If Saturn goes, I will NEVER buy another GM car

I expect GM to survive in one form or another. But if GM drops or stops
the Saturn brand, I am done with GM cars and so is the rest of the
family. We have been loyal Saturn car owners and have found them
superior and different than other GM cars. We have owned six Saturn
vehicles over the years having bought two last year. If Saturn goes, so
will our GM loyalty. In other words GM, you orphan me, then I will
orphan you. I knew that idiot Obama would screw this up. Only his
inexperience could take a bad situation and make it worse.

 

if they were so good, then explain why you needed to buy so many
saturns ?

 

GM has killed Saturn, not Obama.

Chris
'92 SL1
'00 SL1

 

Uh, GM made the decision to drop the brands that were the least
profitable. After GM dumped hundreds of millions of dollars into a
failed brand you expected the government to encourage them to dump
billions more into a failed brand. Let it go.

It is rather surprising that GM dumped the Pontiac brand since it's the
third best selling brand, and they're keeping Buick which is sixth. But
perhaps Buick (and Cadillac) sales, despite fewer units, are more
profitable.

Hopefully the new GM will decide that it should be quality and
engineering that sells vehicles rather than marketing gimmicks like
no-haggle sales and polymer panels.

 

I think the reason for the choices are pretty logical. Chevy, for the low
end/cost, Buick for the Mid-range and Cadillac for the upper, with GMC
rebadged selected sampling versions from the 3 for optional/upper trim
levels. Pontiac seems like it was kind of that mish-mosh of selections and
loyalty that did not really have a concrete hold on customers. In addition,
the brand fit in-between Chevy's low and Buick's mid-level offering, so
killing it seems to make sense.

As far as Saturn, in my opinion they drifted from the original concept of
what it was supposed to be years ago and killed what made Saturn a Saturn.
They also took too long to develop a follow up car to their original success
of the S-series. Getting rid of the polymer sides and going with rebadged
Opel's in my opinion was the killer for me. My '06 Vue was my first and
last GM product...

IYM



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the
name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program,
until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it
happened. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the
Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform."

~ Norman Thomas, 1944 - The Socialist Party candidate for President of the
US

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's
money." ~Margaret Thatcher

 

Correction: My '06 Vue was my first "new" GM vehicle. I bought a used '94
SL2 in '01 that I put 100k miles on, and traded it for the Vue when it had
205k miles on it due to another family addition. (I needed something with
more room). It was my success with that SL2 that convinced me to buy
another Saturn product....

 

I bought a Saturn SL in 1994. Drove it for five years before trading it
in for another one. Kept it for four years, but traded it in for a Jeep
Wrangler in 2005.

Bought an SL1 for my daughter in 2000 as I recall. She totaled the
vehicle, but it saved her life.

So, bought second Saturn SL1 to replace it. Almost identical except for
the year.

She drove that for 5 years and then we traded it in for a VUE (2008). In
the process of evaluating the VUE, she and I test drove an Aura. I liked
it so much, we bought it as a third car.

Does that answer your question? We like Saturns. But now the two latest
cars will be orphaned soon. Stupid move by GM. Wasn't the Saturn brand
supposed to be the import car killer? Killing off all these brands
instead of merging the brands is going to kill off whatever loyalty
Americans still had remaining for American cars.

 

Two years ago the Democrats took control of Congress. One year later the
economy started to go into a tailspin. Obama's lack of leadership and
total and complete inexperience has kept consumer confidence at a low.
Couple that with a failure of the so-called stimulus program that is not
and will not create jobs, is causing consumer confidence to remain low
and therefore keeping Americans from going out and buying new cars....no
car sales means GM, Chrysler and to a lesser extent Ford cannot make
money. Obama and the Democrats took a bad situation and just made it
worse. Lost Hope, Pocket Change.

 

Usenet User wrote:

<snip>

Now it's time to move forward. With 60 votes in the senate, Obama can
begin the arduous task of restoring America to greatness. In just 100
days he’s already taken steps to fix the military, fix the intelligence
services, restore the moral authority of the U.S., undo the disastrous
environmental policies of George W. Bush and the neo-cons, fix the
economic mess that George W. Bush, Reagan, and the neo-cons got us into,
and begin the long process of fixing our health care system.

