Via Twitchy, Dennis Miller:
It they’re going to tap my phone, could they at least tap it for oil?
— Dennis Miller Show (@DennisDMZ) June 7, 2013
Although… now would be a good time for Barack Obama to decide that, what the heck, he might as well authorize Keystone. Most of the people who would be mad at him for that are currently mad anyway.
There comes a time when it’s smart to throw in your cards. This would be one of those times. 66/23 for it, overall, and just look at the crosstabs:
Support for the pipeline spans most demographic and partisan groups. Substantial majorities of Republicans (82%) and independents (70%) favor building the Keystone XL pipeline, as do 54% of Democrats. But there is a division among Democrats: 60% of the party’s conservatives and moderates support building the pipeline, compared with just 42% of liberal Democrats.
The 42/48 split among liberal Democrats on the question of Keystone is actually be the one that should really worry Barack Obama and the other Luddites running the Democratic party, though. Being against Keystone isn’t just fringe; it’s perilously close to being a fringe position even among the existing fringe. Mind you, if the Democrats absolutely want to take a cordially hated anti-energy position through at least two, and probably four, more gas hikes, I can live with that. After all, there’s an election going on next year, and every little bit helps.
Via Hot Air.
Moe Lane
PS: For the record, Pew: a 48/38 split on whether fracking is a good idea is not a “mixed opinion:” it’s “a double digit lead favoring fracking.” Again: for the record.
Very interesting, if this NY Post report is true:
EPA chief Lisa Jackson suddenly resigned last week because she was convinced that President Obama is planning to green-light the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline, The Post has learned.
“She was going to stay on until November or December,” said a Jackson insider. “But this changed it. She will not be the EPA head when Obama supports it [Keystone] getting built.”
…And if true: good news, and good riddance. I’ve got nothing against other people’s religions per se, but I get a little cranky when radical theocratic extremists like Jackson try to impose their bizarre Gaia-worship on the rest of us. And let’s not even get into the profoundly anti-scientific nature of the modern Greenies*. Hopefully, the next EPA head Obama appoints won’t be so addicted to fuzzy thinking as Lisa Jackson was…
Moe Lane (crosspost)
*Particularly since Mark Lynas will be happy to do that for me, at least when it comes to Genetically Modified Organisms. Note that Lynas is not entirely sound on the subject of the Greenies, considering that he still seems to think that the same people who are so profoundly messed up on GMOs and nuclear power yet somehow become infinitely more respectable when it comes to, say, global warming. Still, I can’t find it in my heart to be too critical of a man who will dare praise Norman Borlaug** to a room full of environmentalists.
**Norman Borlaug? Oh, he was an Iowan agronomist. Noteworthy for being a good wrestler in his youth and a devoted family man. Oh, and the entire ‘saved a billion people from starving to death’ thing.
…And, well, there’s a lot, really.
Well, well, well. It turns out that UN Ambassador and prospective Secretary of State nominee Susan Rice (she’s a multimillionaire, by the way) has some rather interesting financial ties to numerous foreign energy companies that still do business with that oppressive, misogynistic, homophobic, and downright barking mad insane regime currently controlling Iran. The most interesting one of those is Royal Dutch Shell, which has about a billion dollars’ worth of interest (literally) in getting Iran’s sanctions lifted; Rice has also invested in at least two other companies that are operating in Iran against the wishes of pretty much most of the West.
Hmm. Let’s scroll through some of her other investments:
Continue reading Susan Rice’s Iranian oil connection? …And Canadian oil connection?
President Obama is finding himself increasingly boxed in on the Keystone pipeline fight as more Congressional Democrats are joining Republicans in backing the project, which has strong labor support and could generate significant numbers of jobs in economically hard-hit states.
On Wednesday, the House passed a short-term transportation bill that included a provision that would pave the way for the construction of the next stage of the oil pipeline, a measure that Mr. Obama has said he would veto. The bill passed 293 to 127, with 69 Democrats supporting it.
Continue reading #rsrh Democrats abandoning Obama over Keystone?
