- End of Day Report
- Congressional Information
- About Us
- Media Guide
- Contact Us
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
To: Friends & Supporters
From: Gary L. Bauer
COUNTDOWN TO VICTORY: 293 DAYS TO THE 2012 ELECTIONS
Obama Says No To Canada's Oil
In a stunning development today, the Obama Administration once again rejected the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline would have transported crude oil from the Canadian tar sands to refineries along the Gulf Coast. It would have provided more oil from a friendly ally while reducing America's dependence on imported oil from hostile regimes like Venezuela or those in the Middle East.
Today's decision is inexplicable. It defies common sense and the recommendation of Obama's own jobs council! Consider this excerpt from the 2011 year-end report issued by the President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness:
"Additionally, policies that facilitate the safe, thoughtful and timely development of pipeline, transmission and distribution projects are necessary to facilitate the delivery of America's fuel and electricity and maintain the reliability of our nation's energy system."
Last month a bi-partisan majority in Congress passed legislation demanding a decision on the pipeline within 60 days. Congress took this unusual step because the Obama White House said it would wait until after the 2012 elections to make a decision. The administration now claims it is denying approval because it can't make an informed decision in 60 days. But according to the Wall Street Journal, "The U.S. government has been reviewing the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline since 2008."
So this project has been under government review for four years -- that's 1,460 days -- and Obama still can't give us an answer? We developed the atomic bomb in less time. We built the Empire State Building in less time. The Hoover Dam took less than five years to build.
But Obama just can't bring himself to approve a pipeline that would provide America with oil from Canada and create tens of thousands of jobs in the process -- even when his own advisors recommend it. He rejects the one really "shovel ready" project on his desk while spending billions on failed alternative energy companies.
Why would Obama do this? Because the radical environmentalist movement has made the Keystone pipeline a litmus test issue. They have drawn a "line in the sand" on the use of "dirty" tar sands oil.
But the oil will be used. The pipeline will be built -- going west, instead of south, to load the oil on Chinese tankers. China desperately wants it. In fact, the Chinese are already aggressively buying up interests in Canada's tar sands and Prime Minister Harper is headed to China next month. According to Canadian news reports, "A decision by U.S. President Barack Obama to delay approval for a major pipeline expansion through the country led to Harper talk about finding other customers for Canadian oil."
By the way, petroleum analysts are warning that 2012 could be "the most painful year at the pump that we have ever seen."
My friends, let me remind you what President Obama's former National Security Advisor, Gen. Jim Jones, said last month about the failure of this administration to develop a serious energy policy:
"If we get to the point where we cannot bring ourselves to do what is in our national interest, then we are clearly in a period of decline… A nation that fails to secure the energy its citizens and its economic engine need to keep functioning leaves itself vulnerable to external contingencies in a dangerous and uncertain world and to the whims of foreign leaders and other actors who may not always have its interests at heart."
Obama: The Divider-In-Chief
Barack Obama may not be able to create jobs or run a coherent foreign policy, but the former Chicago community organizer knows how to divide people based on race, income, etc. And now that he has the bully pulpit of the presidency, it is only that much easier.
A recent Pew study did not get much attention, but it reveals the potential for division that exists, if we tolerate it. According to Pew's findings, "about two-thirds of the public (66%) believes there are 'very strong' or 'strong' conflicts between the rich and the poor. …Not only have perceptions of class conflict grown more prevalent; so, too, has the belief that these disputes are intense."
Pew found that this intense focus on class conflict ranks ahead of concerns over race, immigration and age, and it is also relatively new. "Virtually all major demographic groups now perceive significantly more class conflict than two years ago."
The timing seems odd, doesn't it? One would have expected class conflict to peak during the Great Recession in 2009, not when things are supposedly getting better. It is ironic and unfortunate given that Obama was elected on the promise of hope and change that people now perceive more conflict. But the Obama campaign and the Occupy Wall Street movement appear determined to exploit fear and envy now in order to achieve their shared goals -- Obama's reelection and the "fundamental transformation of America."
While I have been very critical of the GOP debate formats, the weekend debates in South Carolina have me convinced of one thing: The remaining contenders are much better debaters now than they were 90 days ago.
As you know, I have endorsed Senator Rick Santorum, and I think he did well in the last debate. I also have to tip my hat to Newt Gingrich. His performances in the debates are the main reason Gingrich remains in contention. His campaign imploded early on after a series of mishaps, culminating in the mass resignation of his entire staff. Yet Gingrich remains very much a force in this campaign.
Whoever wins the nomination should watch the tapes of the South Carolina debates to get the right sense of how best to beat Barack Obama. We win if we take the fight to him. We lose if we play defense. With your help, CWF will do everything we can to win!