During his acceptance speech, a freshly re-elected President Obama spoke of a message that he received from the American people, a message to “focus on your jobs” and to tackle the challenge of “freeing ourselves from foreign oil”.
With that in mind, there is one project in the international spotlight that would quickly and easily address both of those issues – approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline.
And now, our Canadian allies are urging the White House to stop playing politics, stop sending mixed signals, stop stalling, and approve the project that would not only benefit our neighbors to the north, but the United States economy itself.
For the past year, the Obama administration played politics with the Keystone project in an attempt to placate the far-left environmental contingency in the Democrat party, creating confusion about the future of the pipeline and leaving Canada to wonder if their support and friendship were being taken for granted.
Peter McKenna, chair of the Political Science Department at the University of Prince Edward Island stated, “It made sense for Obama to put that (Keystone) on the back burner to deal with the environmental constituency of the Democratic Party”.
He added however, that issues affecting Canada need to be addressed now that the election is over, citing the Keystone XL Pipeline as “the most important issue”.
While the President’s initial decision to reject the pipeline was blatantly political in nature, it came at a cost to the American people, delaying real job creation and energy progress. Now however, approving construction should be a no-brainer.
In a post-election editorial, The Globe and Mail wrote:
Last January, President Barack Obama rejected TransCanada Corp.’s proposal to build a pipeline carrying Canadian bitumen from the Alberta oil sands to refineries in the United States, including some in Texas on the Gulf of Mexico coast. The rejection was a calculated election-year move aimed at appeasing Mr. Obama’s supporters in the powerful environmental movement. With his re-election, the President should now move quickly to approve the Keystone XL pipeline on its merits alone.
While Peter McKenna sees approval of the pipeline happening in the next six to twelve months, and with Moody’s also predicting approval, Stephen Ewart, Editor of the Calgary Herald’s Energy and Economics section isn’t quite as optimistic.
Ewart counters that approval of the pipeline is anything but a ‘no-brainer’, citing scheduled protests over the pipeline that will apply pressure to the White House, as well as looming concerns from environmental activists over the effects of climate change, concerns freshly renewed by the impact of Hurricane Sandy.
Ewart adds that despite the election results seemingly freeing the President to make the right decision on the pipeline, concern for his legacy means politics will continue to play a role in that decision.
He writes, “Obama has provided little insight into his views on Keystone XL, but it seems unlikely politics will not play a role in the decision that will impact his presidential legacy.”
Uncertainty north of the border has been amplified by the administration’s silence thus far on the project. Rather than following his campaign slogan by moving ‘forward’ with the project, President Obama has remained non-committal.
James Wood, also in the Calgary Herald, concurs.
“… Obama, who earlier this year rejected TransCanada Corp.’s initial application because it needed more environmental review, has remained noncommittal about the fate of the line”.
Uncertainty for our Canadian allies creates another major concern for the U.S. – the threat of oil and economic resources being exported to China.
The Globe and Mail editorial cites this possibility:
“The pipeline has even been touted as the best way for Canadian producers to export crude to China, by putting it on ships once it arrives in the Gulf.”
Most importantly, the same editorial spells out in simple terms why the Keystone XL Pipeline should easily garner approval. Aside from the many economic and energy benefits, the project has worked around areas that were of greatest concern to the environmental obstructionists.
The “merits are many, and they serve both Canada and the United States. TransCanada Corp. has proposed a new route that avoids environmentally sensitive areas in Nebraska and reduces potential impact on the vital Ogallala aquifer. The pipeline’s construction will create jobs, secure a hungry market for the heavier crude from the oil sands, decrease North American dependency on overseas oil, and help lower the price of gas in the United States.”
Will the Obama administration follow through on their promise to focus on jobs and free the United States from the constraints of foreign oil? Perhaps of equal import, will they make a decision before these valuable resources end up benefitting other foreign countries such as China?
The economic benefits to our nation and our neighbors to the north are far too numerous to allow this opportunity to slip away.
Cross-posted at FreedomWorks
Hippie Fail: Protesters Try to Stop Keystone Pipeline Construction … By Chaining Themselves to Equipment That Isn’t Being Used
A group known as the Tar Sands Blockade has come up with a brilliant idea that is sure to rock the environmental and energy debate – chaining themselves to equipment in an attempt to halt work on the job-creating Keystone Pipeline.
