The Ethanol Papers - Paperturn manuscript - Flipbook - Page 546
system itself is double talk contrivance to try and keep the oil industry honest as if it was possible to keep it honest. And your article concludes that the RIN
system is "killing" smaller refineries.
You know what kills, Peter? The oil industry kills. Their products kill. The dead
includes hundreds of millions of humans and unfathomable numbers of animal
wildlife. On top of that are the inestimable number of persons with respiratory
illness, autism, and Alzheimer's disease. Now that's some kind of killing!
Your article ends with the sentence "The American people would welcome another pro-growth effective tax cut, further boosting the economy." It makes me
laugh to think that you think you know what the American people want. I could
agree that many or most Americans might want another pro-growth effective
tax cut, but that's as simple of a postulation as saying that most American people would like to get paid $6.3 million for doing nothing more than writing a
stupid magazine article.
However, I'll tell you what I think most Americans would like: We would like to
not have to listen to windbags spout off on subjects that they know nothing
about.
In doing some research on whatever else you may have written (or supposed
to have written) that's related to fuels and energy, I noticed that you got snookered into co-authoring a piece with Joseph Bast (co-founder of Heartland Institute) titled, "THE SOCIAL BENEFITS OF FOSSIL FUELS." Bast did you no
favor - if it was his idea to include you and your name in the story. The story
stinks, and I mean New Jersey refinery-style stinks, of Alex Epstein's absurd
contention that there's a moral case to be made for fossil fuels. You should take
whatever it was that you were paid for writing the Investor's Business Daily story
and stay far, far away from any issue dealing with fuels, energy, or transportation.
But I hope you've had a great Father's Day.
Patriotically yours,
Marc
