« Obama Betrays His Catholic Allies | Main | Nazis With Nukes »

Thursday, February 02, 2012


Donald Pay

In Pete's recounting of the Hyperion saga, it stuck me that this has become the typical pattern that South Dakota has taken toward "economic development" schemes from the Oahe Irrigation Project forward. They involve, typically but not always, an out-of-state entity using the maximum amount of secrecy and backroom dealing to rope in the typical mindless business organization cheerleaders and high level government flunkies (who call themselves Governors), while providing the minimum up-front information and opportunity for input to local citizens. You would think the South Dakota's misleaders would eventually learn something, but they're dumber than schist.

Ken Blanchard

Donald: what you describe is called "interstate commerce". I love and admire Pete Carrels, but he is dead set against oil in all its forms. Hyperion may have been a bad idea. The Oahe Irrigation Project was certainly a bad idea. I once heard Pete talk about that, and it was excellent as usual.

However, we will need oil for the foreseeable future and we will need to refine it. That seems like something we need to consider.

Donald Pay

I see. Let me get this right: It's "interstate commerce" when it's done by Republicans and "crony capitalism" when it's done by Democrats.

Ken Blanchard

Donald: that's a fair objection. I will give you this: you have complained about "crony capitalism" on the part of Obama. That is being fair. I don't much like the term, as I think that it has been a part of all modern governments all the way back. As long as we agree that both sides engage in it with reckless abandon on occasion, I have no disagreement with you here.

Pete Carrels

Please Ken, don't over-dramatize my feelings about oil. I told you the Sierra club has not come out against development of the Bakken, for example. Further, I told you that it is naive to flat-out oppose oil. I use oil. I drove my car the other day. What I did say is that we need to begin an expeditious transition away from oil use, rather than continuing to allow more and more investment in oil development. I think that's a reasonable approach considering oil's many liabilities There are better sources of energy. Moving them to scale will be challening because of the political and social and commercial power of those with a vested interest in oil, irrespective of the certain liabilities of oil. I contend that there's a difference between what I'm saying and what you are accusing me of saying.

The comments to this entry are closed.