"When will the [economic] pain go away?" That's what Newsweek asked their "Business Roundtable Experts," including GM Car Czar Bob Lutz. Maximum Bob begins by affixing blame: it's big oil's fault. Rising oil prices affect the price of everything because oil "goes into making virtually everything." Fair enough. And then Maximum Bob's off, talking about the "short-term disruption in [GM's] growth caused by rising oil prices." Growth? Seems Bob's suffering from half-zeimer's, conveniently overlooking the fact the GM started losing market share and sales long before oil prices rocketed upwards. Anyway… "Fortunately… we are a global producer, and we're well positioned in the rapidly growing economies of China, Russia, India and Latin America." Yes, despite GM's cash flow problems and mounting debt, "we're going to increase our R&D spending to expand alternative fuel solutions and advanced technology solutions to lessen and ultimately eliminate everyone's dependence on petroleum." [emphasis added] Of course, Mr. Lutz doesn't mention where they'll get the energy to generate all of the electricity or produce all the hydrogen and ethanol for these "alternative fuel solutions." But at least these remarks put him at the front of the pack for next year's Bob Lutz Award.

The New York Times' editorial board is calling it. The SUV's Time of Death is… Black Tuesday. And while their headline says "RIP," what they actually mean is "may you rot in Hell you gas-sucking, planet-warming bastard." "It’s hard to convince most Americans that there is a silver lining to $4-a-gallon gasoline. But General Motors provided a nugget of good news when it announced that it would shutter much of its production of pickups and sport utility vehicles — and might even get rid of the Hummer, the relative of the Abrams tank unleashed on the streets in the cheap-gas days of the 1990s. It’s hardly the solution to global warming, or the country’s dependence on imported oil, but it’s a start." No ambiguity there, then. Nope. Nor is there any doubt– well, just a little– that high gas prices are just what the planet ordered. And can I get that with a side order of MORE taxes? "Expensive gasoline is not good news for most American families… Still, Americans’ response to rising gasoline prices makes an excellent case for a gas tax. It proves that drivers will change their behavior in response to high fuel prices. And even if Detroit doesn’t buy global warming, drivers can help persuade it to embrace fuel efficiency. They don’t even have to know that the Honda Civic emits less than half the 13 tons of greenhouse gases spewed by the Ford F-150."

Back in August of last year, consumer advocate Ralph Nader sent an open letter to the FCC questioning GM's relationship to conservative radio and TV talk show hosts. At the time, GM said it didn't pay cash money to these pundits for favorable mentions; it simply provided free test cars and facility tours (all expenses-paid, presumably). Oh, and advertising. Lots and lots of advertising. Nader correctly pointed-out that "Section 47 U.S.C. § 317, requires broadcasters to disclose to their listeners or viewers if matter has been aired in exchange for money, services or other valuable consideration. Section 47 U.S.C. § 508, requires that, when anyone provides or promises to provide money, services or other consideration to someone to include program matter in a broadcast, that fact must be disclosed in advance of the broadcast, ultimately to the station over which the matter is to be aired." Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh talked-up his forthcoming free ride, the Saturn Astra. Apparently, it's "the most popular executive car in Europe." Rush gushed "We love GM." Last night, one of Sean Hannity's liberal guests (Fox's Hannity & Colmes) was touting the value of green technology (as opposed to drilling for oil) in America's quest for energy independence. "I know about new technology. I'm driving a Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid" Hannity said. It's high time the FCC put an end to this craven commercialization. Or, to call it by its real name, payola.

