Steve Lehto

The Italian Hall Disaster: One Reason to Observe a Silent Night This Christmas Eve

2011-12-21T10:34:11-05:00

Christmas Eve marks the anniversary of one of the darkest moments in U.S. labor history: On that day in 1913, more than six dozen people died in a stampede following a false cry of "Fire!" at the Italian Hall in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. The tragedy occurred during a miner's strike in the "Copper Country," in a time when unions were not protected by law and strikers were more likely to be beaten and fired than to be invited to a bargaining table.

It began in the summer, when the Western Federation of Miners reached a membership level that allowed them to call an effective strike. Most of the copper mines were situated in a line on the north side of the peninsula and the strike worked: The mines shut down completely. The mines called for the National Guard to be sent and also hired hundreds of strike breakers -- an archaic profession for men who wanted to bust heads legally. Soon the area was swarming with National Guardsmen, out-of-town strikebreaking thugs and striking miners.

Michigan's governor, Woodbridge Ferris, recalled the bulk of the National Guard when it became apparent they weren't needed. For the most part, the strikers had not been violent and the Guards had little to do. The day after the Guard was recalled, strikebreakers shot and killed two striking miners in broad daylight in a little corner of the copper district called Seeberville. It was just a hint of things to come.

The sides dug in deeper. The WFM sent out calls for help and labor leaders like Mother Jones and Clarence Darrow lent moral support. The mines were flush with cash though, and bet they could starve the workers into ending their strike. Then came winter.

Michigan's Copper Country winters are famously harsh. Snow is measured in feet and temperatures routinely drop below zero. While many of the strikers were recent immigrants from Finland, the prolonged strike inspired many of them to leave before waiting to see whether the strike would end before the snow would melt.

The heartiest strikers who stayed decided to have a party on Christmas Eve, particularly for their children. More than 500 people attended the event at the Italian Hall, in a town now known as Calumet. It was called Red Jacket at the time and was the home of the Calumet & Hecla mine, the biggest of them all. Songs were sung and presents were given to children. Adults chatted and a light dusting of snow began to fall as dusk turned to night. For a moment, the strike was forgotten.

Then, a stranger stepped into the main hall and yelled "Fire!" There was no fire but panic spread through the building. Most people rushed out the only way they knew: toward the steep staircase that led to the street. Someone tripped and fell and soon a pile of bodies blocked the stairwell. When the volunteer firemen arrived just a few minutes later they could not untangle the mass from the street level. They had to climb the fire escape and perform the rescue from the top. At least 73 in the pile were dead, of whom perhaps 60 were children. Witnesses would later say they could identify the man who had raised the false alarm and much of the evidence pointed to his occupation: He was a strikebreaker.

The president of the WFM, Charles Moyer, sent telegrams to the outside world demanding an investigation. For his effort, the local sheriff stood by as pro-management thugs beat and shot him. They dragged him to the train station and put him on a train with a dire warning: They would kill him if he returned. The local English-language newspapers spun the story to say Moyer had left town suddenly after trying to "capitalize" on the deaths at the Italian Hall. One paper suggested he had merely skipped town to avoid paying his hotel bill.

The funerals for the dead were a spectacle. Services were held in several churches at the same time and the mourners filed into the streets and walked in a long procession to the cemetery outside of town. White coffins for the children were carried by men while the adult coffins rode on horse-drawn carriages.

The local coroner convened an inquest and took testimony over three days so he could publish a report exonerating the most likely suspects: Mine management and its strike breakers. Anyone reading the transcript of the hearings today is struck by how unfair they were. Witnesses who spoke other languages were asked questions in English and required to answer in English. Many witnesses were called who were not at the Hall or who had not seen what happened.

In the end, the official verdict was that no one knew what happened at the Hall. But the problem for the local powers of 1913 is that we do know, and we can remember: The man who cried "Fire!" at the Italian Hall was a strikebreaking thug. He might not have intended to kill anyone but he certainly set out to disrupt the party. His lack of foresight regarding his action does not exonerate him or his masters.

One lasting legacy of this event is the famous quote from Schenck v US, where Oliver Wendell Holmes famously wrote: "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic." He wrote those words in 1919, and while he did not refer to the Italian Hall disaster he most certainly knew about it. It had been front page news at the New York Times and most other major newspapers of the day just six years earlier.

Italian Hall needs to be remembered for more, though. It was centered in a labor dispute, at a time when workers who stood up for their rights could be fired, beaten or worse. At least 73 people died at the Italian Hall in 1913 during a struggle for workers' rights. They must be remembered this, and every, Christmas Eve.

