Grab our RSS Feed
GM to be Exclusive Auto Sponsor For Environmental TV Channel
May 22nd, 2008 | Posted in: Advertising
Discovery Channel’s “Planet Green” is a 24-hour eco-lifestyle channel that is set to launch on June 4th. In their own word’s it aims to be “your user’s guide to living mindfully on this big blue marble we all call home.” Discovery plans it to be a television network with a “robust” online presence.
It turns out that GM will be the exclusive automotive sponsor for this venture.
As a result, the General will get to air a series of eight two-minute documentary style ads featuring their executives. At least one of these will feature our friend, the Volt’s vehicle line engineer Frank Weber.
The network will reach 50 million U.S. homes.
Now that sounds like it would be a good venue to unveil the production Chevy Volt to the world.
Source (MediaPost)
Popularity: 7%
(4 votes, average: 4.5 out of 5) 
Loading ...
Posted by: Lyle
47 Responses to “GM to be Exclusive Auto Sponsor For Environmental TV Channel”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- GM CEO’s Best Guess: Volt Will be Priced in “Mid to High 30’s”
- The Dawn of the Next Vintage of Chevy Volt Developmental Vehicles
- GM May Reveal the Production Chevy Volt on it Centennial Webcast, September 16th
- GM Has More Than Two New E-Flex Vehicles Already at Scale-Model Stage of Development
- The Volt’s #1 Fanboy and Our Wait List Story is the “Shot Heard ‘Round the World”
- GM’s Future Volt and E-Flex Plans
- GM’s Advanced Battery Director Denise Gray is “Keeping Her Eyes on the Future”
- Interview with Chevy Volt Chief Designer About the Production Car: Plus Leaked Pictures and Video
- BREAKING: GM Releases New Production Volt Photos
- Chevy Volt Update from Chief Engineer: “There’s Nothing Standing in Our Way”
Designed and Developed by Twenty Six Media
May 22nd, 2008 at 6:51 am
more and more pieces seem to be falling together everyday!! GO GM
on aside note i just watched Squak Box and heard some congressmen talking about a new bill to increase oil production in the US, i wonder what the chances of that actually materializing!!
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:25 am
Great news, Lyle!
Nothing ever happens in business without MARKETING!!! ….even when the ‘business’ is the space program! I’ve said the following to hundreds of young (and not-so-young) scientists & engineers involved in numerous space missions…..
“Whether it’s the “M” in a Mission to Venus, the Microcircuits in the guidance system, the Missile we’re launching on, or the Motel the launch team’s staying in …..there’s one other “M” that MUST always come first! MARKETING!!! —without it, nothing ever happens!”
I’m delighted to hear GM is still putting marketing first and is doing it via the Discovery Channel —it proves they’re fully committed to the E-FLEX mission!!!
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:27 am
The congressman is telling the people what they want to hear ….What government needs to do is tax the gasoline 1 to 2 dollars per gallon and put the proceeds toward solar and wind energy to propell the Electric Vehicles when they go into mass production. $1.00/gal. would result in $3.5 billion of renewable energy facilities per week.!!!!! How many people would this put back to work ? ….and….How much oil would be saved for future use ?
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:32 am
Excellent news on GM advertising on Discovery. This is movement in a positive direction. Everything is indeed lining up to propel the Volt onto the marketplace.
Drilling more in the US won’t solve the price problem for years to come. The oil would take 5-8 years to begin flowing and the dent in our demand would equate to a $.50 drop in pump prices!! Big deal…who cares! Thats a few dollars a tank or lunch at McDonalds.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:33 am
50 million homes? I hope I’m one of them.
As far as the Squak Box congressman is concerned, drilling for more oil isn’t the answer. Getting totally off oil is.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:36 am
3 Dick G….. What congressman ….& did you intend to post this here?
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:45 am
Ans. to #6 Nasaman…………. #1 Bryon’s congressman. And yes I did mean to post it here.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:50 am
“your user’s guide to living mindfully on this big blue marble we all call home.”
With a slogan like this…maybe Plant Green should have green and blue marbles in their logo instead of just a green one.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:55 am
I don’t believe anyone should waste resources, but we shouldn’t reduce ourselves to a subsistence level. Our governments should always be looking to provide us with an abundance of cheap resources, so that when shortages do occur, we are merely inconvenienced, not disrupted.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:56 am
Holy Greenwashing Batman!!!
