GM, please.

Not as in, "I'd like a GM, please," but as in

"GM, gimme a break. Fertheloveofdriving, GM, please."

I'm a car girl. I love cars. Love driving cars, love admiring cars, love talking about cars, get as giddy about an auto show as most girls get over Brad Pitt or that guy from Prison Break (speaking of driving....)

I married a car man. He knows everything there is to know about cars. About body work, about mechanical repair, about selling, buying, rebuilding - he knows his cars.

First date: he mentioned something about a car he was working on, then cut himself off with a "I'll shut up, you don't want to hear about car stuff."

I think I swooned a little then.

At any rate - one of my favorite current event topics to follow is the Decline of Detroit, so to speak; the Struggle of the Lame Duck American Auto Manufacturer.

Call me unpatriotic (or just flat west-coast), but the glory days of the American cruiser are gone, and frankly, it has mostly to do with the attitudes of chairmen like GM's Bob Lutz. HERE is an article featuring Lutz whining about unfair fuel economy standards and the "desires of the GM customer."

I'm also a fuel economy junkie. I want to get the most miles for my money. Yep, I'd love to get the most stylish miles for my money, or the FASTEST miles for my money, or the most powerful miles for my money, too, but basically: my car sits in a parking lot for all but 1 hour of the day, so I'll be satisfied with going the most miles I can between overpriced fills. BUT, as a girl that likes to drive, I can't quite accept the variable-transmission-Prius option (gimme a stick and lemme fly) or the inflated price tag (which ends up costing more than the amount I'd save on gas). And I sit in traffic, so a diesel isn't a great option (all that carbon build-up...).

SO, when it came time for my new car purchase, I went Japanese. They're efficient. They're well-built. They're decently affordable.

And they're making GM jealous. Or, more appropriately, prone to lame metaphors:

"the attempt to force carmakers to sell smaller vehicles is like 'fighting the nation's obesity problem by forcing clothing manufacturers to sell garments only in small sizes.'"

That's Lutz whining again.

Nope, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard (CAFE) isn't an attempt to force auto manufacturers to make SMALLER vehicles. It's not an attempt to force consumers to BUY smaller vehicles. It's an attempt to hold manufacturers to higher fuel economy standars in ALL of their vehicles. It's simply a request for the (American) manufacturers to make their huge, gaz-guzzling behemoths more efficient.

Old dog, new trick.

If Detroit (and I use the term generally - Ford, GM, et all) - amid slumping sales, layoffs, unispiring incentives and price slashes is still struggling to stay afloat, I'm suspicious that consumers ARE sending messages about what they want. The Energy Security Leadership Council isn't to blame for their slumping sales. Consumers' demands simply aren't being met. Lutz seems to think that the American consumer would be turned off by smaller GM vehicles.

Are they buying enough of those behemoths to keep GM profitable? If layoffs, quarterly profit revisions and sagging sales are any indication, Detroit has nothing to lose by creating more efficient vehicles.

And sure, that Chevy Cobalt I rented handled well, was decently fun to drive, sported an aluminum engine block, Pirelli tires and a Kenwood stereo...but at the end of the day, it pulled 27 miles to the gallon. I'll take my Corolla's 35 average any day...(until I can get my hands on an Audi A3...or a BMW 330, or a Mini S, or a C230 Kompressor...)