Steve Lehto is the author of Death'sDoor: The Truth Behind Michigan's Largest Mass Murder and Shortcut: The Seeberville Murders and the Dark Side of the American Dream

A Thumbnail Sketch of the Lemon Law

2011-08-01T08:27:15-04:00

Ever have a car that just couldn't be fixed? It seems we've all owned a bum car at one time or another. The mysterious engine hesitation or surge the dealer couldn't pinpoint; the weird noise everyone can hear but no one can silence. Or, the car which breaks down repeatedly -- to the point where the mechanic shakes in fear when he sees the car being towed back in. These cars are "Lemons" and are the subject of "Lemon Laws" in all fifty states. While everyone is familiar with the concept of the lemon automobile, not everyone is so clear on the law. Most people don't worry all that much about it until they find themselves with one.

I am an attorney and have spent 20 years dealing almost exclusively with lemon laws, representing consumers who have defective automobiles. I'll give you the brief version of what everyone should know about lemon laws. First, all fifty states now have Lemon Laws. While they vary slightly from state to state, they all have common themes. In a nutshell, the typical lemon law says that your new car is a lemon if it has been subjected to a certain number of repairs for the same substantial problem or if it has spent a certain number of days in the shop being repaired within the first year of ownership. Seems simple but you need to note a few things.

First, most lemon laws only apply to new cars. While this can get tricky - some states consider demonstrator cars "new," for example - you cannot assume these laws will protect you on a used car purchase. Your car is New? The next step is to find out if the problem you are having is "substantial"? The laws don't always define what this is so you will have to ask yourself if the defect would impair the car's use or value (and in some states, the safety). Obviously, if the car won't start or catches fire, then it is a substantial problem. Wind noise? The sunroof leaks during monsoons? These may not be so clear.

Assuming you have a substantial problem, then you need the requisite number of repair attempts or days in the shop. And, some states say that the repair attempts must fall within a certain time frame. For example, in Michigan, the first repair must occur within the first year and all four must fall within the first two years. This will vary by state. If your car has been in the shop four or five times, consult a local lawyer and know the answer to those two questions: When did you first bring it in and how many times did you bring it in?

Some vehicles suffer problems that cannot be repaired or diagnosed quickly and spend some of their early lives sitting at dealerships, unrepaired. If your vehicle has been in the shop more than 20 days, consult an attorney. In some states, the threshold is 25 days and in some it's 30. When you hit the magic number, your vehicle is a lemon.

Some states will ask you to notify the manufacturer that you believe your vehicle is a lemon and offer them a "last chance" to repair it. This demand letter is important because up until you send it, the manufacturer may be unaware of the problems you are having with your car. The manufacturer may or may not follow up on the letter but you still need to send it since the law probably requires it.
The reason the manufacturer is notified is that it is not the dealer who is on the hook for the lemon law; it is the manufacturer. If your vehicle is a lemon and you prevail under the lemon law, the manufacturer must do one of two things. They will have to either replace the vehicle for you with one of equal value or refund your money to you, in essence, buying the vehicle back from you for what you paid for it.

You may be required to give up a mileage offset, based upon how many miles you drove the vehicle before the first repair attempt. These were the trouble free miles - in theory - you put on the vehicle so this makes sense on some level.

Here's the really good news: Most lemon laws require the manufacturer to pay your attorney's fees and court costs for you if you prevail in one of these cases. This means that in most states, you can find attorneys who will handle your case and not charge you anything for attorney's fees.

You should also keep in mind that while I refer to "cars" above, the lemon laws in most states also cover pickup trucks and SUVs. They may cover RVs and boats, but that will vary wildly by state. The good news here is a Federal law called the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act which offers protection to a consumer who has bought any consumer product that came with a warranty. It is not limited to cars or trucks and also offers attorney's fees and costs paid by the manufacturer of the defective product.

And always, consult a local attorney if you think your car or truck (or consumer product) is a lemon.

Steve Lehto is an attorney in Michigan and has taught Consumer Protection as an adjunct professor at the University of Detroit-Mercy School of Law. He is the author of The New Lemon Law Bible: Everything the Smart Consumer Needs to Know About Automobile Law.

The Most Important Car Buying Tip

2011-07-22T14:43:34-04:00

As an attorney, I've heard all the lawyer jokes but I take solace in the fact that there is one professional generally viewed with less respect than the attorney. I refer, of course, to the used car salesman. Perhaps then it makes sense that I have spent the last 20 years suing car dealers for the things they do to consumers. In that time, I have spoken to thousands of consumers who have been ripped off by car dealers and I have heard it all. I can often finish the stories told to me by new clients. I can also tell you some basic things you can do to protect yourself next time you go car shopping. Here is the most important.