Just when you thought it was safe not to watch an American bastardization of the UK's famously infamous Top Gear TV show, NBC and the BBC are proud to announce that they've put the defanged version into production. What's more (or significantly less), they've also revealed the final lineup: radio funny guy Adam Carolla, drift king Tanner Foust and TV construction guru Eric Stromer [pictured]. While we understand that Stromer has better abs than the nets' first choice, ace auto scribe Dan Neil, calling the failed soap opera star a car guy is like calling Vlad the Impaler a genial party host. To wit: "He’s a regular on Adam Carolla’s nationally-syndicated radio show giving out construction advice, and also appears on TLC’s “Clean Sweep,” NBC’s “Three Wishes” and is a special correspondent for “The Insider.”  Stromer prefers his Camry hybrid." To… what? No, don't answer that. Please. But don't worry: there won't be any "real" car reviews. The press release says the hosts will simply "drive the world’s most amazing cars, go on incredible road trips and blow stuff up." We can hardly wait. Oh wait; we can. [Fair disclosure: I applied for the job– and fell down.]

Let's start with the end of The Detroit News' HUMMER-related "analysis" and work our way backwards. "So, does Hummer stay or does it go? Right now, your guess is probably as good as GM Chairman Rick Wagoner's." WTF? If the man at the helm of GM, an executive pulling down $14.4m per year (plus) doesn't know whether or not he's killed HUMMER, let's hope his bankruptcy-prof health care bennies include Alzheimer's medication. Meanwhile, columnist Mark Phelan needs to adjust his own meds, or whatever it is that stops him from facing reality (his paycheck?). "With dealers in 37 countries and assembly in South Africa as well as the United States, 'the potential for global growth is a huge opportunity. It's one of Hummer's strengths,' spokeswoman Joanne Krell said. Developing markets in Asia, Central and Eastern Europe look particularly promising." Once again, GM is spinning the idea that its foreign ops will save North America. Once again, Phelan is happy to broadcast the corporate line (hook and sinker included). Phelan also forwards the idiotic idea that HUMMER could be re-jigged to build green vehicles, and the possibility of an overseas buyer. Let it go Mark. Just let it go.

Last night, I commented on the fact that Autoblog reported on Pamela Anderson's Viper sale– without postng a shot of her breasts. I was a little, uh, "under the weather" at the time. In fact, my alcohol-fueled analysis of AB's mammary aversion tested the limits of the phrase "in vino veritas." It was such a vituperative effort that Frank did something he's never done before: he pulled my post back from "published" to "draft" (ironically enough). For that I thank him. I have no business calling anyone anyone else's bitch, or pointing out that the words "I think" completely undermine a car reviewer's credibility. And just for the record, I never didn't sleep with a college girl because she had a poster of a saucer-eyed puppy on her wall. Anyway, I [now] applaud Autoblog for showing the editorial restraint that clearly evaded me in the wee hours. It's just one more reason TTAC will never be the autoblogosphere's "newspaper of record." In our defense, I bet we have WAY more fun than they do.

Hybrid cars have had one of the biggest impacts on the automotive paradigm since front wheel-drive became popular. Sadly, not everyone can accept change gracefully. Exhibit one: Hawaii-based auto-journo Bill Maloney. In last months autowriters.com newsletter, Maloney's "The Hmmm About Hybrids," purports to show (in one non-stop "sic") that "market researchers and their soothsayers have been busy blowing holes in the rationale (and high pricing) for (sic) many popular hybrid cars… they even provide stats." And with claims like that, they probably should, right? "Would you believe a big Chevy Tahoe SUV has a lower energy cost-per-mile than a small import hybrid ," wonders Maloney. Yes, it's the infamous CNW Research "Dust to Dust" study, thoroughly debunked here and here and elsewhere. Never mind. Maloney doesn't want to analyze hybrids– he wants to demonize their buyers. "A car is no longer a car when it's a hybrid. It's a statement. There are high visibility dudes who like to drive statements. Cameron Diaz, Ed Begley, Jar (sic? It's so hard to tell), and the two guys who own Google, who (sic) the CNW study says quote 'don't know "dick" about the environment.' These are people of the conspicuous consumption class who are into whole foods, wild oats/sprouts and keep Trader Joes extremely profitable. They don't drink Jim Beam and prefer Grey Goose and of course their home away from home is Starbucks and its designer coffee. Researchers say these folks are willing to pay to display their moral superiority and virtue." As opposed to Maloney, who needs only one deeply-flawed study, a few hundred words (and by the looks of things, a few tumblers of Jim Beam) to display his own self-satisfied derision for anyone who buys a Prius. Well played, sir.