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 am
Since I see hundreds of people alone in their SUVs with fat dripping from their ample chins every day while I commute on my bike, I suspect it could be a while before most are reduced to subsistence level. It seems like it’s going to take $8 a gallon gas just to get people to consider changing their wasteful ways.
I also agree with &eye, double Holy Greenwashing!
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:22 am
$1 a gallon extra tax?!? Would you like to cripple the economy before we even get the chance to buy a Volt?
Oil is not just for gas consumption. It will be powering the power plants that will be charging our Volts. It’s for plastics that will be used to make our Volt lighter. It’s for all sorts of things that I really don’t feel the need to send money to the Middle East for. Even if we reduce our dependence through electric cars, we should still strive to be energy independent. The fallacy that has gotten partially gotten us into this mess is that conservation alone can solve any energy problem. We need to work towards alternatives, while still exploiting our own resources to their fullest extent. If we had done a little more of that, and a little less worrying about the One Armed Paper Hanger Spider that might be endangered by drilling, we would be in a much better situation.
BTW, first post ever. And I definitely fall into the “economic” group of early adopters, not the “man made” global warming group.
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:58 am
Jason M. # 9
Yes we need to stop wasting energy, no we don’t need government in an area that we the people should be addressing. We need to look in the mirror because we are the ones responsible for the mess we are in. Auto mfg. builds what we demand, untill we make life style changes that conserve energy, we will remain in the grasp of foreign oil. Please make your ideas of clean & efficient energy known to your Congressman and Senators in the form of a demand. Drilling for more oil is not the total answer!!
God Bless America
Tom
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:04 am
I think what makes me the saddest with some of your comments is the dictitorial nature of your decision that affect so many others. The irony is that your party is supposed to be the one looking out for the little guy.
Raise prices to $8.00 and you will put this country into an economic tailspin the likes of which we have not seen in most or our lifetimes. Already people are hurting, cutting back, doing without.
And Dick G doesn’t think there’s enough pain out there. He wants real suffering so the world looks like he’d have it look.
I’m all for the electric future, I love the idea of the Volt, but markets decide what’s viable and what isn’t, not edicts. Not manufactured pain.
Then we’ve got drivin98 with the usual anti-success, anti-SUV drivel. Don’t you realize that the people on the top of the economic ladder are affected the least? They are the last ones to feel the pain you so joyfully propose.
Our future will take time, decades most likely. You want us to go through a depressions between now and then? I believe we should drill for more oil if we can, the alternative is sending more and more less valuable dollars to the Middle East.
Your short sighted sloganism really shows a lack of any real thought. The world is not such a simple place and nearly every action has some reaction.
Go GM, but I don’t wish my countrymen / women to suffer for the next decade with no choice, no open markets, no freedom.
Chris C.
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:17 am
Just a brainstorm I have…..
How about an advertisement having the CEO of GM, G. Richard Wagoner, in a corn field (ala Field of Dreams) with the same haunting voice whispering “If you build it, they will come”. Maybe have Jay Leno walk into the corn field in center field with a childish grin and giggle like James Earl Jones did in the movie when he watched his arm disappear when extending it in. Have Leno disappear into the cornfield and after a few seconds come roaring out of the corn field driving the Volt and parking it in the middle of the field (of course, the engine would be silent because of the battery powered motor). Then, have the camera slowly pan away and rise into the air showing the field with the Volt parked in the middle and the cars lining up on the road to the farm and the highway beyond as well, in order to have a glimpse of the driving future of the world.
As in the ending to the movie, I feel that would be an incredibly powerful message. Also, think of the symbolism of the corn field (ethanol) to fuel the car.
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:17 am
It looks like Ed Begley Jr. and his show might be moving to a new channel. Ed might have more “street cred” for living green than just about anyone in America. He walks it AND talks it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Begley,_Jr.
http://www.livingwithed.net/
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:27 am
Looks like Ed Begley Jr. might be switching to a new channel for his show called “Living With Ed” on HGTV. Ed probably has more “street cred” for living green than just about anyone in America. He walks it AND talks it every day. He knows his stuff when it comes to the environment and living efficiently.
Speaking of living efficicently, maybe this new channel could have Amory Lovins on good bit. He knows efficiency. He knows how to save people money with green technologies.