Car sales are controlled by the purchase agreement you will be asked to sign once a deal has been struck. Most of these are pre-printed forms smothered in boilerplate legalese. Among the gibberish they ask you to sign is a sentence or two confirming that "verbal statements made by the sales person are not binding on the seller." Yes, that means the salesman can tell you anything he wants; it won't mean a thing legally. "This car is brand new." "This is a one-owner car." "This car has never been wrecked." "This car was not pulled from the bottom of a canal and refurbished after we pulled out all the dead alligators." My advice? Ignore everything the salesman says to you. EVERYTHING. None of it means a thing until it's reduced to writing. (In some states, you can argue that the salesman's statements meant something notwithstanding the disclaimer, but it is much harder to prove; written statements usually trump verbal ones.)

The flipside of this is fascinating. If it doesn't count until they write it down, what happens when you ask them to write it down? Watch and learn. When you talk to the saleswoman and she tells you something worthwhile like, "This car has a brand new engine," ask her to write it on the purchase agreement and let the fun begin. You will be told, "We're not allowed to write things on the purchase agreement," or "You don't need me to write that down, I'm giving you my word." If she won't write it down, refer to the previous paragraph and know this: The saleswoman is lying to you. There is no reason that a salesperson would hesitate to write a truthful statement down on a purchase agreement.

I've had a lot of clients who were harmed by broken promises of dealerships which could have been easily avoided. You take a car for a test drive and you love the car but you notice that the air conditioning is blowing warm air or the stereo cuts in and out. Other than the minor problem, the car is perfect. You say you'll buy the car if they fix the problem and they agree. "Sign here!" Don't sign anything yet. Why would you agree to buy a car in need of repair? This is actually one of the most common problems I encounter in my field: car buyers trust dealers to perform repairs after the purchase has been consummated. This is silly. Why not just say, "I'll sign that purchase agreement right after you show me that the car is fixed." I've heard of dealers who actually say, "Since we're fixing it for you, you need to sign." Huh?! It's their car. It's not yours yet.

People who foolishly agree to buy the unfixed car run into one of the following two scenarios. Often, the dealer simply refuses to repair the car after the purchase. Why should they fix it? Now, it's just money out of their pocket and there's nothing you can do for them at this point -- you're just costing them money. But wait! What if you were astute enough to make them put the promise of repair in writing on the purchase agreement? They can't refuse to repair the car outright, so what most often happens is that the dealer will simply drag its feet in making the repairs. "We'll get to it when we get to it." They might cut corners, installing used parts to "fix" whatever was broken on the car. Or, they might just do a shoddy job working on the car. I've seen used car dealers that had no mechanics on their staff still attempt to repair a used car. Hey, they never promised it would be fixed by a mechanic; they just said they'd "fix" it. Again, they have little motivation to repair the car now. All they wanted to do was make the sale and they did that back when you signed the purchase agreement for the defective car.

So, next time you go car shopping remember this: Ignore everything the salesperson tells you. It doesn't count until it's written on the purchase agreement. And if they won't write it there for you, walk away. Keep in mind how important that purchase agreement is. In fact, I wrote a whole chapter on it here.

Steve Lehto is the author of The New Lemon Law Bible: Everything the Smart Consumer Needs to Know About Automobile Law.

The Pulitzer Scam

2011-07-13T17:10:11-04:00

I hate to narc out fellow writers but this morning I ran across another writer claiming to have been "Pulitzer nominated" on a website to promote a book. The truth of that statement is not what most people think it is -- and it is deceptive.

The Pulitzer Prize is, of course, one of the best known awards in our society. Presumably, it would be a good thing if you won a Pulitzer. Notice that the writer above did not claim to have "won" a Pulitzer; they claimed to have been "nominated" for it. Even so, that has a nice ring to it: "I've been nominated for a Pulitzer Prize." A few years back when I first wondered about this, it was on the cover of a horribly written, self-published book in bold letters: "PULITZER NOMINATED." I looked at the book in wonderment. How could that be? The book had typos on the cover! I did some research.

The Pulitzer Prize competition is open to anyone who wants to enter. Anyone can submit a few copies of their work -- there are categories for books as well as for journalism -- and pay $50 and BAM! The book is now entered in the Pulitzer Prize process. Here is where it gets tricky. Notice that I did not say the book has been nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. It may have been submitted for consideration by the author, but the Pulitzer Prize has a process for nomination. Many writers ignore this part. The Pulitzer Prize organization has juries which select finalists in various categories and then the Pulitzer Prize Board picks the winners from those finalists. According to their own website, the only people who should say they are "nominated" for a Pulitzer Prize are the finalists who have been selected by the juries for consideration by the Pulitzer Prize Board.