When Reagan and George W. Bush were president it was party time. Spend,
spend, spend, and go on reckless military adventures without looking at
the big picture. It was great fun, and everyone enjoyed the party so
much that they forget that the bill eventually comes due. It’ll take
more than just eight years for Obama to undo all the damage the
Republicans have wrought on our great country.

The only concern is that eight years may not be enough for Obama to
complete the task. One thing we should immediately begin working on is
the repeal of the 22nd amendment of the constitution so Obama can serve
more than just eight years. He’s still a young man after all. Changing
the term limit to four terms would be appropriate given the damage that
the Republicans have done to the country and the time that will be
needed to undo the damage.

 

And exactly what do you think the Democrats did to cause that? Did
they deregulate the banking industry? No, that was the neocons. Did
they raise taxes? No, the Bush tax cuts remain in force to this day.
Did they deflate the housing bubble? No, bubbles deflate on their
own. Did they waste a trillion dollars (and thousands of lives) in
Iraq? No, that was the neocons again.

Consumer confidence just jumped by the most in four years.

<http://seekingalpha.com/article/134000-still-low-consumer-confidence-improves-significantly>

There are signs it is working, but it is really too early to tell.

Typical neocon tactic: repeat your own misinformation until someone
believes it. Have you noticed this isn't working anymore? (Hint:
look at the party controlling the legislative and executive branches.)

If Obama hadn't bailed them out, GM and Chrysler would be in
liquidation now. (And yes, I know the difference between bankruptcy
and liquidation and I choose my words advisedly.)

Whereas Bush took a healthy economy with a budget surplus and put it
in the toilet while giving big tax breaks to his rich friends.

 

What did they do to *prevent* the crisis? What did they even
*propose*? They, afterall, controlled all legislation.

Irony anyone?

 

You need to learn how the government works in terms of legislation,
then get back to us.

Here's a hint--look at what it takes to over-ride a presidential veto,
especially when you have a Republican party that sticks together to
prevent crucial legislation from passing. And they're still doing it
using the filibuster. Fortunately, with the defection of Arlen Specter
from the Republicans, and the imminent seating of Franken, the
filibuster threat will be negated.

 

I agree with one thing. 60 votes will help bury America forever. Lost
Hope, Pocket Change.

Country was fine until 2 years ago when DemocRATS took control of
Congress. When they took the reigns of the country's finances, we went
into decline. When employment has not recovered in 3 years, Obama and
socialism will die.

 

Tell me what the Dems did to prevent the crisis instead of dodging.

 

To the degree the crisis was precipitated by the crisis in
mortgage-backed securities in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac due to the
deflation of the housing bubble, the Dems reportedly resisted the Bush
administration's attempt to address the lack of guidelines for those
organizations. In addition, Dems (admittedly with either encouragement or,
at least, little resistance from Repubs, including neocons) tend to have
promoted policies and an atmosphere that encouraged lending at levels we now
recognize were beyond the means of some borrowers.
To those with short memories about the Bush tax cuts: Bush inheritied a
contracting economy (admittedly not nearly as bad as that his successor
faces) and his tax cuts were followed by what appears to have been a strong
recovery. Besides, tax cuts are a good thing in and of themselves, IMHO,
because they tend to result in smaller government (thus less spoils for
crooked politicians and "special interests").

 

I suggest we go one step further, change the constitution and install Obama as
Emperor of USA. All our problems will be over. Are we that stupid?

 

Typical neo-con, doesn't believe in democracy.

 

Where the HELL did he ever say that he NEEDED to buy that or any amount?? So
many look to be negative and don't stick to the facts... Just proves each
and every time
where they're coming from and what they are all about...

if they were so good, then explain why you needed to buy so many
saturns ?

 

USENET USER>>>>

I never would have watsed the time on him with any answer. He was and is not
deserving of one with the accusing bullshit attitude...
As for all of the others ,... take your fucking politics out of this group
to where it belongs and leave this one open for Saturn items and issues as
it is intended...