You can read about it here.
And I didn't retaliate when he went after me in a particularly convoluted weblog post about Congressman Boucher's ill-considered energy plan, other than to make the comment that ... well, you'll never know what my comment to this post was because Brian blocked it (or deleted it; same thing). Too bad too, because I spent a good bit of time ripping his contentions apart. Perhaps that's why ...
But it's a bit odd that Brian seems as fixated these days on me as he always has been on our congressman's well-being. Or perhaps our congressman has heard my footsteps coming up behind him and has instructed Brian to devote attention to me.
In either case, I was made aware yesterday that I'm the subject (well, at least the target of a passing shot) of one of Brian's barbs once again. I was initially inclined to say that this particular shot is a bit difficult to decipher, but I gave Brian a gentlemanly pass once. Not again.
Brian Patton proves himself through these actions to be nothing more than a political shill for a congressman who has been in office for two decades and who has nothing to show for it.
And not a very effective shill at that.
From More on Boucher’s Energy Plan:
Other bloggers on the right, not surprisingly from areas outside the Coalfields, have continuously criticized Congressman Boucher’s plans to boost the economy in the Coalfields and help break our addiction to Middle East oil. This issue should not be about Republican vs. Democrat.For those of you here in Southwest Virginia who aren't familiar with your congressional representative's energy plan, what he has proposed is this: "... if the price of petroleum declines below $40 (per barrel), the government would make a payment to the liquid fuels operator. If the price climbs above about $80, the operator would make a payment to the government, making the risk about equally balanced. ... We think this program would wind up costing the government nothing, but it would provide the financial certainty the market is looking for, for private investor dollars to flow into coal to fuels. ... If the oil price falls, new technology would essentially be stranded." (source)
Attacking Congressman Boucher on this issue is like saying dependence on foreign oil and poverty in the Coalfields are good things.
I've already addressed the goofy notion that the government is somehow at risk in any way by adopting this or any plan. But I'll reiterate: The government is you. If an imbalance occurs, it won't be the government that assumes the "risk." It's you.
But beyond that, Boucher, and now Patton, are pushing a plan that keeps the price of oil - and therefore gasoline - artificially high (in the case of oil, over $40 a barrel), and they want you to believe that such an action would be good for the people of Southwest Virginia.
Are higher gas prices good for you? Ever?
For the elderly who are on a fixed income over there in Dickenson County, is this plan to jack up prices so as to promote research and development good for them?
For the 25% of the citizens of Tazewell County who are on some form of government assistance, is a government plan to inflate gasoline prices good for them?
When you know you have $35 for food and fuel to last you the rest of the month, how much of that do you plan to spend on research and development?
Brian Patton says: "Attacking Congressman Boucher on this issue is like saying dependence on foreign oil and poverty in the Coalfields are good things." That is, of course, foolish on its face.
Brian expects you to believe that those in poverty will benefit from a plan to raise their fuel prices and that my attacking such a plan is "like saying poverty is a good thing." The opposite is true, Brian. But I find it heartwarming that you, for the first time, recognize the fact that there are poor people in our midst. Perhaps you should now send an email to Congressman Boucher.
If anyone mocks the poverty-stricken in Southwest Virginia, it's the two of you who adopt a plan that only someone in Boucher's neighborhood of fabulously wealthy DC suburbanites could love (and many of them do).
Here's something that's lost in the muddled thinking: Liquid coal fuel will be successful. It will prove, in the not too distant future, to be a viable alternative source of energy. And it will receive billions of investment research and development dollars. And Southwest Virginians will benefit. Because its a good idea who's time has come and because investors will therefore flock to it.
We don't need government to make it happen. And we sure as hell don't need to force more Southwest Virginians into poverty or inflame the suffering of those who already have difficulty making ends meet to make it happen.
Leave it alone, Rick. And Brian. Stick to creating - and promoting - those worthless hiking trails. You'll do us less harm.