So how does one ferret out the true nominees from those who have simply paid the $50 themselves so they could claim to have been nominated (albeit not truly nominated)? The site has a search function which allows you to search the winners and finalists - the true nominees according to the Pulitzer Prize organization - going back quite a few years. Next time you see a questionable book touted as Pulitzer Prize "nominated," go here and do a quick search. Don't be surprised to find that the book was not a finalist and is not listed anywhere on the site. The award has not been given out willy-nilly to writers of self-published books you've never heard of. Some years, there have been categories that don't even have winners.

I suspect that many writers will continue with this little misdirection; pay the $50 and submit a book so it can be touted as somehow related to the Pulitzer Prize. Suggesting it has been "nominated" for a Pulitzer Prize is wrong, however, unless it has been nominated by a Pulitzer jury. I would think that the Pulitzer organization should do something about this. It tarnishes their image, especially when you see some of the things which are claimed to be nominated. Then again, maybe they don't want to lose all of those $50 entry fees.

Daytona in July: Forty Years Ago

2011-07-01T16:24:45-04:00

Will you be nostalgic for simpler times during this year's "Coke Zero 400" at Daytona? Think back 40 years if you need a fix of the good old NASCAR days, long before they invented Coke Zero. The 1971 Daytona race was the "Medal of Honor Firecracker 400," and NASCAR saluted the medal recipients before the race. What could be more patriotic than that? Reigning NASCAR champ Bobby Isaac went to the race though, as a spectator. His K&K team was protesting the seemingly arbitrary rules regarding restrictor plates. Many observers believed NASCAR was simply handicapping the teams to counter advances they had made in racing technology. You make your car faster; NASCAR makes it slower.

K&K had not even bothered to bring their car to the track. Team owner Nord Krauskopf flew to Daytona and held a press conference outside of the registration office for the race track. Krauskopf explained his gripe about the restrictor plates -- and how the #71 car was not entered in the race before he got there -- but he had since changed his mind. Knowing that fans might be upset by paying to watch a race they had expected to see Isaac in -- and they'd blame him and Isaac, not NASCAR -- Krauskopf relented and told Isaac to race.

Because the decision to race had been made after qualifying took place, Isaac was dispatched to the 21st position in the starting grid. He had never won a race where he started that far back, but in practice he had run laps that would have started him third if he'd qualified on time. Isaac was unfazed by the position. "It doesn't matter where you start at Daytona. The fastest car is going to win if it stays in." Once the race started, it was obvious that Isaac's car was the fastest on the track as he worked his way to the front in the 62nd lap of the 400-mile race. He clung to the lead, even though being pressed hard by Richard Petty. On the 71st lap, disaster struck as Isaac ran out of gas on the track. He coasted into the pits where Hyde and company refueled the #71 and then had to push his car out of the pit to get it started.

Isaac overcame the lost time from the fuel miscalculation, and retook the lead. With 12 miles left, one of his car's three hood pins shook loose after a bumping incident with Joe Frasson, and the corner of his hood started flapping. His lead over Petty at this time was only 10 seconds, and Petty was closing. If the hood came loose he would have to stop, and if it looked too dangerous, the flagman could drop the black flag on him and force him into the pit for repair. Isaac ignored it -- even as the flapping broke the second hood pin, leaving only one -- and kept racing as Petty closed the gap to 4 seconds. "Everyone was standing in their seats," to watch the drama as the finish approached. With the hood flapping and Petty on his rear bumper, Isaac crossed the line in 1st. He won $16,000 for the win -- a win from the worst starting position he'd ever raced from and won. The race he almost didn't enter also became the most lucrative of his career.

What about the fact he'd almost missed the race? "I just wanted to race. I didn't care about the politics."

Steve Lehto is the author of Bobby Isaac: NASCAR's First Modern Champion and Chrysler's Turbine Car: The Rise and Fall of Detroit's Coolest Creation.

Who Killed the Multifuel Car?

2011-05-19T16:27:28-04:00

We all heard about General Motors and how they "killed" their EV1 electric car program. The EV1 electrics were produced from 1996 to 1999, and were on the road until 2003 before GM rounded them up and -- for the most part -- destroyed them.

Proponents of the plug-in cars screamed, and a documentary was even made. Perhaps some of that backlash led to GM creating the Chevrolet Volt, which became available in 2010. While many point to this as an example of how the automakers learn from their past, others -- particularly old timers -- had an eerie feeling: Didn't something like this happen before?

