Looks like somebody has stopped drinking the Kool-Aid!

We’ve told you about the opportunistic energy con jobs being foisted on the public by snake oil salesmen.  The “wind power and natural gas will save the world” con is pretty easy to figure out if you separate the emotion from the equation, and today’s editorial in the Oklahoman of all places shows there is hope.  Take note of the line about how coal must be used in the national quest for energy.

The bottom line is: if the Oklahoman can figure out the con, anybody can!  

It’s All Wet…

It’s something the press has had a difficult time getting their arms around: the coming battle with surrounding states over Oklahoma’s surplus of water.  The Oklahoman’s Tony Thornton, unquestionably the best writer at the paper (why’s he still there?) does an excellent job explaining.

And as if on cue, the AP has a story about a potential water problem in one of Oklahoma’s larger communities, Enid. 

Attorneys representing Tyson Foods Inc. filed a motion (Read full motion) Wednesday that calls into question the legality of Attorney General Drew Edmonsdon awarding contingency fee contracts to several private law firms – including former attorney general and friend Mike Turpin – in regards to the poultry suit. Tyson lawyers hope to get the private attorneys dismissed and have Edmondson “carry his own water with this lawsuite” or have the suit dismissed altogether.

The motion states that Edmondson entered into contingency fee contracts with several private law firms authorizing them to represent the state and promising them a substantial portion of any recovery the state might obtain. The motion says such a contract “violates both the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions.”

“The Contingency Fee Contract transgresses due process under both the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions because it inextricably commingles use of the State’s power by private attorneys with an executory obligation on the part of the State to provide these attorneys with massive private profit that varies depending on the results of the litigation…”

“Moreover, because the Contract commits a large percentage of any damages the State may recover to the State Contingency Lawyers in the absence of a specific legislative authorization, the Attorney General has violated the separation-of-powers provisions of the Oklahoma Constitution…”

The motion aslso asks the question that the Tulsa World and The Oklahoman seems to want to ignore:

“The Attorney General is hardly immune from thoughts of personal gain in some form. The State Contingency Lawyers hired here are the same law firms the Attorney General hired to prosecute the State’s claims against the tobacco industry. These attorneys have donated tens of thousands of dollars to the Attorney General’s campaigns in recent years. In short, the Attorney General has hired his biggest supporters and has thereby violated due process by creating at least a reasonable impression of impropriety.”

Attorneys representing Tyson Foods Inc. filed a motion (Read full motion) Wednesday that calls into question the legality of Attorney General Drew Edmonsdon awarding contingency fee contracts to several private law firms – including former attorney general and friend Mike Turpin – in regards to the poultry suit. Tyson lawyers hope to get the private attorneys dismissed and have Edmondson “carry his own water with this lawsuite” or have the suit dismissed altogether.

The motion states that Edmondson entered into contingency fee contracts with several private law firms authorizing them to represent the state and promising them a substantial portion of any recovery the state might obtain. The motion says such a contract “violates both the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions.”

“The Contingency Fee Contract transgresses due process under both the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions because it inextricably commingles use of the State’s power by private attorneys with an executory obligation on the part of the State to provide these attorneys with massive private profit that varies depending on the results of the litigation…”

“Moreover, because the Contract commits a large percentage of any damages the State may recover to the State Contingency Lawyers in the absence of a specific legislative authorization, the Attorney General has violated the separation-of-powers provisions of the Oklahoma Constitution…”

The motion aslso asks the question that the Tulsa World and The Oklahoman seems to want to ignore:

“The Attorney General is hardly immune from thoughts of personal gain in some form. The State Contingency Lawyers hired here are the same law firms the Attorney General hired to prosecute the State’s claims against the tobacco industry. These attorneys have donated tens of thousands of dollars to the Attorney General’s campaigns in recent years. In short, the Attorney General has hired his biggest supporters and has thereby violated due process by creating at least a reasonable impression of impropriety.”

The Oklahoman has decided to involve itself in the Kim Holland /”Just The Facts America” controversy. For the record, The Oklahoma Political News Service believes the media’s role is to report the news, not make the news; but we digress.

Sue Hale, Executive Editor of The Oklahoman, has sent a letter to JTFA’s attorney Ben Ginsberg complaining about the use of The Oklahoman’s nameplate and story in this ad. Mr. Ginsberg writes:

“It is surprising to see your newspaper – with its rich history of fighting to protect the first amendment – now attempting to squelch the public’s right to hear all sides of an issue of public importance by invoking its own commercial interests in its “copyrighted nameplate and story.”
(Click here to read entire letter)

The Oklahoman has decided to involve itself in the Kim Holland /”Just The Facts America” controversy. For the record, The Oklahoma Political News Service believes the media’s role is to report the news, not make the news; but we digress.

Sue Hale, Executive Editor of The Oklahoman, has sent a letter to JTFA’s attorney Ben Ginsberg complaining about the use of The Oklahoman’s nameplate and story in this ad. Mr. Ginsberg writes:

“It is surprising to see your newspaper – with its rich history of fighting to protect the first amendment – now attempting to squelch the public’s right to hear all sides of an issue of public importance by invoking its own commercial interests in its “copyrighted nameplate and story.”
(Click here to read entire letter)