turbo200

just will chime in here to defend what i think is right. obama administration has leaked about a pre-packaged bankruptcy being talked about, could be a very good situation for GM, if it doesn't get posted here, i'll look for it later. i mention this because saab would be one of the brands under discussion among people here to close, under that possible restructuring scenario. that would be a mistake. saab has tons of equity and is one of the least invested properties in the GM stigma. they've been incredibly consistent with design, so they're instantly recognizable and have plenty of plenty of automatic value thanks to that immediate recognition. the biggest problem they have has to do with engineering and the percieved value of it when compared to competition. they will either have to slightly adjust pricing downscale in the future, or seriously make up ground in roadgoing abilities, i.e. suspension refinement, driving experience. of course use of premium materials will need to be kept up and reliability will need to also be kept up and perhaps improved on [don't know really how reliable Saab is, heard plenty of conjecture already]. in design, they are clearly going in the right upscale direction. saab really is what VW wants to be, only obviously at a lower volume.

from my somewhat informed perspective, the biggest problems i have are allocation of resources and planning that in hindsight looks very limited and unfocused. all the big trucks came and went again, when in the early 2000s the problem we were all discussing were cars and how uncompetitive they were. lambda came and the plan to reduce overlap was blown out of the water--what if the money for traverse had been used to give cobalt a meaningful update with stylish trappings meanwhile its true update won't be here until TWO years after it debuts in other smaller markets. insignia won't be available here--perhaps at all, when Pontiac is selling a massively outdated car with massive discounts and in relatively large volumes. small cars are a bust at GM. medium cars at GM outside Malibu are a bust. Buick cars are a joke [lacrosse] or irrelevant [lucerne]. large cars, cars in general, suck at GM. there's no getting around that the product picture has been seriously seriously laughable compared to competitors. competition is coming in and making stories with innovation in design, features, engineering.....GM is nowhere in that picture. it's always coming just around the corner with GM. meanwhile, I could have gone there and turned the company around several times just introducing astra and insignia on time here and watched the money pile up on those fantastic cars. greenlighting good designs doesn't require a lot of work

the public is only given what we see from the outside looking in. granted, the plan may be in place, the perfect restructuring plan, but we only see what we have evidence of. analysts and investors, the plague if it were up to members of this board, don't want to touch GM because of the one thing they have been talking about for decades now, a majority of the buying public has changed its habits, and a majority of the buying public has now shifted to import shopping. GM has lost a majority of consumer share in its field, in one of the most spectacular failures of a storied company in the last century. I know you all have heard this before, I'm trying to word this to get around very plebian and sycophantic arguments, 'it's all unfair, GM has been treated harshly,' or the blind 'it's really all there, the product is there, it's great, it's enough, it's perfect. it's biased mindsets that won't shop because they hate GM.' Really, what vendetta exists in people against GM? Explain away. Consumers who've had bad experience with a product and refuse to shop GM are numerous, but that's no vendetta, that's simple intelligent and adaptive behavior. there's simply no denying the record GM has, unless you're stupid. there's simply no objective view of GM that has them as a successful company with a solid track record in thier specialty, cars. GM just has a huge distribution network, legions of employees to sustain and boost buying patterns, and an indisputable legacy and history. This is why they still exist today. plenty companies with equivalent track records for producing mediocre, unimaginative, and generally subpar product in their most important market segments have gone under. to get back to my original point, we all only have evidence of what we see from the outside. it would be sorry and maniacal for the government to offer a private business a guaranteed loan with no strings attached, it'd be welcoming a number of private sectors, as well as private consumers' ire and personal requests. on many different levels here, there will be a bailout, and there must be compromises. GM will be called into judgement for thier repetitive failure.

apart from two product, GM makes cars that are designed out of date and engineered out of date, on platforms with less structural integrity than competitors, utilizing less advanced building materials than competition. entire designs have come and gone that have revolutionized the industry and GM has been content to play in last century think, where they invest just what the need and never lead the pack. they're content with second, third, and fourth tier. Is it that you are willing to accept out of date notion and technology and product, or is it that I reject a good product. CTS and Malibu are with the head of the pack in cars, G8 and Astra are unsupported by thier own company. what else is there? Why should the general public buying these cars for general purposes care?