Yes. Almost 60 years ago, Chrysler unveiled an automobile to the press that contained a remarkable engine worthy of the space age. The power plant contained one-fifth the moving parts of a piston engine, weighed less and -- here's the kicker -- ran on any combustible fuel you could pour in the tank. The engine was a turbine and Chrysler had developed one specifically for automotive use. It fit under the hood of a car, and the controls of the car were similar to those on any other car.

From 1953 to 1963, Chrysler fine-tuned the technology and even drove the turbines cross-country to garner attention for their newfangled cars. In 1963, they built a fleet of the cars and lent them to the public. Any person who was lucky enough to have their name drawn from the 30,000 people who submitted applications was given a turbine car to drive for three months. Chrysler paid the insurance and maintenance. All you had to do was put fuel in it. The recommended fuel was diesel, which was only available at that time at truck stops. The car would run fine on unleaded gas, but that was a little harder to find back then. Here's the cool part: Users were told they could run the car on home heating oil if it was available to them, or even on kerosene.

The problem was that gasoline in the 1960s cost much less than a dollar per gallon. It wasn't how many dollars per gallon you paid; it was how many gallons you got for a dollar. Many people looked at the multifuel capability of the car as nothing more than a parlor trick. Chrysler demonstrated the car being driven on Chanel No. 5 perfume and tequila. One test driver described driving the car on a tank of peanut oil and said it smelled like someone was baking cookies. But what if the cars had made it into production? You would pull into a "gas" station and take a look at the various fuels available. You could choose the cheapest one and refuel. If enough of these cars had made it onto the road, demand could have brought more alternative fuels to the market.

Some critics will note that the turbines didn't get great gas mileage and throttle response seemed sluggish compared to other cars of the day. These things are true, but many of the engineers who worked on the program will tell you that these were simply engineering problems to be solved. If only they'd had a little more time.

In all, Chrysler let 203 families borrow the cars (and do over a million miles of driving!) and then rounded the cars up and destroyed most of them. Automakers have always been leery of letting their prototypes get out into circulation. (Nine of the 55 turbine cars from the user fleet survived; Chrysler retained three and the other six were donated to museums.) Still, Chrysler continued their experiments on turbine cars until 1978.

What killed the Chrysler turbine car was more a convergence of forces no one in the auto industry had seen coming. New tailpipe standards and fleet fuel economy numbers were things the turbine engineers couldn't solve quickly enough, and Chrysler hit its first ugly financial patch right around this time. The full story takes up a whole book, but the upshot is this: Detroit built a car as early as 1953 that would run on any number of fuels, some of which could have been manufactured here. What if the turbine car had gone into wide scale production? Would we still be tied to petroleum as we are today?

Fame, Fortune and Cool Stuff

2011-05-14T14:46:50-04:00

Ask someone why writing might be a fine vocation and you will hear the usual trifecta: Fame, Fortune, and getting to do Cool Stuff. The wonderful thing about being a writer is that while those first two can be elusive, the Cool Stuff is quite easy to come by. Long before you are rich or famous, you can get to do some pretty cool stuff as a writer if you put your mind to it. Here are some of the cooler things I have gotten to do as a writer and I assure you: I am not rich or famous.

I got to drive Jay Leno's turbine car. One of only three running Chrysler turbines in the world, the car is priceless, literally and figuratively. The full story is here, so as not to repeat myself.

I got to drive Bobby Isaac's K&K Charger Daytona. This car won the NASCAR National Championship in 1970 and later set more than two dozen land speed records at Bonneville. I drove the car on the road outside of the Talladega raceway after I met the owner of the car and told him I had written Bobby's biography. Somehow, it seemed fitting: The car is on the cover of the book.

I got to fly in a B-17 bomber. The Yankee Lady is one of only a handful of survivors and resides in a museum in Michigan. The barn-door sized rear tail is even bigger when you see it up close. Flying over southeastern Michigan at only a couple thousand feel, I crawled up into the place where the bombardier sat and watched the farmland pass by below. It was eerily reminiscent of so many WWII movies I'd seen.

I've met four current or former governors of Michigan. At a recent book event in Lansing, I met former Governor James Blanchard who bought two copies of my Chrysler Turbine Car book. Blanchard had played a role in the story -- he was involved in the first bailout of Chrysler during the Iacocca days -- and he asked me to sign one copy for him and the other for Sergio Marchionne. I didn't meet Sergio, but the CEO of Chrysler is a friend of Blanchard's; the former governor now sits on the board of Chrysler.