Quick background: the Obama administration has rejected plans for an additional pipeline to transport ethical oil from Canada to the United States, despite the fact that support for this project is bipartisan, and in fact favored by traditional Democratic allies in organized labor (who were reasonably expecting that they’d be able to get some jobs out of it). Anyway: while reading this darkly entertaining article on how proper, blue-collar labor unions are smarting over the way that Barack Obama prefers to cater to liberal environmentalists over letting a working man, well, work, I came across this passage: “Unions and environmental groups that praised Obama issued a joint statement lauding his decision to go slow – and blaming the House GOP…” – well, no need for Democratic party agitprop, is there? Particularly when it’s as clumsy as the default Green-derived pap that we typically get these days.
Still, let’s look at the unions that support the Obama administration on Keystone, shall we? List via here: Continue reading The phony union split on the Keystone pipeline.
There’s been a bunch of back-and-forth over who, precisely won and lost here with the House agreeing to extend the payroll tax cut for only two more months. I suspect that this is largely due to what your priorities were. For example: Ace thinks that it’s a loss, but is not exactly broken up about it, as it always was pretty procedural to him; Allahpundit’s looking at it as a capitulation because, I think, of the length of the payroll tax cut.
Me? … I wanted the Keystone ethical oil pipeline dumped back on Obama’s plate. Either he torpedoes the deal (now or later), thus compromising his jobs message; or he signs off on it, thus smacking the Greenies in the face. I win in either scenario … as long as it gets to his desk. The issue of how long to keep the payroll tax cut bandage on the gaping, necrotic wound of our economy was comparatively minor, in my eyes.
Your mileage may, as they say, vary. I’m not telling anybody that they’re wrong for having different priorities.
Moe Lane
That’s the buzz over at Hot Air; and certainly the Greenies are screaming that special scream that accompanies a victim being fed to OBAMABUS. The word is that the White House gave up Keystone in exchange for a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut, unemployment benefits, and doc fix.
Because, hey, elections have consequences.
Moe Lane
PS: I would like to take this time to remind the environmental movement that it’s coming up towards the end of 2011, and that the Democrats want to thank you in advance for your continuing generosity. If you have any problems, questions, or concerns, the Democrats are of course deeply committed to providing you with the very best in proactive conflict resolution analysis; they will be more than happy to fully document your action item or items, and do their best to provide you with a comprehensive and timely response to them. It’s just all part of the commitment to awareness that the Democratic party offers to its loyal base supporters.
(Via @davidhauptmann) Background: the House of Representatives, understandably upset that the Obama administration would rather please foreign conflict oil despots and radical progressives than provide manufacturing and construction jobs to good Americans – to say nothing of cheaper energy – has passed a bill that would expedite the construction of the Keystone ethical oil pipeline. More specifically, the House passed a bill that would extend the payroll tax cut for a time; given the estimated costs of such a cut, the Keystone language was added in order to get enough Republicans to sign off on the whole thing. In other words: no energy jobs, no overall bill.
The Senate version has yet to be voted on, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is in a bind. There are at least four Democratic Senators who publicly have come out in favor of the pipeline (Baucus & Tester of Montana, Conrad of North Dakota, and Landrieu of Lousiana); this means that Reid would lose a regular vote 51/49. Worse, the GOP is claiming at least nine more Democratic Senators support it (Begich, Casey, Hagen, Manchin, McCaskill, Ben Nelson, Pryor, Stabenow, and Warner). If true, that puts the total up to 60, which is not coincidentally the number that you need to win a cloture vote. Which means that if Harry Reid puts the bill up for consideration, it’s probably going to pass; and the President has already (and in my opinion, foolishly) threatened a veto, despite the fact that his own private sector union allies support both the cut and the pipeline.
Continue reading Obama, Reid facing revolt over Keystone ethical oil pipeline?
Diana Furchtgott-Roth of RealClearMarkets estimates that two provisions of the Republican version of the jobs bill – fast-tracking the Keystone ethical oil pipeline, and modifying eligibility on unemployment benefits could shave a full point off of the unemployment rate in 2012. The major obstacle? President Obama himself, who opposes both. Diana thinks that he shouldn’t. In fact, she thinks that Obama’s been given a gift by House Republicans:
Luck has once again struck President Barack Obama-if he has the wit to recognize it and use it.
If.
(Via Ben Domenech’s Transom.)
Moe Lane