It may go done as one of the saddest protest efforts in history.
Here is a sampling of their self-congratulatory announcement:
“Today’s action has halted work on a segment of TransCanada’s illegitimate pipeline outside of Saltillo, TX. As promised, Tar Sands Blockade’s rolling campaign of nonviolent civil disobedience pushes forward. Five blockaders total are currently risking arrest to stop work on this segment of the Keystone XL pipeline. Contractors discovered their presence early in the work day, and work at the site was called off shortly thereafter.”
One protester in a local news story (video below) explains why it’s so important for this group to stop construction of the pipeline.
“It’s necessary to stop this pipeline. It’s a threat to our constitutional rights.” – noted constitutional scholar and Tar Sands protestor.
The pipeline you say, infringes upon your Constitutional rights? Well no actually, no it doesn’t.
But the genius doesn’t end there … the group of protesters chained themselves to equipment that wasn’t even being used.
Money quote from the news story:
“TransCanada says the protesters chained themselves to a third-party contractor’s equipment that was not going to be used today.”
The group is so committed to the cause that they’ve decided to work all the way up until lunch time.
“It’s after lunch now, so we’re gonna follow the lead of our contractor and police friends and call it a day!
Of course, pay no mind to the concessions TransCanada has already made in supporting a new pipeline route in Nebraska, one that would shield sensitive areas from construction.
“Today TransCanada announced the selection of a revised route for the Keystone XL Pipeline which bypasses the sensitive Sandhills region of Nebraska. The new route will result in the project crossing fewer miles of threatened and endangered species habitat, and fewer streams, rivers, and wetlands while completely avoiding sensitive Wellhead Protection Areas where the state’s groundwater resources are particularly shallow. These changes will further increase the resiliency of the Keystone XL pipeline which the U.S. State Department already declared ‘would have a degree of safety greater than any typically constructed domestic oil pipeline system.’”
But hey, never let facts yet in the way of a good misguided protest.
Hippies are so awesome…
Where would you want to celebrate Independence Day? Somewhere relatively close to home, at a local park or beach, taking in the fireworks?
Not only is the Obama campaign team planning to spend Independence Day outside of the U.S., but they’re spending it in a surrender-happy country who’s only major military victory came during their civil war.
Apparently tiring of US soil as a source of campaign dollars, the Obama campaign is headed overseas — with its celebrity friends in tow. The European Obama campaign starts next week in Paris on July 4 with a reception organized by various fundraising heavy-hitters. Independence Day fundraisers in Paris – now that’s a flag-waving campaign.
But then, France may be the ideal place for a President who’s main platform seems to be one of Anti-Americanism.
While the crux of his predecessor’s low approval ratings were in fighting an ‘unpopular war’, President Obama is watching his own approval ratings stagnate due to an unpopular, well, everything else. His record has been so blatantly in contrast to the will of this nation, that it could very nearly be defined as anti-American.
The most obvious example of this has been the force-feeding of the health care reform bill down the collective throats of a nation. There has been a consistently strong opposition to Obamacare even prior to it being signed into law. The Supreme Court decision to uphold the law did nothing to change the negative perception, as 50% of Americans in a recent poll opposed the court’s decision, to 39% who supported the ruling.
This isn’t the only example of the President supporting policies that the rest of America opposes.
- In 2010, the President voiced what CNN called ‘incoherent’ support for the building of the Ground Zero Mosque, something a massive 70% of America objected to.
- The U.S. Justice Department’s decision to fight the Arizona immigration law through the courts; a law that 59 percent of U.S. voters would like to have seen enacted in their very own state. Prior to the Supreme Court ruling, a CBS News Poll showed most Americans (52%) considered the law to be “about right”. In addition to that, another 11% said the law did not go far enough, while a mere 33% said it went too far.
- The President killed the job creating Keystone pipeline, while Americans at a 2-1 margin thought the project should have been approved. Another energy independence issue involved the BP oil spill. After the crisis in the Gulf of Mexico, Obama issued a ban on deepwater oil drilling, a policy that nearly three quarters of Americans opposed.
