March 4 (Bloomberg) -- Bloomberg's chief Washington correspondent Peter Cook reports that opponents of TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL pipeline have stepped up their objections after a March 1 report helped clear the way for White House approval of the project. He speaks on Bloomberg Television's "In The Loop."
Showing posts with label Keystone Pipeline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Keystone Pipeline. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Keystone Pipeline Opponents Dig-In After Report
March 4 (Bloomberg) -- Bloomberg's chief Washington correspondent Peter Cook reports that opponents of TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL pipeline have stepped up their objections after a March 1 report helped clear the way for White House approval of the project. He speaks on Bloomberg Television's "In The Loop."
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Austin Hill - The Quest For A Reason To Re-Elect The President
Mitt Romney doesn’t have enough of his money taken from him in taxes. Paul Ryan wants to give rich people a tax “break.” Mitt Romney cut jobs when he was an executive at a private equity firm. Paul Ryan wants to cut school lunches for needy children.
You’ve probably seen and heard it all before. Romney and Ryan are scary, “extreme,” and out of touch, according to Team Obama. The President, Vice President, and all their operatives and surrogates are committed to getting the word out.
But while the President and his friends are adept at making rhetorical attacks on Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, it’s an infrequent occurrence when they offer any reasons why the President should be re-elected. So what, really, is the case for an Obama re-election victory? We know why the President dislikes the Romney-Ryan ticket (and Republicans, generally). But why do we need another four years of Barack Obama as our President? “Because Mitt Romney is terrible,” seems to be the implied answer.
Try searching for remarks from the President about what he intends to do in a second term, and you won’t find much. This is because he hasn’t said much on the topic. Most of the President’s comments these days are disparaging remarks about Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and not about his agenda - although he did note in an Associated Press interview on August 25th that if he is elected to a second term, he believes there are Republicans in the House and Senate who will compromise and work with him to “get things done” for the country.
I did, however, receive a recent email update from the Obama campaign, a portion of which read like this: “President Obama believes the only way to create an economy built to last is to build it from the middle out and not from the top down. His economic plan is to restore middle-class security by paying down our debt in a balanced way that ensures everyone pays their fair share. Yet the President also wants to still invest in things we need to create jobs and grow our economy over the long term, things like education, energy, innovation, and infrastructure.”
This little blurb should raise some big questions. First, we should all ask “who is seeking a ‘top-down’ approach to the economy?” The answer, of course, is the President himself.
Within less than two years of taking office, President Obama successfully put in to place a system of tremendous governmental control over the otherwise private economy. By the middle of 2010, the President had become a de-facto C.E.O. over huge chunks of the economy, with the power to hire and fire executives, establish compensation limits for executive management, and to determine what products and services are produced. Insurance companies, car manufacturers, lending institutions and energy producers – President Obama has successfully forced his will upon them all.
So has all this governmental control created an economy that is “built to last?” We should also ask the Obama campaign emailers “how does the extra $6 trillion in U.S. government debt (roughly the amount of federal debt increase since the President’s first day in office) help pay down the debt?” And what about the $813 billion stimulus bill of 2009 – that was supposed to be an “investment” in innovation, infrastructure and education – where did that money go? Wasn’t that supposed to be “invested” in important things? And what happened to “shovel ready jobs” – were there any “created?”
A quick check of Democrats.org, the national party’s website, also reveals a list of other specific policy ideas that the President allegedly supports, yet he isn’t talking about them these days. One such policy has to do with energy independence, as the Democrats claim that “President Obama knows we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices,” and that President Obama is focused on “developing all of America’s natural resources...”
Of course, the President himself said late last year and earlier this year that he is committed to an “all of the above” approach to energy policy, implying that he’s okay with petroleum-based energy, along with the alternative energy development that he’s promoted.
This sounded great- but the President isn’t saying this anymore. This is probably because an “all of the above” approach to energy, we now know, means “anything except Big Oil” within the Obama worldview – hence the President’s veto on the Keystone XL Pipeline project that could have reduced America’s reliance on oil from other continents and could have created jobs from the Canadian border all the way down to Texas. The President and his friends would prefer to ignore this here within the last ten weeks of the election cycle, so they simply don’t talk about it – better to remind everyone about the scary and terrible Romney and Ryan.
Historically, Americans haven’ been content to merely vote against a particular idea or candidate – they generally prefer to vote for someone or something, even if they are choosing the lesser between two “evils.” Will President Obama defy the odds this year – or will Americans be more scrutinizing?