When GM's FastLane blog was first unleashed on suspecting surfers, we dismissed it as a PR exercise without, well, balls. PR puff pieces accompanied by camp followers' comments made it an exceedingly anodyne place to spend one's surfing time. Well it seems that some of the site's backwaters are getting pretty rough. KixStart drew our attention to an old post (February) about the Chevrolet Cobalt— a car whose excellence escapes just about anyone who's ever driven a Honda Civic. It starts with "Charlie" sticking it to the Cobalt vs. the Corolla but good. GM Powertrain's Dave Lancaster answers by ignoring all complaints (mpg, weight, speed) except Charlie's kvetch about the Cobalt's need for premium go-juice (recommended not required). It's the usual prevarication, but the comments includes a nightmare Cobalt customer non-satisfaction story, posted today. The tale ends with "I have vowed never to own or recommend a GM product again." Heady stuff. But is GM listening? And if they are, would they have deleted this comment? Will they? Over to you, Christopher Barger…

Those lucky bastards over at Edmunds Inside Line (Robert would call them collaborators) have already got their mitts on the Lancer Ralliart apparently, and with the news of the model released yesterday they posted their review today. Some interesting info that was previously unclear: the engine has a single scroll turbocharger, versus the twin scroll unit on the Evo; also, there is not going to be a traditional three pedal version (dual clutch auto standard and exclusive transmission). EIL did not perform instrumented testing, but estimates 0-60 to be on par with the WRX and Mazdaspeed3, and price was also not released, but will probably clock in somewhere between $25,000 and $30,000. Worry not, though; we at TTAC will be driving and reviewing the Lancer Ralliart ASAP.

ABC's decision to create a TV show based on the high drama of Detroit's auto tycoons is not particularly surprising. The backstabbing, corruption and alliances that you read about in these pages are often far more compelling than anything in the networks' lineups. But much like Detroit's interiors, Hollywood's high-concept pilots rarely hold up to more than a passing glance. The Prince Of Motor City is no exception. Rather than mining Detroit's rich, stranger-than-fiction heritage, the producers of TPOMC are erring on the side of hackery by simply transplanting the plot of Hamlet to the Motor City. Philosophy lecturer (yes, really) Billy Hamilton's father dies, leaving him in control of "Hamilton Motors," where he deals with uncle/mom entanglement, a ghost haunting the factory, a "spunky" girlfriend, and other eerie parallels to Disney's The Lion King. Ultimately, pilots rarely make it past that first episode– even if their scripts were written hundreds of years ago. ABC should ditch the Hamlet retread for some cheaper and far more entertaining Detroit-inspired reality television. Survivor: Detroit would sell itself, Extreme Makeover Chrysler Edition would tap into reality-show schadenfreude, and a show about Volt development could bring back the old Mission Impossible moniker. Then, there's always The Biggest Loser…

Breaking up is hard to do. It's even harder when you aren't even ready to move on. Automotive News [sub] reports that GM is "breaking up" with "Big Oil" in a series of new advertisements set to debut in June. "Dear Oil," begins the McCann-Erickson spot. "We've had this great relationship for many years. We think we will both be a lot happier and healthier if we see less of each other." GM's corporate marketing director Katherine Benoit says the ad "addresses the oil-price issue head-on, albeit with a tongue-in-cheek twist." By which she clearly means not at all. You see, GM has been attempting the hugely popular "green branding" approach for some time. The only problem being GM has basically nothing particularly green to market. GM has tried to conceal this discrepancy by touting its E85 FlexFuel vehicles. But with food prices up and ethanol enduring a much-deserved run of bad press, GM is back to square one. And so GM simply asserts it's "done with oil." Benoit thinks that someone will take the "break-up" seriously, saying "You have to make sure that the story you tell plays out." Sadly for this misguided marketing attempt, the GM-Oil relationship has less of a boyfriend-girlfriend dynamic than a junkie-heroin vibe. The [still] truck=heavy manufacturer doesn't need a break-up; it needs a 12-step program.