Before you all start clapping your hands and dancing around in circles, there is responsibility to be accepted, there is no plan set as of yet to do anything to help a business that has sunk itself, there is accountability to be dealt. My head can't get around this easy money mentality that seems to motivate CaminoLS6, longtooth, reg, perhaps a few others. Am I wrong? Where's the discourse about how we got to this mess? Where's the solutions to stop this kind of thing from ever happenning again? Where's the accountability, after all they're going to be getting yet more money out of the taxpayers' pockets. Instead of reforms and plans that work to stimulate job growth, sectors, tech investment, education investment, we have to worry about funding a company that's been reeling for over a decade and been inept enough to deny it all. Thank God investors and government officials know enough not to gloss over history in these cases. The fact is these companies, especially GM, has been reeling in a downward spiral for some time. Where was the call for aid a decade ago? Where was the call for intervention because conditions and the situation called for it five years ago? Where has the revitalized product program taken them? Where we were a decade ago...with superlative trucks and outdated cars, where design was a privelege only to be gleaned with a Cadillac. Why did we let it get to this mess? And why should we be responsible for bailing out a private business without there being accountability? I understand the need for GM to be saved, I need no spiel about the affects it would have on local governments, and the 'millions' of jobs it affects. GM must be saved AND GM must take responsibility. Regardless of where the current restructuring is, the tenth restructuring in only the last decade, management and board needs to resign or forced out. they need someone with the guts, know how, and swift movements of Alan Mullaly.

the 2.0T would make a great mass market upgrade. the 2.2 DI would be a perfect base engine, still giving the Insignia/G6 the performance characteristic embodied in its profile. this car is great, yet here we are at the juncture with GM yet again where its most important market, where it does the most volume and revenue, still has to wait for another great product.

this is really an awesome car. the combo of great rounded surfacing and the fascia treatment are really classy. this would make a great new Pontiac G6, something fitting the pricey upscale mantra Pontiac should have. no it's not extroverted like other past Pontiacs, but it follows the stylish athletic tradition set by the G8. it would work as a Buick of course, but there's something just slightly maniacal and fun-loving about the expression on the front end that says kid brother Pontiac to me. Whatever it is, GM looks stupid again for not getting on the global program with this car sooner. The plants are switching over with the new Lacrosse anyway, it's yet another move at a time when cars are needed showing just how inept the GM management is.

having seen one in person, on looks alone and presence , the fit looks like an upscale car. the price is shocking on a NAV model, the last gen seemed high to me when it was priced at $15k, for an economic subcompact albeit a highly sophisticated one. certainly the sophistication and fuel economy will live up to thier end of the deal, and acceleration is no doubt improved. presentation wise it lives up to the price, but for $19k, there are designs that move you more and other cars that have most of the sophistication, but maybe not honda bulletproof build and efficiency. i am thoroughly pleased with my honda, but I won't make the mistake of spending $25k on a design that doesn't excite me.

agreed. this is one stunner of a wagon.

interesting ideas. i think it's obvious to many the front page has become outdated and needs to get with the times. It's time for a C&G revolution! How about more dedicated member access? Dedicated members posting updates to a blog like style on the front page, I guess similar to autoblog which has a more wide-ranging set of stories and scribes to take up the brunt of the work. I don't usually go to other auto news sites simply because I don't have much time, and have proably an outmoded mindset towards GMI that it's a labyrinth. Some of the people here are still engaging, and that's really why I keep coming.

oh please keep the debate on issues and substance, do not refer derogatively to our candidate. okay, so just got done watching the latest SNL skit, man the writing for Tina Fey is spot on. The classics have to be, "Can I call you Joe, cause I practiced a bunch of zingers with Joe." and, " for the guys watching at home playing drinking games, 'MAVERICK'" my serious comment though on this all and how it has progressed over the last few days. Sarah Palin is Mccain's Britney Spears. She is high profile because she's good to look at, she's good to look at, she's affable and charming, and most men are imagining what she looks like underneath and many women idealize everything she is underneath. She isn't a serious substantial person. If she does have substantial issues, she comes across as not being able to defend or truly believe in those because all she does is repeat campaign refrains. She is the media frenzy for the campaign, exactly what Mccain and camp wanted. Ironically and justly, the frenzy is playing out against him since we're in a time where people don't want the "Robot" or 'yes man' campaigner.

those were some bland questions....i guess no chance for the right wing to call Ifill biased after such streamlined questioning. Palin was well rehearsed.... the mood of the nation seems to me like one demanding serious answers, speficity, accountability, and a serious politician. While Palin didn't make a major fumble like in her spontaneous question interviews, most of her responses seemed more like mantras lifted from campaign speeches, rather than specific answers. there was a lot of dodging the question, flipping the responses.