Austin Hill
Friday, July 6, 2012
Michelle Malkin - Fox & Friends - 7-5-12
She's back!!!! - Syndicated Columnist/NY Times #1 Best Selling Author/President of Twitchy.com, Michelle Malkin, offers her perspective on the latest updates on Mitt Romney's position on the Supreme Court ruling of Obamacare. Other topics discussed: VFW will hire 114,000 veterans to help construction of Keystone Pipeline project; and 4th of July Jabs from Celebrities Chris Rock and Zach Braff on twitter to publicly BASH and DISS the United States.Friday, May 11, 2012
Kevin McCullough - Why Obama is 'The One'
He was "The One" who could take our post racial nation to a plateau of greater unity. He was "The One" who would leave behind the "bitter divisiveness" of previous administrations. He was "The One" who would create a greater tomorrow, by calling us to ALL be "one."
Without ever using the term "messiah" it was clear the campaign's effort was to make him as messianic a figure as possible. A strategy I was on record--at the time--saying would be certain trouble for any candidate who ever yearned for a second term in office. No one listened and election day came. It was a historic win--in the ethnicity of the winning candidate. It was a very average--nearly boring--win in the vote tallies. Despite a brutal campaign, terrible organizational issues, and a candidate who didn't seem to want it very badly, the GOP lost by not all that much. Or said better, Obama eked out a win--not very impressive for "The One."
In 2012 the Romney campaign has the potential to purposefully focus on the singular nature of President Barack Obama once again.
For if the history books will record the first term victory of Barack Obama as important, and historic, certainly this election is worth comparing.
Because for now, there is just one man, who stands in the way of helping America finally recover.
Just "one" man stands in the way of allowing TransCanada to install and re-route--both physically and symbolically--a new path to America's independent energy future in the construction and establishment of the Keystone pipeline. As the company has submitted their necessary paperwork and applications the company is giving America and "The One" one last chance to establish this core component to the harvesting of America's own energy.
Just "one" man stands in the way of allowing energy to be recovered from 4000 gulf rigs, 3,999 who were all operating safely until the BP oil spill. Ironically it was "The One" and his sidekick Salazar who refused to take action in advance of the BP spill, when the engineers on the rig were begging the federal government for help in the matter. But few could explain "The One's" overreach by executive fiat in flat-lining all of the remaining oil rigs in the gulf.
Just "one" man stands in the way of greater border enforcement in America's southwest. From Texas to California, the states that border Mexico are far more familiar with the crime, the violence, the infiltration and the drugs. And that was all before "The One's" justice department began to allow dangerous automatic weapons to be smuggled to terrorists who would then turn and use them against American citizens. To date over 1400 weapons that "The One" allowed to be trafficked have yet to be "recovered."
Just "one" man stands in the way of allowing states to also choose the best way to pass laws, protect its citizens, and reduce crime and public resource drain by controlling the issue of illegal immigration. "The One" is going to need to absorb a fairly firm body blow on suing a state to attempt to remove that state's sovereignty, but the nation could help the process along by just removing the one man who prevents as much.
Just "one" man stands in the way of genuine health care reform--based on free markets--that reinstate incentive, competition, quality care, and genuine doctor/patient interaction to be the core concern of medical treatment in America. Not content with having his lawyers embarrassed in arguments and questioning earlier this spring, this last week "The One" sent additional arguments through the mechanism of "reply briefs" attempting to argue on paper that the disruption to current Medicare services would be too great for the court to possibly consider deciding against "The One."
Just "one" man stands in the way of the opportunity for small businesses to grow, and for jobs to return to the American main street as a way of life.
Just "one" man stands in the way of allowing people of conscience to not be forced to pay for the death of unborn children, condoms for irresponsible people (so irresponsible they evidently are incapable or prioritizing their own spending habits so as to buy their own condoms), or $3000 worth of birth-control for any woman who has her hand out.
Just "one" man stands in the way of an increase in American production. Just "one" man stands in the way of America renewing her friendship with Israel. Just "one" man stands in the way of ending America's continued subservience to Saudi kings, or Japanese emperors. Just "one" man stands in the way of lower gas prices, more vibrant markets, and a resurgence in the spirit of the American entrepreneur.
Campaign Team Obama may have wished to paint the then Senator as "The One" in 2008, and argue that he would bring with him the keys to prosperity and success. But from racism, to immigration, to employment, to even the nation's highest court, the "one" was incapable of accomplishing anything helpful, more often frozen with paralysis than leading from the front.
It's time to remove at least just "one" man, and watch the flow of healing and progress begin.
For if just "one" man is capable of blocking energy development, job growth, economic development, reductions in illegal immigration, the free expression of people's personal religious and moral beliefs, strong relationships with our most cherished allies, and even the right for states to govern themselves...
Imagine what he'd do with just "four more!"