They say hope dies last, and GM's damned-to-strategic-review HUMMER brand certainly doesn't have much else to run on. Accordingly, HUMMER GM Martin Walsh has posted a reality-efficient, truth-sipping take on his brand's beleaguered fortunes to GM's Fastlane blog, utterly confirming that website as the place bad spin goes to die. Anticipating "speculation" about HUMMER's future, Walsh wants us to know that in his opinion, "the HUMMER name, and it's line-up of iconic vehicles, will still be purchased and enjoyed by customers around the world." In fact, Walsh seems to think the overseas market will rescue HUMMER. "Outside the US, where the world has been living with high fuel prices for the past decade, 2008 sales through April were up 34.8% compared to 2007." Yes, well, as Bloomberg reports, these sales spikes are the result of recent introductions of the brand to countries like Japan, complimenting a steady trickle of sales from gas-subsidizing countries like China and Russia where HUMMERS are still nouveau-riche icons. Walsh trots out every possible reason to think HUMMER isn't completely effed– truck mags love HUMMERS, there's a HUMMER biofuel concept, etc. He finally concludes that he "wholeheartedly believes that HUMMER can have a bright future." So is Walsh trying to stimulate pity-purchases of H2 and H3s, or is this just brand inflation leading up to a sale to Mahindra or Tata? Or is this just empty reassurance to HUMMER dealers that their recent million-plus dollar GM-mandated dealership upgrades were not complete wastes of money? Hand the guy some jam. HUMMER is toast.

Problem: the Toyota Camry is being outsold almost 2-to-1 by Dodge's Avenger among black customers. "Here's this nameplate that's ubiquitous," said Monica Warden, account director for Burrell, Toyota's agency of record or African-American advertising. "But for an African-American woman, it's not even in her consideration set. Our preliminary testing found they think of it as suburban, not urban; as solid but boring. And for this woman, she doesn't see herself as boring." To raise sales of its best-selling dullard, Toyota hired the company responsible for the intriguing (at least to us fanboys) The Dark Knight (movie) viral ad campaign. The result this site: If Looks Could Kill. It features a subtle sales pitch, serial web movies and who knows what else. The Dark Knight campaign had fanboys running around the San Diego Convention Center in Joker facepaint; we'll see what curious activities will arise from ILCK.com.

Also in today's Washington Post: an profile of Chevrolet Cavalier fans. Yes, fans of a car that would have made TTAC's Ten Worst (had the award existed then). The article starts with the sad fate of the last production Cav (MIA) and quotes from Edmunds such as "the worst [drive] we've experienced in recent memory", "homely," "[engine vibration] like a caffeine addict going through withdrawal," and "seats are uncomfortable for any length of time."  WaPo then heads to the flat trailing end of the automotive bell curve with fan testimonials, pimped rides, and the disturbing fact that the Cav is #2 (after Camaro) on CarDomain's directory of vehicles with >9000 entries.  The print edition managed to devote just about a whole page to this article, and it shows: serious padding about the apartment complex where a Cav tuner and his family live, the dozens of mods and hundreds of related pictures on his iPod. Click here, if you dare.

I know that's waaaay too easy a headline, but how else would you describe this ad for the Ford Flex, launched this weekend? The TV spot gives the crossover a SteadyCamaroscopy and a 360-degree website spin (or eight) to the tune of the song "Son gonna rise" by Citizen Cope. So the unique selling point is… style. I mean it must be, as there's no strapline revealing its Unique Selling Point, no voiceover announcing its arrival, no nothin'. Ah, but there's another ad [click here]. This one touts the Flex as an "agile, 24mpg crossover," then proclaims– both in narrative and in mescaline-tinged imagery– its drug-like ability to warp-your mind. "Suddenly, everything looks a little different." In fact, "Discover Flex" is as trippy a tagline as I've heard in some time. Like, wow Scoob.