Posted on 03/21/2008 7:13:04 AM PDT by Conservative Vermont Vet
Hillary Clinton calls President Bush's talks with the Saudis about increasing oil output "pathetic." But it's not as pathetic as her co-president husband locking up billions of tons of clean coal in exchange for political contributions.
As Bush wrapped up his Middle East trip, Sen. Clinton commented: "President Bush is over in the Gulf now begging the Saudis and others to drop the price of oil. How pathetic."
A large part of America's energy dependence on foreign sources can be traced to Sept. 18, 1996, when President Bill Clinton stood on the edge of the Grand Canyon on the Arizona side and signed an executive proclamation making 1.7 million acres of Utah a new national monument.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
A great reminder from the guys at IBD... This is one that should be brought back again and again as energy prices remain in the stratosphere. Just another of the disgusting pieces of history from the Clinton vacation from history. And just another of the cans kicked down the road that provided the foundation for his “bridge to the 21st century.” A rather shakey foundation indeed.
“this federal land grab was done without any consultation with the governor of Utah or any member of the Utah congressional delegation or any elected official in the state.”
THAT is why he had to stand in Arizona when he signed it.”
Not sure that is exactly true. I had heard from friends who live near Salt Lake City that Clinton had been talking to Utah members of Congress. The Utah members had heard rumblings that Clinton was planning this action, and they were demanding information and input. There were large companies ready to mine the coal- the employees had already been hired, and equipment was in place.
Clinton lied to Sen Hatch and the others right up to the last minute.
Not only did Clinton do his dirty deed on the Arizona side of the border, he did it on a holiday weekend, when he could totally blindside Utah, and in effect, the entire USA, with these coal deposits not being implemented in our quest for more energy.
I find all this ironic in more than one way. Except for nuclear power plants, almost all the electricity generated EAST of the Mississippi river is generated by coal fired plants. The Clintons use electricity that is most likely created by coal.....
THAT is why he had to stand in Arizona when he signed it.
With Robert REDFORD grinning like the Cheshire Cat along side.................”
Yesss... Robert Redford, another ethically challenged person whore the “environment” is concerned.
He sucessfully got regulations passed about development in and around his canyon property in Utah——AFTER his Sundance property was all developed....
Ethics...Morals... 2 words Liberals cannot even begin to understand or spell.
I missed that one... Thanks for the post!
1.7 MILLION Acres? That’s the equivalent of a square with 50 MILES on each side!
...and to think, it didn’t occur to any one to just push BOTH of them into the canyon. What a wasted opportunity.
“W lacks the skills of a moron, and will be remembered as one.”
It is unfortunate that someone cannot be all things to all people. Would you have been more happy if Bush was against immigration, against increased spending, for the war, against Dubai, against Meirs but was pro-choice?
Then again, based on that, while you may have liked him better, the pro-life crowd would have hated him. And if he was everything, but didn’t defend a marriage amendment someone else would have hated him.
The toughest job on the planet is being a Conservative politician.
There was a thread just this week about some imbecile’s plan to eliminate use of coal by 2050. I hope that wasn’t Algore.
Conservative politician, you are not talking about this jerk are you?
I don’t think he is a jerk. Everyone knew what he was when he was elected. There was no suprises.
We wanted a strong leader in the war on terrorism, we got it. We wanted a leader who was pro-life and pro-marriage and we got it. Aside from the Meiers fiasco, we got two very strong Conservatives on the bench, which in my opinion is the most successful part of this presidency.
With a congress hellbent on spending like drunken sailors and a senate more concerned with giving the country to the UN and staying in power then working for the American people, I think Bush did pretty good.
A President cannot do it on his own as much as we think he can.
“Terrorism wasn’t on the table when he first was elected.”
I disagree. Terrorism was huge when he took office. WTC in 93,Khobar Towers, The Cole, etc. Add Somalia in 93 and everyone knew terror had to be addressed. And he addressed it.
Open borders was a given. He was the Governor of Texas. Did anyone think that he was going to take money out of the pockets of his business buddies in Texas? It’s a bit naive to think differently. Did congress put a strong anti-immigration bill on his desk? Did he veto it?
IIRC and please correct me if I am wrong, congress put a bill in front of the President for a fence and he signed that. Aside from him going down there and building the fence himself, what else could he do?
What did Bush do? Go along with justice and the homo ACLU which got us 911. That’s all keep your head in the sand, I will hear no more of your BS.
Sooo... you're saying President Bush caused queers to fly jets into buildings?
That's a new one.
While this and of itself does not rise to the single reason we will not ever achieve energy self-sufficiency, it is symptomatic of what we face should any “serious effort” be made to achieve same—which just ain’t happening.
Between the stranglehold which the EnviroNuts enjoy with near unparalleled success in applying veto-power over any attempt to extricate our precarious position thru new developments; coupled with bought-and-paid-for Pols and others too timid to confront or oppose them (can anyone say “BUSH?”) we stand little chance of seeing any relief in the foreseeable future.
-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—
Well said. Thanks for the article.
I agree that there is plenty of potential energy out there. It’s all a matter of the political will to tell the tree-huggers to take a hike. My fear is that won’t happen until Americans are confronted with hard times and tragedy.
I hope you are right. But, it seems that currently we are a liquid fuel economy. Retooling that economy to provide transportation for 300 million people and countless goods, that currently travel in cars, trucks and airplanes that require petroleum based liquid fuel, will take a decade.
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.