I've been quoted by the New York Times, and have been featured as an expert on CNN, the BBC and by quite a few local TV stations and newspapers. One of the earliest things I wrote was about the lemon law -- my legal specialty -- and whenever someone looked for an expert to comment, they somehow found me. One day a producer from the BBC called and said a film crew was coming over to America to study our consumer protection law because they didn't have an equivalent law in England. I became the spokesman for American law in their piece. It wasn't broadcast here but the producer sent me a tape of it. I did get to the see the CNN piece and I have copies of the New York Times article.

So, if you set out to write because you are seeking Fame, Fortune and Cool Stuff -- hang in there. The Fame and Fortune might take a while but the Cool Stuff is just around the corner. And every writer I've ever met has stories just as cool . . .

Old School NASCAR

2011-05-11T14:17:59-04:00

Next time you turn on a NASCAR event and watch the "stock" cars rip by the high-def cameras, remind yourself that this sport is over 60 years old. And boy, have things changed since the old days. The television coverage rarely acknowledges the real roots of the sport, so here are a few things you might not know about the early days of NASCAR.

A race held in Charlotte on June 19, 1949 is often cited as the first NASCAR race. Jim Roper was crowned the winner of the race -- after the first man across the finish line was disqualified for cheating -- and Roper drove himself home in the winning car. He had driven the car to the race, from his home in Kansas. He took home $2,500 for the victory.

While modern races may start 43 cars, NASCAR didn't always have such uniform starting grids. The 1951 Southern 500 started 82 cars.

In 1951, a NASCAR race was held at the State Fairgrounds in Detroit. It was not uncommon in those days to run races at state and county fairs, and many of the races were held on dirt tracks, laid out not long before the race. More than half of the 54 cars to start the race dropped out -- many with clogged air filters -- but the 25,000 or so spectators who watched were impressed. Some were even execs from the local car companies who saw the effect the race had on spectators.

Many of racing's earliest heroes started out on small dirt tracks in the 1950s, where winners might take home only $100. Ned Jarrett, Bobby Isaac and Ralph Earnhardt all started out racing on dirt tracks and it wasn't until 1970 that NASCAR finally left the dirt behind, to race entirely on paved tracks.

It only took until 1955 for the killjoys in Washington to try and shut the sport down. That year, an Oregon senator asked Eisenhower to back a ban on auto racing. Ike refused, but the pressure helped push AAA out of auto race sanctioning. Of course, this just helped NASCAR by removing a competitor.

The Big Three automakers were involved in NASCAR racing at different times and by 1969, some companies were investing huge sums in developing racing technology. In 1969, Dodge began wind tunnel testing of a nose cone and huge spoiler for the car they would eventually race in NASCAR called the Charger Daytona. The car was purpose-built to race in NASCAR, but Dodge would sell a few more than 500 to the public so they could call it a "stock" car.

Bobby Isaac would qualify at Talladega in 1969 at 199 mph in a Charger Daytona. A similar car owned by Chrysler ran the first official 200 mph lap on a NASCAR track with Buddy Baker at the wheel. Not to be outdone, Bobby would take his Daytona up to a NASCAR certified 201.104.

NASCAR introduced rules to hobble the stock cars which had been developed for the sole purpose of racing. At Talladega in August 1970, NASCAR introduced the restrictor plate. The device slowed cars down and many grown men cried.

In 1971, K&K Insurance -- owners of Bobby Isaac's car -- sponsored a trip with the car to the Bonneville Salt Flats. There, Isaac set more than two dozen land speed records including a flying mile at over 216 miles per hour. The records were classified as "stock" because the body of the car was similar to the body on the car anyone could have purchased at a Dodge dealer just a couple years earlier. This time, the record was sanctioned by USAC. The car did not run a restrictor plate on the salt.

Steve Lehto is the author of Bobby Isaac: NASCAR's First Modern Champion and Chrysler's Turbine Car: The Rise and Fall of Detroit's Coolest Creation.

Coming to Terms With the Typo

2011-04-25T13:29:39-04:00

A fellow writer's book just came out and when I heard, it sparked memories of those fabulous days past when a book of mine had just been published. Seeing the hard copy for the first time -- even after having seen countless drafts and the advance review copy -- is always a rush. I emailed my friend to congratulate her. I then had to ask: "Found any typos yet?"