Kevin McCullough
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Austin Hill - “Tire Gauge Politics:” Obama Becomes The Status Quo On Energy
My question was off-topic from the stated purpose of the interview, and my talk show guest seemed a bit caught off-guard. But I was even more surprised by his answer.
It was early in the year 2000. Vice President Al Gore was ramping-up his presidential bid, while a bunch of Republicans were slugging it out for a chance to run against him. And although the dot com economic bubble was looking like it might be headed for a burst, the American economy was still relatively stable – certainly more so than it is now.
“Well, our lack of a coherent energy policy is a huge issue right now” noted the famous automotive revolutionary Lee Iacocca. Gasoline was averaging only $1.50 a gallon at the time, and Iacocca was visiting my hometown of Phoenix to unveil his then-new electric bicycle invention. But he was willing to venture in to a discussion of presidential politics – and “energy policies” were top of mind for him.
“When I was running Chrysler I tried to get Presidents Carter and Reagan to focus on this, but when foreign oil is cheap it’s just too easy to play politics and to ignore the problem of foreign oil dependency” he continued. “One of these days America is going to end up in big trouble if we don’t make some changes…”
That was twelve years ago. And today we are in trouble – have we been “playing politics” all these years? - as yet another spike in foreign oil prices threatens our economy. And, just like in 2008, Barack Obama is once again running a campaign for the presidency in an environment of spiking fuel prices - only this time he’s the incumbent and not the outsider.
The price increases have become so burdensome that the President can no longer ignore them. Last Thursday he stated that “some politicians, they see this as a political opportunity,” and noted a headline from “one newspaper” which supposedly indicated that “Republicans are licking their chops” over rising gas prices. “Only in politics do people root for bad news” President Obama growled to his audience.
And the price surge is happening against a rather bizarre background. After denying a permit in January for the expansion of the TransCanada Corporation’s Keystone XL Pipeline project - a project that would have presumably expanded American oil refining and decreased America’s foreign oil dependency – the President is now stuck defending his obsession with government funded electric cars that don’t sell, and failed solar energy companies owned by his campaign donors which have “lost” hundreds of millions of our tax revenues.
This confluence of elements has led the President to begin talking about domestic oil production as though it were actually a good thing. Under his administration, the President continued in his Thursday speech, “America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years,” with a record number of oil and gas rigs. “We’re focused on production.”
This is a dramatic departure from the President’s previous attitude. While campaigning for the presidency during the 2008 price spike, candidate Obama scoffed at the idea of producing more oil at home. “If everybody in America inflated their tires to the proper level,” he sarcastically noted in August of that year, “we would actually probably save more oil, than all the oil we’d get from John McCain drillin’ right below his feet… or wherever he was gonna drill…”
Americans need to demand both an end to the “politics of oil,” and a coherent energy policy. Never again should we settle for cynical “tire gauge politics,” or “stimulus dollars” for President Obama’s solar energy friends.
Republican congressional leaders should take the lead now – now, while the President is lacking credibility on the issue - and begin to acknowledge the obvious: the United States is home to its own substantial oil and gas resources.
There’s nothing wrong or “unfair” about this – we’ve got resources right here at home. Yet it iscurrently a violation of federal law to search for oil in the Pacific Ocean, in the Gulf of Mexico, in the Atlantic Ocean, and in Alaska. Similarly, it is against the law to search for oil shale in the continental United States.
President Obama is being forced to contradict his positions from four years ago because he’s not campaigning against the status quo. He is the status quo in this year’s election, and the status quo has us, once again, “over a barrel.” Alternative energy development is good, noble and necessary – but oil is our need right now.
Who will take the lead, in the President’s absence?
Austin Hill
Austin Hill is an emerging American voice, addressing culture-defining questions through books, talk radio, web, speaking, and interviews. His recent books "White House Confidential" and his new title "The Virtues Of Capitalism" show his range from whit-infused writer to thought-provoking expert on the intersection of philosophy, religion, politics & culture. Hill helps to make the complex seem simple when exploring capitalism, socialism, and other "Isms".
He is an editorial contributor to national publications such as U.S. News & World Report, a columnist with TownHall.com, and is a popular expert-host on radio from leading stations in Washington DC, Chicago, Phoenix and Los Angeles, and nationally with networks such as Fox NewsTalk Radio. He hosts the "Austin Hill Show" weekday mornings at Fresno, California's Talk Radio 105-9 KMJ-FM, and weekday afternoons at Boise, Idaho's Newstalk 580 K I D O radio.
Hill holds a Bachelor's Degree in English Literature from California Polytechnic State University at San Luis Obispo, and a Master's Degree in Philosophy of Religion and Ethics from Biola University in California.
THP Videos - Obama's High Gas Prices
NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)