This new channel ought to air a bunch of those ENVIRONMENTAL MOVIE DOCUMENTARIES and environmental conferences like you see on YouTube. The public definitely should see more of those environmental movie documentaries like Al Gore movie and Leo Di Caprio’s movie “The 11th Hour”.
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:42 am
#15 Tom S.
Wow Tom….what a brilliant advertising spot! That would be a tremendous commercial and like you said, the symbolism would be incredibly powerful and everyone would be grabbed by all of the imagery. You should send your idea to GM Corporate brass and allow them to use your idea. I’d love to see it produced.
May 22nd, 2008 at 10:00 am
It’s amazing to see the wonderful things that happen when a company does the right things for their customers and not JUST things to cover their own bottom line.
As you sew so shall you reap!
May 22nd, 2008 at 10:02 am
#10 &eye
#11 drivin98
Greenwashing? By spinning it that way, you discount the benefits of a “Planet Green” 24-hour eco-lifestyle channel. Do you want to discourage that channel? To have such a channel, I imagine it takes some cash. Luckily, GM is willing to sponsor it. Yes, GM gives the people what they want, which is not necessarily what they need. However, the masses are starting to want green, fuel-efficient cars and GM is responding. I’m glad for that change. I’m encouraging it. I don’t hold it against GM to tout their efforts. Self-promotion is part of the capatalistic process.
You can’t label it greenwashing before the fact. Otherwise you are jumping to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions makes you appear to be biased and shallow. I applaud GM for making the Volt.
Watch out for divisive spin. It can backfire on you. For example, I’ll use your tactic:
You ride bikes. Bikes pollute the environment. Bicycles require raw materials, marketing, distribution, oil, and service. Broken or worn out parts end up in our landfills. You would be much greener if you walked. I am better than you because I walk.
Look for the good, encourage it. You catch more flies with sh*t than honey. But, I don’t want flies or sh*t . I’ll stick with the honey.
May 22nd, 2008 at 10:13 am
By the way, it’s government “entitlement” and “military-industrial complex” spending, fiat currency and the private Federal Reserve Bank that has collapsed our currency and caused this problem in the first place.
The country may be addicted to oil, but Congress is addicted to pandering with other people’s tax money and debt.
The LAST thing we need is MORE federal taxes & spending.
May 22nd, 2008 at 11:11 am
Chris C and Tim
There are two paradigms in your statements:
1. Tax and freedom combination
Tax is bad thing. I would say of course for those who pay. But those who receive are happy. Anyway you are paying income tax, VAT and several other taxes as well as we do in Europe. We pay 4$ excise tax per gallon. Is this freedom limitation? I don’t think so. The people in Europe decided better to pay gasoline tax than having income tax higher rate. I think you should not deny freedom of Europeans or Americans which way they would like to pay taxes.
On other hand is it fair? I think so. I think we should tax our people in such way, that they got economical signals from government what is good and what is wrong. The same excise taxes we have for alcohol and tobacco. On other hand income is taxed. I would ask what is wrong having higher income. Government by introducing Income tax wants people to have lower Income? Is it rational? No!!!Therefore I support 0% income tax and $ 5 per gallon fuel tax in my country.
May 22nd, 2008 at 11:11 am
Dick G. do you really think destroying the economy (everything needs transportation to get to market) will actually help advance us. If you have no job then you don’t need that bike to get to work now do you! No job = bad news for everyone and the enviroment. Visited any third world contries lately?
May 22nd, 2008 at 11:31 am
To all:
I was going to respond to Dick G #3, but so many of you have done so very well without my assistance. I will just enjoy reading and re-reading all of your commnets.
One parting thought. I heard on a news talk show where oil consumption was the topic the other day that our domestic use of oil was at the same level as it was in the early 1980’s. Only one thing was contributed to that astounding fact. Conservation by individuals and by industry (automotive, industrial and household products) producing energy conserving products. Now, if what I heard is true, and I have no reason to doubt it. I think Americans are doing a pretty good job. Our conservation efforts can only get better. Way to go America!
May 22nd, 2008 at 11:35 am
21 Darius…..
Thanks for your provocative comments! I’ve lived & worked all over Europe (& many other places) in connection with the US space program, and I totally agree that a heavy tax on “petrol”, as you know it, is VERY effective in reducing consumption.