:rotflmao:

If it hadn't been for the direct implication of the question, an airstrike, a military strike, the beginning of a war, I wouldn't mind his answer as much. but he made a joke out of going to war with them. to fuel the hatred of the crowd, get the war crowd on his side, for whatever reason, it is a disgusting answer.

Here's the context: Question: it's well documented that we have for quite a long time now known where the real problem is in the Middle East , and in fact the President adequately described it as the Axis of Evil. I guess my question is how many times do we have to prove that these people are blowing up people now, nevermind if they get a nuclear weapon, when do we send them an airmail message to Tehran? Mccain: That old Beach Boys song, Bomberan Bomb bomb bomb so here's his ethic on war, let's not mince words, let's not be careful in how we approach this situation, let's not engage in the intelligence theatrics, let's scare them straight, let them know they have reason to both hate us and resent us, let's send them a clear message of how wreckless we are, we won't engage you in diplomacy, we will go after you like we did the other, we will kill your people, you will be gotten. We'll even sing a song about it and make getting into it a joke, since war is such a joke. Get the message?

here, in a comfortable environment with a comforting conservative, she displays her incredible knack when speaking for placing the wrong emphasis on any idea in her sentence, not having a solid sentence structure, for repeating various unfamiliar talking points/branding points fed to her by others, and for poor word choice. yet here with a local non-nationally known face, on a day when something she cares deeply about failed, she's determined, very composed, and even professional. her points are thorough and understandable, and her tone doesn't vary wildly nor do her words get as jumbled. her controlled mood because of the decision that has affected her keeps her on balance. that being said she's one step away from emphasizing the wrong words or ideas in the sentence and losing the audience completely, as she tries to make her way through the information she wants to get out and not forget the right information/ right answer to the question posed....as she has displayed so well in the Couric interviews.

Six Army brigades, a National Guard unit and three military headquarters have been ordered to Iraq next summer in a move that would allow the U.S. to keep the number of troops largely steady there through much of next year. The planned deployments involve about 26,000 troops and would maintain 14 combat brigades in Iraq from about February to early fall. READ the full Pentagon Report from today troops through most of next year http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-New...Up_To_12_People don't want to be too negative, but on the surface here, you have to understand why at least to some people, this war can seem endless what caused me to respond is the idea that you propogate that victory is within reach. nice optimism, but please don't fudge the truth. I like optimism, I am that way, but I do not like when people mislead, especially on such a grave issue, as has been the case with this grave issue on so many occassions.

Gen. Patraeus still is reluctant to use the word 'victory' with regards to Iraq, says he does not think he will ever use the word victory. he described the situation as fragile. the top commander of the US military said a withdrawal of US troops in the next couple of years would be 'doable'. the leader of the US military says his work could be finished very soon, go figure. it's his job to be strong and confident. I would not go as far as suggesting he should be doubted, but his other words are just as important, if not moreso read the full context here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7610405.stm additionally, while reports of violence are down, any number of events could bring forth increases in violence, from a Pentagon report: Violence in Iraq dropped further during the summer although security gains remain "reversible and uneven," with the main threats coming from Iranian-backed militias and the Shiite-led Iraqi government's slow integration of volunteer Sunni fighters, according to a Pentagon report released yesterday. Potential is growing, moreover, for politically driven violence as ethnic, tribal and religious groups vie for influence in advance of provincial elections planned in coming months, according to the congressionally mandated quarterly Pentagon report on security in Iraq. the bottom line is that while the situation has improved somewhat, this is such a harrowing and complex situation, with different peoples with sharply differing mindsets and beliefs all vying for power out of fear of being excised completely by an opposing group-controlled government, and then there is Iran. I hope their government can be involved enough in world affairs to gain a standing that will increase the democratic influence felt within the country. i hope the economy can continue to strengthen there so that people will see the true benefits of what has transpired, but I doubt they'll be able to just forget the incredible violence and deaths they've witnessed. I don't know, along with the rest of the American people, I am hoping for the best. regardless of if we have troop withdrawals, we will need to have massive political presence and some military supplemental forces it would seem

