Posted on 05/06/2014 1:55:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
Don't trouble yourself trying to figure out whether President Obama is more political than ideological. He's an expert at straddling both and getting his way without compromise.
Analysts have long debated whether partisan Obama would prevail over ideological Obama in his decision to approve or reject the Keystone XL pipeline, but in the end, it may be a false choice, as both could win under the overarching dominance of Saul Alinsky-Obama.
Keystone XL is intended to carry crude oil from Alberta to refineries in the Gulf of Mexico. Environmentalists have long opposed construction of the pipeline, arguing it would do great damage to the Sandhills region of Nebraska. Supporters have contended that the project would have little, if any, negative environmental impact, is critically important for U.S. energy independence and would be a great boon to the economy and create thousands of jobs.
Many believed that Obama's eventual approval of the pipeline was inevitable and that he was just delaying the decision to get past the 2012 elections, after which he could safely withdraw his opposition without worrying about further wrath from environmental absolutists.
But since the elections, Obama has continued to obstruct the pipeline. He is still doing so as we are approaching mid-2014 even though the State Department found in January that the project would not have a significant effect on global warming; Obama has always insisted that the pipeline's alleged impact on global warming is his primary concern.
Many people, including no less a supporter of Keystone than Texas Gov. Rick Perry, predicted Obama would ultimately have to approve the project because, according to Perry, "there is no defending not opening the XL pipeline." Perry continued: "I don't know why he's going to wait for two or three months to do it, but at the end of the day, it is too important to America. It's too important to the security of this country. It's too important to job creation."
Though Perry's optimism and bullishness on America are wholly appealing to me, it appears you just can't count on Obama to follow impenetrable logic or to do the obviously right thing for America.
In April, Obama once again kicked the can down the road, postponing indefinitely a final decision on the construction of the project. His shamelessly subservient State Department announced that it would give the other federal agencies "additional time" to provide their input.
Some may interpret Obama's decision to further stonewall the project as another example of his "leading from behind," but I disagree. It has always been and remains a mistake to misinterpret Obama's incompetence and lack of engagement concerning many aspects of his executive duties as evidence of his indecisiveness.
When it comes to his overall direction -- his overwhelming dedication to fundamentally transforming the nation -- there is no vacillation, no equivocation, no lack of direction. He is hellbent on using "climate change" as an excuse to further sabotage America's free market system.
Obama adviser John Podesta, his "point man on climate policy," said recently that "taking action on climate is one of the most important goals in the president's second term. He feels a profound and urgent obligation to get as much done as he can before he leaves office." According to Rolling Stone, Obama is determined "to use his presidential powers to effectively hasten the phase-out of dirty coal from America's energy system." He directed the Environmental Protection Agency to develop new rules to limit carbon pollution from power plants.
So, Obama has opted for his ideology in favor of partisan politics after all, you ask? No, not quite, because he obviously believes that his two goals are mutually beneficial. He must do everything he can to elect as many Democrats as possible because they (and the disgraceful liberal media) are the ones who enable him to advance his agenda.
Obama was not about to disappoint the richest Democratic donors, who, at the time Obama's State Department announced its further postponement, were getting ready for their annual meeting of the Democracy Alliance, a confab of wealthy liberals who share Obama's commitment to destroy America's founding principles.
So though on the surface it may have appeared to some that Obama had thrown overboard some of his red-state Democratic senators up for re-election, it just so happens that many liberal activists, including San Francisco billionaire Tom Steyer, were promising to leverage their super PACs to support beleaguered Democratic candidates. Indeed, Steyer reportedly pledged to spend $100 million to help Democrats in November, and his driving passion is to kill Keystone.
So with Obama, you don't have to wonder whether he'll finally yield to his ideology, his party or corrupt money.
Why should he when he figures he can have all three? Fortunately for us, however, he is probably figuring wrong, as he'll find out in November.
Never saw Obama as an expert, smart or brilliant. He’s an idiot on a pedestal that was put there by bigger idiots. It was more luck and timing than anything else. His cabinet is made up of the same type people he hung around with when he was younger.. i.e. more idiots all of which don’t have a clue on what they are doing, are far outside their capabilities and wreaking havoc on America because they can.
Given random decisions, it is highly improbable that the administration would select the worst decision for America every time, therefore, there is an intent to do harm.
They may be idiots, they may not have a clue, but it dawns on one that you don't have to be able to design a computer to destroy one, any more than you need be able to strengthen a country to weaken it.
Many people have their own epiphany moments...
Mine is back in 2009 with Honduras. What 0' did there with Zelaya, while comparing with O'Dinga, showed a Marxist wannabees direction for here in the US.
Actually, my epiphany was during the LBJ administration, but for these guys the IRS crap made it glaringly evident that they cannot hide behind alleged incompetence. Operation Castaway was another fine example, mainly a she-Clinton bit.
FMCDH(BITS)
Not at all
I'm sorry. I forgot he's a homo, which is the least of my worries about this "guy".
FMCDH(BITS)
I think you seriously underestimate them. These people are a CPUSA/KGB cell, and they are backed up by all the resources of the resurgent Soviet State and its many America-measuring tools and scalpels. They've been preparing to finish us off for 70 years. Think they'll stop now? These people are all, all of them, committed.
And you think the damage Obama et al. have done to foreign policy, military capabilities, our space capabilities, and our economy is some sort of blundering coincidence?
Guess again.
I’m not into conspiracy theories and many an idiot have ruined a business so Obama ruining America is to be expected. The man is incapable of speaking without a teleprompter or written speech, Holder couldn’t win a murder case if a guy confessed with video evidence. If I was at a WH press conference the first questioned I’d ask Carney would be, “Are you really as incompetent and stupid as you come across?”
The rest of liberal Americans are incompetent assholes by design. Reid & Pelosi are in 4th stage dementia and should be in a mental ward along with 95% of Congress.
The military has become a social experiment simply because Obama and company like fags and from all accounts he was one and probably still is being married to the Wookie.
Nope..
9/11 wasn’t an inside job.
MH-370 isn’t in Diego Garcia
Google isn’t Skynet
Sandyhook was not a perpetrated hoax
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.