<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The F Word: Fancy That!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://grittv.org/2008/07/02/the-f-word-fancy-that/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://grittv.org/2008/07/02/the-f-word-fancy-that/</link>
	<description>Cultivating a Better Conversation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 May 2011 01:31:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nettle</title>
		<link>http://grittv.org/2008/07/02/the-f-word-fancy-that/comment-page-1/#comment-396</link>
		<dc:creator>Nettle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:55:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grittv.org/2008/07/02/the-f-word-fancy-that/#comment-396</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;And, if I might tag along in the good news keep it up category, MN administrative regulators, unlike those in South Dakota, have &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/19617009.html?location_refer=Editorials&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;come darned close to putting the kabosh&lt;/a&gt; on the new Big Stone II coal plant on the SD/MN border.  Its still not quite a done Not-deal, but MN regulators say hey, we passed laws calling for lower carbon emissions and this plant doesn’t cut it.  SD, eager for dollars and a coupla jobs, as with the proposed new oil refinery in Union County and uranium mining in Western SD, doesn’t seem to give a rat’s ass about environmental concerns, taking “private property” to just a bit over the line even for the thousands of libertarians that vote in SD.  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Big Stone II should go down.  Its not a feasible project and will sit smack on an environmental wetlands area to boot.  Wake the hell up, South Dakota.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And, if I might tag along in the good news keep it up category, MN administrative regulators, unlike those in South Dakota, have <a href="http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/19617009.html?location_refer=Editorials" rel="nofollow">come darned close to putting the kabosh</a> on the new Big Stone II coal plant on the SD/MN border.  Its still not quite a done Not-deal, but MN regulators say hey, we passed laws calling for lower carbon emissions and this plant doesn’t cut it.  SD, eager for dollars and a coupla jobs, as with the proposed new oil refinery in Union County and uranium mining in Western SD, doesn’t seem to give a rat’s ass about environmental concerns, taking “private property” to just a bit over the line even for the thousands of libertarians that vote in SD.  </p>
<p>Big Stone II should go down.  Its not a feasible project and will sit smack on an environmental wetlands area to boot.  Wake the hell up, South Dakota.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

