Obama kills a major oil pipeline from Canada with its jobs and implications for national security by Andrew Malcolm - Investors.com
AP
A pretty amazing presidential decision out of the White House today, to kill the Keystone XL Pipestone plan to bring 700,000 barrels of oil per day from Canada to Texas.
Treating Canada, our largest trading partner, next-door neighbor (or neighbour), most trustworthy longtime friend and ally in good times and Afghanistan, as if it can only sell all that oil to us instead of building a shorter pipeline to British Columbia and selling to -- wait for it -- China.
After all, who needs a secure energy source from a best friend when you can pay a fortune to buy it from unfriendly people in faraway unstable places?
This from a president who preaches energy self-sufficiency. But one whose extended-hand policy of engagement hasn't engaged Iran but has allowed it to become near-nuclear and now threatening to close the Straits of Hormuz where 20% of the world's oil supply passes through.
Not to mention not creating thousands of domestic U.S. union construction jobs, which Obama has so often said is his Job #1. (Other than keeping his.)
In a White House statement (full text below, along with text of reactions) Obama tries to blame the rejection on the Republicans, who were trying to force an early decision, which the Democrat had put off until after the Nov. 6 election.
Seriously, the environment? In the interests of the national interest after how many decades with how many pipelines being built better each time?
In purely political terms, it's hard to imagine Obama's play for green voters driving malfunctioning Volts outnumbering those blue-collar voters all across the distressed battleground Midwest. Can you say Teamsters?
(go to link for statements):
http://news.investors.com/Article/598108/201201181904/keystone-pipeline-oil-obama-canada.htm
Treating Canada, our largest trading partner, next-door neighbor (or neighbour), most trustworthy longtime friend and ally in good times and Afghanistan, as if it can only sell all that oil to us instead of building a shorter pipeline to British Columbia and selling to -- wait for it -- China.
After all, who needs a secure energy source from a best friend when you can pay a fortune to buy it from unfriendly people in faraway unstable places?
This from a president who preaches energy self-sufficiency. But one whose extended-hand policy of engagement hasn't engaged Iran but has allowed it to become near-nuclear and now threatening to close the Straits of Hormuz where 20% of the world's oil supply passes through.
Not to mention not creating thousands of domestic U.S. union construction jobs, which Obama has so often said is his Job #1. (Other than keeping his.)
In a White House statement (full text below, along with text of reactions) Obama tries to blame the rejection on the Republicans, who were trying to force an early decision, which the Democrat had put off until after the Nov. 6 election.
Seriously, the environment? In the interests of the national interest after how many decades with how many pipelines being built better each time?
In purely political terms, it's hard to imagine Obama's play for green voters driving malfunctioning Volts outnumbering those blue-collar voters all across the distressed battleground Midwest. Can you say Teamsters?
(go to link for statements):
http://news.investors.com/Article/598108/201201181904/keystone-pipeline-oil-obama-canada.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment