Rush Limbaugh Tells All (and Then Some) in the Green Car Conspiracy
By Greg Johnson April 1, 2009Note: The quote about Ford and Honda in the third paragraph was from an article in The Los Angeles Times, and was incorrectly attributed to Rush Limbaugh.
The gospel according to Rush Limbaugh now includes another chapter in what we'll call the green car conspiracy.
Here (from a transcript on the Excellence in Broadcasting network Web site) is what Limbaugh had to say on Tuesday about why vehicle manufacturers are scrambling to design and produce fuel-efficient, cleaner vehicles:
"The Ford and Honda hybrids due out this month are among dozens planned for the coming years as automakers try to meet new fuel-efficiency standards and please politicians overseeing the industry's multibillion-dollar bailout."
(That's probably news to Ford, which has just said 'no' to bailouts, and Honda, which doesn't qualify. And it might be news to the million motorists worldwide who've purchased Priuses and prodded Ford to introduce the Fusion Hybrid (left) and Honda to market the Insight Hybrid.)
And why are the auto companies kowtowing? Because the president is in cahoots with environmentalists who stay awake nights trying to figure out how to get us back to the good, old days when a gallon of gas cost more than $4.
Ah, but the evil-doers in Washington, D.C. (and their cronies in Sacramento) can't fool steely-eyed consumers when it comes to hybrids.
"Nobody's buying 'em," Limbaugh said. "Nobody wants them! The manufacturers are making them in droves to satisfy Obama! Sorry for yelling. Nobody wants them!"
(As of March 30, Americans had purchased 1.3 million hybrids since the first one -- a two-seat Honda Insight -- was sold in December 1999. Hybrids accounted for 2.51 percent of the market in March. That's the fourth-best monthly market-share showing ever, even with the lower gasoline prices. To be fair, though, hybrid sales did fall by 44 percent in March from a year earlier, and that's a worse showing than the 37 percent drop in the overall market.)
Limbaugh also reveals why Toyota has spent almost as much money as Limbaugh earns in a year to develop the third-generation Prius that goes to market in May:
"God bless Toyota, but Prius is a loss leader. They'll lose money on the Prius to keep Congress off their back, to have a good brand, to make 'em look like they're socially conscious citizens of the earth, but they're making the freight on the big cars and trucks they sell."
(We confess that we do have a preference for buying our cars from socially unconscious citizens of the earth.)
Limbaugh also tells what killed the automobile industry:
"Politics. Politics. Politics outta Washington and Sacramento and other state capitals, politics killed the auto industry. Politics is why you can't get a car you really, really like or why they don't make as many as you really, really like 'cause they're being forced to keep the Gestapo off their back."
(Is that a ditto for all of the Hummers, Sequoias and Crown Victorias that dealers can't sell?)
No doubt some of what Limbaugh is selling makes sense. But blaming Obama for the not-so-Big Three's demise is a reach. On that score, we're partial to some of the thinking that David Brooks advanced on the GM bailout during a recent New York Times column:
Some companies are in the steel business, some are in the cookie business, but General Motors is in the restructuring business. For 30 years, GM has been restructuring itself toward long-term viability.
For all these years, GM's market share has endured a long, steady slide. But this has not stopped the waves of restructuring.The PowerPoints have flowed, and always there has been the promise that with just one more cost-cutting push, sustainability nirvana will be at hand.
There are many experts who think that the whole restructuring strategy is misbegotten. These experts think that costs are not the real problem. The real problem is the product. The cars are not good enough. The management is insular.The reputation is fatally damaged.
But if you are in the restructuring business, you can't let these stray thoughts get in the way of your restructuring. After all, restructuring is your life. Restructuring is forever. Restructuring is like what dieting is for many of us: You think about it every day. You believe it's about to work. Nothing really changes.
For now, let's set aside Limbaugh's allegations of receding capitalism and galloping socialism. Let's focus on his argument that Big Government is the only reason vehicle manufacturers are thinking green.
We'd argue the opposite -- that green-leaning manufacturers and regulators are in tune with what the market wants and the economy needs.
And we'd like to hear from motorists who paid a premium for a Prius when gasoline was over $4 a gallon -- or who revel at the thought of Ford and Honda sparking competition through the introduction of well-designed, socially conscious cars.
Is Limbaugh right when he claims that consumers are being "forced to start considering cars" that they really don't want?
Greg Johnson, Contributor
LEAVE A COMMENT
Click here to comment on this entry.As long as everyone understands that Mr. Limbaugh is now the NEW leader of the Republican party, then i will be able to sleep better.
