The most ungracious endorsement of the Keystone Pipeline you’ll read all day.

From the Washington Post editorial board:

We don’t blame Republicans for wondering why the pipeline’s approval is still in limbo, particularly now that a Nebraska court has thrown out a challenge to its routing, which had been the most recent pretext for Obama administration stalling. But the issue isn’t worth wasting more legislative time or inflaming partisan tensions at the start of a new Congress. If Republicans nevertheless proceed, Mr. Obama would be wise to sign the bill and get Keystone off of the national agenda…

…and I’m not quoting the rest of that sentence because the time for Barack Obama to make a deal on this issue has passed, by Obama’s own choice.  He can either veto the bill and aggravate labor unions, or sign it and infuriate environmentalist extremists.  It’s Obama’s call, and I can work with the results either way.

But, anyway: oh my, but that editorial was bitter. The Washington Post would dearly love to blame all of this on conservatives, but even its editorial board is forced to concede that the real problems here were Obama’s fecklessness and the environmental lobby’s apocalyptic fervor. I’d make a Jeff Bezos joke on the subject at this point, except that I have no idea what the man thinks about Keystone, and I’d actually rather not look it up. We politicize everything that moves enough as it is…

Moe Lane

3 thoughts on “The most ungracious endorsement of the Keystone Pipeline you’ll read all day.”

  1. Bet you a million dollars: Obama vetoes Keystone XL bill. Turns around a week later and approves it. Claims credit for creating all those jobs.

    1. No veto. He just won’t sign it. He has consistently said he won’t sign it. Wait ten days, and the bill is law. Then he claims credit…

  2. He’ll veto it.
    And then there will be a lot of chin-pulling next election about why blue collar whites keep abandoning the Democratic party. “What’s the matter with Kansas?” will be referenced.

Comments are closed.