Let's face it: assemble 100,000 words on any topic and there are bound to be a few typographical errors by the time the product is printed. In my book Death's Door: The Truth Behind Michigan's Largest Mass Murder, there were a few we found right away. A dropped period here, a missing comma there, but nothing major. Luckily, the book sold enough copies to where we had the opportunity to correct the typos in another press run. After the second printing, an astute reader wrote to me and pointed out how I had reversed the north-south orientation of two towns in the story. No one else had caught it. When I had first written the text, I had placed the towns correctly, but while editing, I had moved a couple partial sentences around to make it more readable. I missed how the two sentences were dependent on each other. Again, a subsequent printing was corrected. If nothing else, I can now identify which printing of "Death's Door" you are reading by looking for the typos.

Most writers I've spoken with relate similar stories of reading a freshly printed book with trepidation. It is almost a relief to find a small typo here and there. At least you can tell yourself, "That's all there is!"

Chrysler's Turbine Car: The Rise and Fall of Detroit's Coolest Creation, came out in October and was my first book to be published in hardcover. Of course, the robustness of the cover has little to do with how I juggle the words before my editors see them. Did I manage to get any typos into print in that book? Of course I did.

My publisher's team of editors did their best to clean up my writing but I still snuck a couple by them. In one passage I wrote about a couple of cars and accidentally described a "1973" Aspen automobile. There is no such thing, but there was a 1976 Aspen and elsewhere in the text I had been speaking of a 1973 Satellite. Rest assured that mistakes like that will be pointed out to you by astute readers. I heard about that one within a week of the book coming out. I also accidentally referred to a DC-7 as a "jet." What can I tell you? Maybe I was thinking of the DC-8. Again, errors like these are easy to fix in later printings.

Despite spell-checking programs, typographical errors will always be with us. I will continue trying to write error-free, but I've made peace with the notion that typos are a part of writing life. I like to view them as little scars on my work. The book will survive. And so will I.

How Jay Leno Came to Write the Foreword to My Book

2011-04-13T18:05:28-04:00

My recent book Chrysler's Turbine Car: The Rise and Fall of Detroit's Coolest Creation has a foreword written by Jay Leno. Jay is a well known "car guy" and it seems quite fitting that he would contribute to a book written about such an iconic car. I am from Detroit. While many of Jay's cars were built near where I grew up, he and I existed in different worlds up until a few years ago. How did he wind up writing the foreword to my book?

In 2006 I wrote a book about the Italian Hall disaster of Calumet, Michigan. There, more than six dozen people died in a stampede when someone falsely yelled "Fire!" in a crowded theater during a Christmas party. The book was called, Death's Door: The Truth Behind Michigan's Largest Mass Murder, and the cover was befitting such a somber event: It was a stark, sepia-toned image of the staircase where the victims were trapped, with a ghostlike outline of a tombstone cast upon the stairs.

An advertisement in a small newspaper called the book "A great holiday gift!" Someone cut the ad out and mailed it to the Tonight Show, for Jay Leno's "Headlines" segment. ("Headlines" features submissions by viewers of unintentionally funny, often small-town newspaper headlines. "Texans support death penalty, but only for the guilty." "Cops to get hard on sex shop rip-offs.") One morning -- around the holidays -- my phone began ringing. "You were on the Tonight Show last night!" Of course, I wasn't anywhere near the Tonight Show the night before but I soon figured it out.

Jay had held up the ad for my book with the prominent dark cover and said, "Death's Door. What a great holiday gift idea. Let's get this for grandma!"

What's the saying about lemons and lemonade? I took a copy of the book and gift-wrapped it with the gaudiest holiday wrapping I could find and stuck a huge bow on it. I put a tag on the front: "Merry Christmas Jay!"

I had previously written a manuscript about the Chrysler turbine car but had run into nothing but resistance from the publishing world with it. "It's a car book," I heard over and over again as agents and publishers repeatedly told me, "Car books don't sell." I had shelved the project and gone on to write Death's Door. Knowing that Jay is a car guy, I included a copy of the manuscript with a note that said, "I think you'll enjoy this one a little more than Death's Door." I bundled it up and shipped it off.

A few weeks later, my secretary buzzed me. "There's a guy on the phone who says he's Jay Leno." I have friends who routinely claim to be famous people but I knew this was real: I hadn't told anyone about my Christmas package to Jay.

I got on the phone and sure enough, it was him. He thanked me for the book and the manuscript and told me I ought to get the turbine car book published. When I told him about the resistance to the idea I'd gotten so far, he sounded disappointed. Still, I got to tell all my friends I'd spoken with Jay Leno. How cool is that?