THANK YOU MR. LIMBAUGH
I don't understand how that that moron still has a pulpit or why edmunds decided his opinion was important enough to give publicity.
He is a scared little man using fear & bigotry to fight for relevancy. The oldest shill game of hate mongers.
He doesn't represent the "Right" and certainly deserves no response from the "Left".
"I don't understand ...... why edmunds decided his opinion was important enough to give publicity."
Exactly, cruiserhead1! Boss Limbaugh is a complete idiot! Oh dear........
Why is it that extremists somehow get labeled as leaders? They're not leaders. They're just loud.
If we stop giving them an audience, they will go away.
Well, there is a grain to truth to this rant by Mr. Limbaugh. Lest we all forget, prominent commentators from liberal think-tanks and op-Eds from the NY Times were quite excited to mandate much-higher-than-industry MPG requirements for the Big Three receiving any loans, plus a gag order to not resist emissions legislation from California, and require all-electric cars to be manufactured.
Have we already forgotten all the pontificating about how domestic automakers were in financial trouble for stubbornly not making cars people want - all-electric vehicles and super high fuel efficiency vehicles? Of course, this is not entirely correct, as domestics can and do make class leading cars in terms of quality and fuel efficiency.
The domestics are in trouble because of legacy contracts and structural problems going back decades. The Japanese manufacturers have much newer, streamlined systems. Remember the UAW resisting robots and streamlined processes in autoplants in the 80's? Those were American traditions of preserving absolete jobs. The newer Japanese manufacturing plants do not have those problems, and the associated higher costs of labor and benefits. Not that management is without blame, but I do see a disconnect with what all the enviromentalists are claming to the the ills of domestic autos. And, it is true that Japanes make their profit on trucks and fuel-hogging luxury vehicles, similar to domestics.
"It's not that Liberals are ignorant, it's that they know so much that isn't so." -Ronald Reagan
Well said jederino.
Let's not forget too that the Asian manufacturers have from the start used primarily their own domestic (Asian) car platforms. Those are mostly smaller, fuel-efficient platforms due to their government's local policy of high gas prices to
encourage efficiency and discourage imported oil.
We don't hear much about eg Toyota's SUV's, pick-ups, and Lexus high displacement engines all built for the US market. Now those new factories have all but closed also. NOR about how the size (and so inefficiencies) of their "compact" and
mid-size offerings have continued to grow. Yet the US domestics supply what the market asks for and they're crucified for it even tho many of their small and mid-size platforms are world class.
Even the logic of GM (and Chrysler, BMW) with their application of hybrid technology to improve mileage on what the market asked for - SUV's and Trucks, was ignored. Yet the far greater
overall improvement in fuel efficiency and emissions comes from increasing mileage in low efficiency vehicles than in platforms already at 28/36
Rather than giving a blowhard (and easy target) like Limbaugh all this coverage, how about elevating the coverage?
Mr. Johnson,
Your article is inaccurate and misleading. Mr. Limbaugh did indeed say:
"The Ford and Honda hybrids due out this month are among dozens planned for the coming years as automakers try to meet new fuel-efficiency standards and please politicians overseeing the industry's multibillion-dollar bailout."
However, what you failed to report is that he was quoting the LA Times article found at http://www.latimes.com/news/science/environment/la-fi-hybrid17-2009mar17,0,1930594.story I realize you have your own political views and disagree with Mr. Limbaugh. But why do you have to resort to questionable reporting to try to win people to your side of the argument? I did not read the rest of your article because you already lied to be in the beginning. I'm sorry you wasted your time.
Buuusted!
Greg,
You probably have a fascination for organic food, sandals, public transportation and 4-wheeled carts with 105hp. You need to realize there are readers of Inside Line who like their Hummers, Escalades (not the hybrid), GTR's, Porsches and Maseratis. Perhaps you should contribute your liberal diatribe to an "eco-friendly" web-site and be in better company.
Fanon is right, what Rush read was from a LA Times article and was written by Ken Bensinger. It appears you just read what you wanted to and left out other important details. Maybe you should cite Ken when he wrote
"Yet automakers believe they have little choice but to make more hybrids. Though car buyers are losing interest, politicians are pushing them as key to reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil and limiting the global-warming gases that cars emit into the atmosphere." Simply put, the legislatures and President are trying to shove their cars down American's throats and being forced to design, implement and manufacture one as a condition for bail-out money (Minus Ford).
The sales of these vehicles are driven by the market, people don't want them!!
Apologies for putting words into Rush Limbaugh's mouth. The quote about Honda and Ford is indeed from the LA Times article. Thanks for pointing out the mistake. We've added a correction to the post.
Greg
ADD A COMMENT