And it isn’t just these more recent actions that are contributing to the President’s perception as being anti-American. Lost in the more current list of unpopular moves are some of the early attempts at implementing policies which were equally unpopular. They include…
- An early term executive order that gave federal funding to family planning organizations that provide abortions, opposed by 58 percent of Americans.
- A subsequently embarrassing mark on the president’s record involving an executive order to close the prison in Guantanamo Bay. The goal was to shut down the prison within one year, and was opposed by a 50-44 percent margin. Despite the President’s efforts, the prison remains open.
- On that same note, the DOJ’s decision to investigate the treatment and possible torture of terrorists during the Bush administration was considered wrong by a 49-36 percent tally. These same interrogation tactics were later proven to have led to the assassination of Osama bin Laden.
- The announcement that terrorists, including September 11th mastermind, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, would be tried in New York City, was roundly rejected by the American public 51-29 percent. This particular move may have been the hallmark of the anti-American presidency, granting rights afforded our citizens to a terrorist with single-minded designs on destroying those very same citizens, speaks volumes.
Isn’t it about time that the president of the United States started implementing pro-American policies? Isn’t it about time that he listen to the people that elected him?
Then again, that would require abandoning his liberal agenda and start accepting what America is – a predominantly conservative nation.
Maggie over at Thurber’s Thoughts has a fantastic piece on what she originally calls a spin job by the administration. But hearing Jay Carney tell the American people that President Obama did not reject the Keystone pipeline isn’t spin.
It’s, as she concludes, an out-and-out lie.
This is an administration so arrogant that they actually believe they can look directly into the camera and lie to the American people. They are banking on you not knowing any better. And if you’re not offended or outraged no matter your view on the Keystone pipeline project itself, then you have relegated yourself to a life of government servitude, an acceptance of administration lies, a repeat of the epic mistake our country made in 2008 – or your just too damn lazy to care anymore.
I suppose that the job of White House Press Secretary Jay Carney is to spin the actions of President Barack Obama in a favorable light. But out and out lies, unchecked by the media, are beyond what Americans should expect – especially with an economic project as critical as the Keystone Oil Pipeline.
Real Clear Politics reports that in yesterday’s press briefing, Carney was spinning away:
White House press secretary Jay Carney first says Republicans “forced” President Obama to deny the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. Later in his press briefing, Carney says Obama didn’t turn down the pipeline.
“In terms of Keystone, as you all know, the history here is pretty clear. And the fact is because Republicans decided to play political with Keystone, their action essentially forced the administration to deny the permit process because they insisted on a time frame in which it was impossible to completely approve the pipeline,” Carney said when asked about the pipeline by ABC News’ Jake Tapper.
As Maggie points out, the pipeline has been under consideration for three years. It isn’t a new project that just snuck up on the President. The deadline imposed by Republicans was something that Obama actually forced, having dragged his feet for so long.
And when Carney whines about not having enough time to review – during that three year span the project was approved by 10 government agencies already, including the environment-bound EPA!
Just curious, if you or someone you know is struggling to find work, how does a statement like this make you feel? It certainly provides a significant look into the mind of a Democrat who is perfectly fine with killing 20,000 jobs in the name of some perceived and unrealistic environmental threat.
From the Hill:
Chicago Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.) drew fire from Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) on Wednesday when she dismissed the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline, suggesting the 20,000 jobs it could create were relatively insignificant in the scheme of the greater economy.
“Twenty thousand jobs is really not that many jobs, and investing in green technologies will produce that and more,” she said on Chicago’s WLS Radio Don Wade and Roma Show on Wednesday morning. “But I’ll tell you what, you know it seems to me that the Republicans would rather have an issue than a pipeline.”
“Tell that to the 20,000 people that woke up this morning and didn’t have a job to go to,” said Coats. “ ‘Well, these don’t really matter’ — I mean, this not only is jobs, this is less dependence on Middle East oil.”
Investing in the green jobs boondoggle will create that and more? Not sure the unemployed at Solyndra or CH2M Hill would agree.
Green energy investment has been such an overwhelming success that the unemployment rate has increased since Obama’s stimulus plan took hold, and there are now 2,000,000 fewer jobs in the U.S. today.
Is that a lot of jobs?