However, remember that the income tax system in the US is PROGRESSIVE (i.e., the high-income earners, who can better afford it, pay more tax. By contrast, a $5/gal flat tax is actually, in effect REGRESSIVE –meaning those who can LEAST afford to pay it are hurt the most, whereas the wealthy or high-income earners are barely affected at all. That’s why it would hurt the US economy so badly.
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:07 pm
#21 Darius
#24 nasaman
I want to express my appreciation for the way you debate. It is considerate and informative. It has substance. Both of you seem capable of revising your opinion based on new information. I’m tired of shallow, uninformed, intransigent blowhards yelling.
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:33 pm
#15 Tom
Very creative…Creativity is very needed in order to progress and build this great country back up
Go GM Go!
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:40 pm
This program brought to you by the new GM Hummer.
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:44 pm
25. ThombDbhomb says,
“I’m tired of shallow, uninformed, intransigent blowhards yelling.”
That statement is really uncalled for. You could word it more politely and more politically correct.
May 22nd, 2008 at 1:04 pm
#19 ThombDbhomb:
While I take your point entirely, I have to confess that my first reaction was the same as those of #10 &eye and #11 drivin98. There is clearly a great danger of “greenwashing”.
For example, I really take offense at ads which promote all of GM’s “over 30 mpg (highway)” cars. That is a basically meaningless and discredited number, and obfuscates the truly mediocre “city” mileage of many of those same cars.
Nevertheless, you are quite right that we should not prejudge what they will do with this TV initiative. I think that bloggers here have amply shown themselves fully able to tell the difference between effective environmental ideas and “greenwash”. And they have never been shy about “calling BS” on GM, or anybody else.
I am reminded of the famous scene in the Steve Martin movie “The Jerk”. As the Martin character prepared to leave home to go to California, his adoptive father gave him some final advice. He held out his hands with an object in each. He said “Now son, this is s**t, and this is Shinola.” I believe that we can tell the difference, and comment appropriately.
May 22nd, 2008 at 1:07 pm
#19 ThombDbhomb
I’m not into Global Warmming and carbon footprint. I would call them Greenwashing as well. But to change our way to get off the oil may merge into part of the Global Warmming and Carbon Footprint idea as the Greenwashing. I’m all for getting out of oil. I don’t care if people label “green” or “tree hugger”. “green” or “tree hugger” may have a playing role of getting out of oil as a bonus. There is nothing wrong playing “green” or “tree hugger” to get out of oil.
May 22nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
#28 Rashiid Amul
But, I am tired of shallow, uninformed, intransigent blowhards yelling. What’s wrong with saying that? I admit, I am elitist (to use an neo-con buzzword). I prefer the style of the late William F. Buckley, Jr.
My comment wasn’t a personal attack directed at any individual. If I offended the shallow, uninformed, intransigent blowhard, yellers; I’m not sorry. They deserve it. However, I’m open to suggestion. How would you word it more politely and more politically correct?
May 22nd, 2008 at 1:45 pm
…Regarding my comment #25, I was trying to compliment some astute, considerate debate. Volt news, and substantive give and take keeps me coming back to this site. I have little patience for “gutter” level of discourse. This is Lyle’s blog. We should strive to match Lyle’s class and substance.
May 22nd, 2008 at 1:54 pm
ThombDbhomb #31
You are right and you are wrong. You should have stopped after the word uninformed. Most of us are shallow and uninformed to a great extent on many subjects. I find myself agreeing with a point of view that is later proven as not correct. That shows me up as shallow and uninformed. We need your comments to continue. You must decide what words to use. They are, after all, just words. We can take them or leave them. We try too hard to be too politically correct when we over-react to just words. Actions speak so much louder than words. So, don’t go throwing bricks at people and you’ll be ok with me.
I agree we can ill afford higher fuel taxes at this time of rising fuel prices. After alternative fuel vehicles are out, I don’t mind the taxes being raised to help influence purchases of fuel conservative vehicles like the Volt. But, that tax should be set aside to give tax rebates to people buying those alternative fueled vehicles. Not wasted by government on more pork barrel or ear-mark projects to benefit themselves or their “friends”.
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Darius #21 & nasaman #24:
Although a high tax on gasoline is regressive, it also created de-facto higher mileage vehicles than we have available in the USA. So therefore, rather than driving a used Caddy that gets 10 mpg, it might actually be cheaper in the long run to drive a used Opel, that gets 50+ mpg!
