That's because China cares about the environment.
Posted on 02/01/2013 6:16:51 AM PST by hedgetrimmer
As he begins his second term, President Obama is barreling toward what one Bay Area activist predicts could be "all out warfare" with environmentalists who want him to stop the Keystone XL Pipeline, the transcontinental conduit for tar sands fuel from Canada that many scientists say could expedite climate change.
Obama's political dilemma lies in the pipeline's potential upside: The State Department projects that it could deliver 6,000 temporary jobs to the U.S., where 12.2 million people are unemployed. Bay Area liberals leading the Keystone opposition say Obama has only one choice.
"If he doesn't reject it," said Piedmont attorney Guy Saperstein, a former Sierra Club Foundation president and prominent liberal donor, "then I think it should be all out warfare for the next four years."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
The environmentalists are part of the communists like empire to destroy America. Our problem is they have not been exposed as such.
That's because China cares about the environment.
I agree, and I suggest that Sarah Palin should start a conservative news network.
Or, if they can get some really big crowds and break a lot of windows and set some fires they can provide the kenyan with an excuse to cal out the troops or try out his new FEMA army. He really doesn't care if the heads he is breaking think they are on his left side of it or are TParty types.
I agree, and I suggest that Sarah Palin should start a conservative news network.I know I'm beating a dead horse here but I feel we need a revolution of the media in this country. - copaliscrossing
I am a broken record in my disdain for “the media.” But having studied the issue assiduously for decades, I feel qualified to state categorically that conservative journalism, in the mold of liberal journalism, is not possible. The problem we face is, as Adam Smith put it,It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity,In the founding era and up to the Civil War, newspapers were not dailies but mostly weeklies, and each newspaper was about the opinions of its printer, more than an even nominally factual basis. The printers had preferred access to each other’s papers (via a postal subsidy), but they did not literally have any news source which a man on the street, or in the saloon, might not have. Then came the telegraph, and the wire service (specifically, the AP). With the AP, suddenly your local newspaper editor had a cornucopia of reports which would not come to anyone else in the local newspaper’s area - until the local newspaper printed it.
and they very seldom teach it enough. The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing. - Adam SmithSuddenly, the newspaper wasn’t like listening to Rush Limbaugh but was like listening to any ordinary news anchor we are now accustomed to. The credulity of the public was coopted by the sudden, unaccustomed fact that a newspaper would print a story today, and weeks later the report would be confirmed by first-hand witness reports. It was like magic. People raised alarms about the concentration of propaganda power which the AP represented, but the AP deflected them by by pointing out that the members of the AP were notorious for not agreeing about much of anything - and claiming that therefore the AP was objective.
The reality, of course, was that the AP homogenized the newspapers, leaving as a common denominator the self interest of journalism as such as the default assumption ruling all major journalism. And what is the self interest of journalism? It is to be respected, and to be thought of as must-read material every day. And what does that require? That journalism warn the public about dangers. Doesn’t matter if the dangers are real, only that they are threatening. And in fact there are advantages if the “danger” is supposed to come from a trusted person or institution rather than (say) Al Qaeda. First, it surprises and engrosses the public. And second, the trusted person who is put in the dock is not actually a danger to behead the editor of the newspaper.
The long and the short of the matter is that “liberalism” is the default of the business model of journalism. There are obvious PR benefits to going along with journalism, and those are recognized by both major parties. It’s just that the Democrats don’t have any principle which would prevent them from going along more completely with journalism than the Republicans can. That doesn’t prevent “RINOs” from trying - but it explains why they can’t succeed.
So expecting Sarah Palin, or any conservative, to create conservative journalism is to expect the impossible. FR is as good as it gets, I’m afraid . . .
The Market for Conservative-Based News
Heh
“Obama’s political dilemma lies in the pipeline’s potential upside: The State Department projects that it could deliver 6,000 temporary jobs to the U.S., where 12.2 million people are unemployed. Bay Area liberals leading the Keystone opposition say Obama has only one choice. “
The hypocrisy of both Parties....they spent 40 years willingly weakening our security and sending our manufacturing jobs to China, and now there aren’t those good jobs for those Americans that don’t have and can’t afford college or a technical skill.
So what’s the new Wall St/D/R solution? Let’s give amnesty to 30 million unskilled illegal Mexican immigrants while we keep paying unemployment and food stamps to Americans. We have had and continue to have a clueless bunch of incompetent corrupt traitors in DC and Congress. We’d do better with a dart and phone books.
And the new discovery in CA...another Monterey shale play running from San Jose to south of LA with an estimated 50 billion barrels of recoverable oil.
And the biggie...Green River Formation that weighs in at 3 TRILLION barrels of oil with 1 Trillion recoverable with todays technology.
The US has more reserves than Canada. The difference is that Canada has the political will to exploit its resources, the US, seemingly, does not.
As for reserves in California, they might as well be on the moon. The US consumer would have far more access to that oil if it was in Canada or even Mexico or Venezuela.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.