Althouse: "Ecuador prides itself on being pro-environment. Its constitution gives nature special rights."

February 7, 2013

"Ecuador prides itself on being pro-environment. Its constitution gives nature special rights."

"But Ecuador is a relatively poor country that could desperately use the money from the oil."

17 comments:

Scott said...: An animist constitution. How progressive.; 2/7/13, 9:57 AM
Shouting Thomas said...: God bless gasoline!
Damned greatest thing I've ever seen.
Drive my car from New York to New Orleans.
God bless gasoline!; 2/7/13, 10:02 AM
Bob said...: They eat Guinea Pigs in Ecuador. Oh, this wasn't the daily Wikipedia geography post?; 2/7/13, 10:04 AM
Strelnikov said...: Hilarious.; 2/7/13, 10:05 AM
Eric the Fruit Bat said...: Their evil plan will fail after James Bond infiltrates their operation posing as an eco-tourist.; 2/7/13, 10:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Any story about Ecuador, Oil, and Enviromentalism must have a link to the fact that they have tried corrupt judicial robbery under the guise of tree hugging already.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/29/chevron-ecuador-judge-idUSL1N0AY0EX20130129

Our Rich liberals (e.g. Kennedys) have 'invested' in the swindle by funding the plaintiffs.; 2/7/13, 10:19 AM
gadfly said...: Gasoline prices are government controlled in Ecuador. The socialist government sells it for $2.00 American (because that is the official currency there).

In Keto, homes are surrounded by barbed-wire-topped fences to keep out the bad guys - simply because police protection and rule-of-law are not expected there (kinda like Chicago).

But the mountain parks are extraordinarily beautiful and the active volcanoes provide nature's spectacular pyrotechnics for travelers flying into the country.; 2/7/13, 10:24 AM
lgv said...: First, I don't believe Quito is any worse than Chicago.

Second, the idea of getting money to not drill is absurd because it can't come with a guarantee. Imagine getting the money. Then the next president decides to drill any way. It's not like the money will be returned.; 2/7/13, 10:42 AM
Anonymous said...: Igv: "the idea of getting money to not drill is absurd ..."

Oh, yeah? Have you heard of "campaign contributions" and stopping the Keystone Pipeline?

Sounds like getting the money to not build the Pipeline to me.

The difference is: only in America, a payoff to politicians is called campaign contribution; anywhere else in the world it is called corruption.; 2/7/13, 10:53 AM
edutcher said...: Stupid is as stupid does.

Which is the real problem with socialism.

You can get past the corruption, but stupid is nigh invincible.; 2/7/13, 11:06 AM
Anonymous said...: The Drill SGT: "Our Rich liberals (e.g. Kennedys) have 'invested' in the swindle by funding the plaintiffs."

Another liberal, Soros, "invested" in Petrobra to drill off shore oil to destroy Brazil's pristine coastline. Our greenish President stimulated him with $2 billion of our money.

Yet another liberal, Buffett, "invested" in A123's new battery technology, and was "stimulated" with $150 million of our money to close the damn place down.

It's easy to be a liberal. The taxpayers always back you up in lousy "investments".

We call the raid of the taxpayers' treasury "Stimulus".; 2/7/13, 11:06 AM
n.n said...: Part of the motivation for the large illegal population in America is that native people in places like Ecuador are displaced from their lands, where they harvest foods, tend animals, and raise their children, by fanatical environmentalists.

Another part of the problem, also related to fanatical environmentalism, is the coerced behavior and inducements offered for converged migration and development of concentrated population centers. The source of strife originates through bringing a diversity of competing interests to bear in close proximity, as well as anthropogenic effects occurring in concentration.

The tragedy with contemporary environmentalism is that the environmentalists are for-profit activists who subscribe to the principal of out-of-sight and out-of-mind. Their concern is selective and limited to their environment and their political, economic, and social welfare.; 2/7/13, 11:43 AM
Seeing Red said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 2/7/13, 12:52 PM
Seeing Red said...: Concentrated population centers, just heard about that for the 1st time, UN21?

Something like that? That's the goal.; 2/7/13, 12:53 PM
sinz52 said...: This is a form of blackmail.

As one commenter at NPR pointed out, how about if the U.S. asked for contributions from other countries in exchange for us promising not to detonate any nuclear weapons?

And the answer to both is the same: Call their bluff.

What's Ecuador going to do if they don't get paid, destroy their precious ecosystem? Of course not. They'll preserve it anyway.; 2/7/13, 4:08 PM
Juan Pablo said...: Everyone here just needs an afternoon in Guayaquil's riverside (malecón) after 5pm. Grab a beer and enjoy the breeze.

Sad a thing about my lovely city, its basically a gray city when seen from above. Not that many trees. Planning was never part of our DNA.

Everything will always carry the clouds of corruption until our legal system gets replaced by one from another country, with laws, judges and lawyers from another country.

But I do miss those afternoons; 2/7/13, 5:39 PM
tim maguire said...: "Equador prides itself on being a pro-environment...But Equador is a relatively poor country..."

Seems to me they can go ahead and remove the "but".; 2/8/13, 6:06 AM