A year or so later, Jay acquired a Chrysler turbine car. There are only nine of them left in the world and even fewer mechanics around who know how to work on them. I had interviewed one of them in depth for my book. Jay called and asked me if I could get him in touch with the man, named Bill Carry. I got the two of them together and later Jay called me to thank me for the help. "If you're ever in California, stop by my garage and I'll let you drive the car."

Although I had gone and looked at a couple of the turbine cars, I had never driven one. I made arrangements to be in California as soon as I could get there and one Saturday morning a few weeks later, Jay Leno and I were zipping around the streets of Burbank in his turbine car. He even let me drive it. After we got back to his garage, he again commented on how I ought to get the turbine car book published. This time he added, "If it would help, I'd be happy to write a foreword for you." Jay has written forewords for a few other car books and I knew something like that might help. When I got back to Detroit I started contacting agents and I very quickly had one who thought he could sell the book -- with the foreword by Jay Leno.

The book came out in October 2010; that's Bill Carry on the cover. The book has gone into a second printing. Jay did a feature for his website's "Book Club."

It also did particularly well around the holidays. Turns out it makes a great holiday gift.

When an Author Meets His Critics

2011-03-17T13:41:21-04:00

If you are a writer whose book has been listed on Amazon, you
know the feeling when you see someone who has given your book a
one-star rating. Sometimes, the low ratings offset whatever good
feelings you may have had after reading the good reviews.
I felt pretty good when my recent book Chrysler's Turbine Car: The
Rise and Fall of Detroit's Coolest Creation, was positively
reviewed by several well-known sources. Vanity Fair called it
"fascinating," while the New York Times said it was an
"entertaining meander." P.J. O'Rourke also called it a
"fascinating account" of the turbine car project, and an editor
from Motor Trend said it was "A relevant tale for our age." The
Wall Street Journal said it was "delightful."

So why did it bother me when a customer of Amazon gave the book a
one-star review -- the lowest review Amazon allows -- and said the
book was "tedious"? He (or she, we really don't know) said it was
a struggle to finish the book. I know we can't please all the
people all the time, but it got me thinking. What happens to other
authors on Amazon? What about my heroes? Are they immune to these
anonymous barbs? Turns out they aren't. So, here's my advice to
you, writers whose work is disparaged by faceless reviewers on
Amazon. Look up your favorite books of all time and then read some
of the one-star reviews they received. It will make you feel
better.

To Kill a Mockingbird was called "A BORING, WORTHLESS WRECK OF A
BOOK" -- yes, in ALL CAPS -- by one reader, and "one of the most
overrated and hyped books of our time," by another. I don't know
about you, but I'm feeling better already.

One of my favorite books is Snow Leopard, by Peter Matthiessen.
The book won a National Book Award and Washington Post Book World
called it "stunning." Still, a reviewer on Amazon gave it one star
and warned readers, "Don't waste your time reading this book."
According to another, the book was "fluff."

One reviewer claimed she was "oppressed" by Hunter S. Thompson as
she read Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. I wonder if Thompson went
to her house and made her drop acid at gun point? Another wrote,
"This book is retarded." "BK" said that Thompson was "a self absorbed jackass."

Douglass Adams doesn't fare that well either, having received his
share of one-star reviews. "It is a terrible book," was how one
reader summarized Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Another said
it was "tedious, boring and insanely stupid." He claimed "It was
physically painful to turn the page, it was that bad." Actually,
that sounds more like a medical condition we might see on
"House."

The New York Times called Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance "profoundly important." On Amazon, "Sir Isaac Newton"
(I don't think that's a real name) called it, "The worst book I
have ever read. Dull as dishwater." Another reviewer came back
after reading the book 15 years earlier to say, "I'd give it NO
stars if possible." Imagine being that fired up against a book: To
seek out a way to disparage it a decade and a half later.

So, try this next time you get a one-star review. And be glad
they don't let readers give NO star reviews.

Why Chrysler's Turbine Car Was The Coolest Car To Come Out Of Detroit (PHOTOS)

2010-10-13T07:20:00-04:00

After World War II, Chrysler spent a couple decades and a boatload of money developing turbine powered cars. At one point, they built a fleet of them -- more than 50, and they were all the same color! -- and lent them to the public as part of a huge PR campaign. For a while, it seemed that turbine cars were everywhere. I remember seeing the "jet cars" on the road and wondering whatever happened to them. The answer wound up implicating tail pipe emissions, CAFE standards, and financial troubles at Chrysler. Still, the program was remarkable. There really was a time when the smart money was on us being able to buy jet cars for our own personal use. If nothing else, we came closer than most people would ever realize. And the pinnacle of the program was the Chrysler Turbine car built by Ghia, Detroit's Coolest Creation.