Iraq Study Group, bipartisan group, led by James Baker, former Republican Secretary of State and Lee Hamilton, former Democrat U. S Representative. recommended the division of Iraq into three groups, along with phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Predicted a more endless type situation in Iraq if Americans continued there, back in 2006. we're still looking at an endless type situation, almost in 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Study_Group

it definitely should not be Biden and Obama, since they are the principals and should stay above the fray. however, that whole media is the bad guy storyline needs a major rebuke, and lesser Democrats, not lesser by nature but by position, could have gone after that line. As for watching it implode, I am wondering how long it is before the major story being passed around is the fever pitch with which Republicans are pushing Mccain to remove her from the ticket. it's already reaching a level of altitude, their calls asking her to step down. I love the woman as a person and sympathize for her, but we've only begun to see her levels of unpreparedness. the cat is out of the bag.

by the way, what authority do I have to theorize the way I have? As someone who lives and breathes analysis of the way the world works, and letting the world teach him how it does live and breathe, I have plenty of facts to back up what I'm saying. the fact that thier meetings with Palin were outrageously brief. The fact that ther time in national government is outrageously brief. The fact that the outrageously few times we've been allowed to see potentially one of the most important persons in our land she's made a complete fool of herself, leads me to see all the reasons behind the pick. the fact that Mccain campaign cynically looked at Obama as a media starlet and wanted a piece of that action. the fact that Mccain couldn't break through the media cycle because his campaign and appearances were stuck in the dull days of the last century while Barack was and is moving forward with his appearances and speech. the fact that Mccain hates not being the change agent. the fact that republicans think 'gas is expensive' appeals to 'dumb Americans' [thier words not mine]. the fact that republicans choose the simplest hot button issues, like feminism, sexism, energy prices, and choose to run on campaigns that are as simple as 1,2,3, as if we still lived in the dark ages where access was completely limited and most people voted on gut.

isn't that the greatest irony of it all? the way the Mccain campaign and Republicans would have you buy it, everyone in the world is the biggest sexist for even talking at her, you can look but you can't touch. but the reality is underneath it all, they saw her looks as one of her biggest assets. Who's the sexist?

I think this is such a fascinating story and it has so many levels. on her though, my my my, you know first impression matters most they say, she comes across strong, capable, comfortable, confident in her own skin. But going past the skin and past the first blush, we have to develop a relationship and know that when we first thought we could trust we were right. I never read her like that, I never read her as someone who's policies I would trust. Because I always beleived she didn't have a depth of knowledge, but I always saw her as an impressive person, in her own right. I beleive she has taken all that she's been given and made the most of it, but that single personality trait does not mean I would endorse her for Presidency. That role requires understand world history, current events, histories of a people, histories of our economy, the intertwining role politics plays with decisions made in Washington and how best to manage that, and much much more. I would love to an analyst right now posing this question on my highly rated newshour: did she get picked for her looks, did that play a big role. At this point she's proven herself incapable in many respects and not possessing the knowledge she would need to be ready to be President. Any President at any time is a likely target, there's even more chances for that with this particular candidate, Mccain I mean. She has to prove she's ready to be President. At this point that question would not be out of line, and there would be some serious insiders who would make that call. Yes, she did in fact get picked, well one strong reason anyways, is that she is a hot woman.

on that note, and on your comment about her media rollout, Chris, it's interesting to note that the total dearth of access the public has to her only highlights the moments we do get to hear from her. the fact that we have barely had any meeting with her, only feeds the rampant curiousity of this compelling figure. it's amazing how much they have limited the access to her, and how poorly the Dems have reacted to this. We're supposed to accept that she can deal with men like the Ahmindenajad or be seen as a leader of our country against the likes of Hugo Chavez, yet she fears the media? American media? The media's the big bad wolf, so what does that make the rest of our enemies? And how will she react to the 'Axis of evil'? How can she deal with all our problems, when she can't even make her case to the media, to a person asking questions? Okay, that's the argument I would have used to defuse the old "Media is the boogity man" line. Back to what I was saying though, it's truly amazing how much limit they've put on thier campaign, and now it's going to be even more amazing how much that backfires because people truly want to know. So special emphasis will be placed on any meeting she has. Hence the attention the disastrous Katie Couric interviews have gotten for CBS this week. When there's only person with access to the biggest story, they too will go down in history.

what does it matter what he said, he doesn't represent us does he? We' re trying to educate him on our ideals, the push for freedom and equality, the right to a free voice. We are supposed to love America, which stands for rights and equalities and you don't call into question a future Presidential candidate of our country making jokes of killing people, attacking another country, singing a song about it? What is wrong with you? My respect goes out to Mccain as an individual, but when 9/11 first happened he jumped on the bomb the 'Middle East' train like there was no tomorrow. He laid a list of four countries to go after....Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and another one I can't remember. that's not the kind of thinking I want from a President.