My real problem with a forced governmental higer tax on gasoline is that I do not hear anyone also saying that the income taxes should be lowered to compensate for it. So we get hit with a triple whammy - federal and state income income taxes, sales taxes, and now high fuel taxes?!?!?!? What a deal for our spend it all, pork barrel loving, elected officials!!!!!
Thanks, but no thanks.
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Just for the record, $1.00/gal. @ 2-gal./day = $730.00/year that’s not too much to pay for our children’s future…& I said gasoline tax not other petro products. The $3.5 billion per week MUST BE USED FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY !!!!….And we must have renewable energy to make this work …..What do you think will happen if we plug in 250,000,000 cars twice each day ?…..That’s +/- 5 billion kWh/day …Think about it, do the math.
Thanks ……Dick G.
May 22nd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Regarding the recommendation for a “yet another tax” solution, the following poem and analysis (which I copied off the internet) pretty much summarizes the way I feel:
——————————–
This is too true to be very funny:
Tax his land,
Tax his wage,
Tax his bed in which he lays.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes are the rule.
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirts,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his smokes,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he tries to think
Tax his booze,
Tax his beers,
If he cries,
Tax his tears.
Tax his bills,
Tax his gas,
Tax his notes,
Tax his cash.
Tax him good and let him know
After tax, he has no dough.
If he hollers,
Tax him more,
Tax him ’til he’s good and sore.
Tax his coffin, Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in which he lays.
Put these words upon his tomb,
“Taxes drove me to my doom!”
And when he’s gone,
We won’t relax,
We’ll still have inheritance TAX !!
END OF POEM
—————–
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL License Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax),
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax),
Liquor Tax,
Luxury Tax,
Marriage License Tax,
Medicare Tax,
Property Tax,
Real Estate Tax,
Service charge taxes,
Social Security Tax,
Road Usage Tax (Truckers),
Sales Taxes,
Recreational Vehicle Tax,
School Tax,
State Income Tax,
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA),
Telephone Federal Excise Tax,
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax,
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax,
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax, Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax,
TelephoneState and Local Tax,
Telephone Usage Charge Tax,
Utility Tax,
Vehicle License Registration Tax,
Vehicle Sales Tax,
Watercraft Registration Tax,
Well Permit Tax,
Workers Compensation Tax.
COMMENTS: Not one of the above taxes existed 100 years ago and there was prosperity, absolutely no national debt, the largest middle
class in the world and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What happened ??????
May 22nd, 2008 at 4:21 pm
#3 Dick G.:
Well you seem to be taking some flak here my friend, so let me offer this. Gas taxes are way HIGHER than $1-2/gallon in Europe, and their economies seem to be in quite a bit better shape than ours. 1 Euro = $1.57US yesterday. Plus, as a result, they have WAY more fuel efficient vehicle fleets than we do, which is only going to reinforce the above as oil prices continue to rise.
I heard yesterday that diesel fuel is now the equivalent of $11.00/gal US in Britain.
Plus, when I get my Volt, I am not going to pay ANY gas tax, so who cares! ROTFLMAO, HAHAHAHAHA.
May 22nd, 2008 at 4:24 pm
#36 PAUL-R:
Yeah, where are the Beatles, now that we need them?
May 22nd, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Dick G #35:
When has a government ever enacted a tax to be used only for a specific purpose, and left it that way?
You idea is not bad, it is just that it would never work out the way you anticipate…..
Noel # 37:
And just how long do you think our buddies in Washington and in every state legislature in the country are going to let you get away without paying to use the roads in some fashion?????
Either the yearly registration fees for plug in hybrids will be really high, or a special “use fee” will be added to our electric bills. I can just imagine a “sun tax” for those that put solar panels on the roofs of their homes. Bueraucrats can be very creative when it comes to taking money from our pockets……..
May 22nd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
#39 Jim I:
Yeah, see #39.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
ThombDbhomb #32
To tell you the truth, I’m not remotely offended by what you said.
I am tired of you being the word police and idea police.
You have corrected me, Grizzly, N. Riley, and others.
So I thought I would send one your way. You seem to be a bleeding heart liberal, which is your right. However, pick on something real, not the people that have been here forever and know how to act.
As far as N. Riley is concerned, he is a special forces Vietnam veteran who has earned his right to say what he wants.
