The Ethanol Papers - Paperturn manuscript - Flipbook - Page 471
This brings me, Bill, to your history of working as a paid stooge for the Tobacco
Industry, in a role not unlike what you are performing for the oil industry. I'm
referring to your being a cash-for-comments-academic as described on the ScienceCorruption.com website, on the SourceWatch.org website, and on the
SourceWatch page that describes the Cash-For-Comments-Economists-Network.
How much have you been paid by the oil industry? How far are you willing to
go in lying for the oil industry? How little respect do you have for the academic
institutions you've served and the degrees you hold that you would whore yourself out to the tobacco industry and the petroleum oil industry for a few measly
dollars?
Your participation in ethanol bashing, along with the awareness of your participation in the scammy tobacco-promotion racket, verifies what we've long believed about the academics and media spokespeople who come out to support
the oil industry: You don't have a clue as to the subject matter and you are
simply selling access to your professional and academic credentials without any
concern for the truth. You should be removed from your post at Utah State University and barred from ever teaching at another school.
Reply #1 from William Shughart:
Dear Mr. Rauch,
I have only two replies to your column:
First, most of the information in my recent column in Investor's Business Daily
was taken from the peer-reviewed economics literature as well as U.S. government data sources. As far as I can tell, yours is not. Second, I reject categorically your ad hominem attack on my credibility and your implication that my
analyses of the ethanol mandate are influenced by monies paid to me by special-interest groups. I have been a professional economist for nearly 40 years;
my opinions never have been "bought!".
With best wishes,
William F. Shughart II