I don’t recall reading any post that has asked you to correct any comment that YOU deem negative. If people here say something really bad, many people will react to it. It has happened before and Lyle has removed the offending post.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:31 pm
From USA Today…
“Planet Green replaces Discovery Home, an unsuccessful spinoff channel, and will be available in 50 million of the nation’s 110 million TV homes June 4.”
If this is accurate then it will be on DIRECTV channel 286.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:36 pm
PS -
Sorry for the off-topic #43 post. ;>}
May 22nd, 2008 at 9:26 pm
#42 Rashiid Amul
(Everyone else - I am sorry for the following. So we don’t bore you further with our spat, I invite Rashiid Amul to take this into a private room if he wants to discuss it further)
All I did was compliment Darius and nasaman on their civil discourse and mentioned that I don’t like boorish behavior. I didn’t attack any one person or political group. Why do you have to take it personally and go on a personal attack? Did I touch a nerve? I
s it unfair of me to call you or others on partisan statements and the like? Are you, Grizzly, N. Riley, and others beyond reproach? Do you support shallow, uninformed, intransigent blowhards yelling? Lighten up dude.
In your comment, you called me a word policeman, idea policeman, and bleeding heart liberal. I am beginning to understand why you would be offended when someone makes reference to those types. As far as me correcting you and others. Perhaps you deserve it.
I invite you to go back and review my “offending” comments. Typically, they ask for balance and consideration. Typically, the offenders calm down and admit that they were unfair.
“You have corrected me, Grizzly, N. Riley, and others.
So I thought I would send one your way.”
The thing you sent my way amuses me because you seem to be defending, uninformed, intransigent blowhards yelling. Who defends that?
“Pick on something real”
What am I picking on that is not real? Uncivil discourse is real. Read my post #26 again. Is it really that bad? I’ve seen a lot worse onthis blog. You turned a compliment into something ugly for reasons that are not apparent. We have mixed company on this site. It is not just for conservatives and knee-jerk conservative thoughts. I can tolerate thoughtful conservative thoughts and ideas. I can’t tolerate bullying, bellicose, meatheads. I call them on it. If the shoe fits, take it out of your mouth.
“…not the people that have been here forever and know how to act.”
Look at how you are acting.
“As far as N. Riley is concerned, he is a special forces Vietnam veteran who has earned his right to say what he wants.”
Thanks to N. Riley you for defending my freedom of speech. We all have the right to freedom of speech. So, N. Riley can say what he wants and I can’t? Seems hypocritical. Who are you, N. Riley’s police protector? N. Riley can, and has, spoken for himself. We had discussions and moved on like mature adults. I try not to harbor resentment.
I consider you basically a good guy with a few glitches. Obviously, you don’t like me. I don’t really care. Let’s thoughfully and respectfully debate ideas and share Volt information.
Keep the good posts coming. Try to get along with others.
May 22nd, 2008 at 11:15 pm
@ThombDbhomb:
Yeah, greenwashing. They have spent and will spend a lot more money promoting “ungreenness”. It’s just the nature of being a car manufacturer. They aren’t making the Volt so they can be green. They are building the Volt to make money. As for this whole green channel, and I could be totally wrong about this (and if I am, that’s great), but I really doubt many people will be spending much time watching.
@Chris C:
I’m not anti-success. I applaud it. I would just prefer if all that “success” out there wasn’t polluting the air we’re all breathing. You know, that stuff that KILLS (since much of it’s avoidable, perhaps it’s murder) so many people every year. I just prefer that hundreds of thousands of people not die prematurely because people have to flaunt their wealth (or make it seem like they have some wealth) with an SUV.
May 23rd, 2008 at 7:40 am
# 25 Nasaman
Sorry not responding in time. I would say so that there is certain need of social security and social cooperation within any society. I would not oppose to that. On other hand I do not propose cancel all income tax immediately. Probably adjustments should be made in order to make better tax combination. Economical analysts have huge financial tools (models) of doing that. Probably before Volt will be on the market is no need for hurry.
On other hand excise on fuel would be absolutely fair in America. How big are US military spendings? They are huge. Most of them are directly connected to the fuel (oil). Shall those cost be included into the fuel price or excluded? Any American MBA will say - of course included!!! Therefore excise on fuel in USA would be no less than in Europe.