General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI guess we can take the "He supports the XL" ...
Last edited Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:14 AM - Edit history (1)
off the "Bad Obama" list.
His postponing the decision until after the Nebraska Court decision (after the 2014 elections) signals how his Administration is likely to rule ... he's gonna kill it.
Killing it now would put key Democratic Senators in a bad spot with their electorate ... It would lose more support for Democratic candidates than it would gain.
Funny how the gop can see this but DUers, can't.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Champion Jack
(5,378 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)eom
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Pretty easy..... they just move the goalposts....
treestar
(82,383 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)
Those goal posts have legs!
LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)That's what cretins do.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)
Puglover
(16,380 posts)a positive thing that President Obama is doing and use it to attack your fellow DUers.
Nicely done!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)goes un-noticed by those that constant attack President Obama and his supporters.
Why is pointing out that this cohort's speculative out-rage is wrong ... again, a problem? Maybe if/when we do it enough, the cohort will recognize that their worst fears have yet to materialize and they will re-think their constant state of "he's gonna ... He really will this time ..."to your point, I will go back and edit me original post to remove the offending observation.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)And I agree. There are those that seem to only find things to disagree with the Prez on. That bugs me as much as folks that attack legitimate criticism of the administration.
I really do appreciate your gesture.
Autumn
(45,019 posts)He left it.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)Whatever. It's Spring finally and nice outside.
I thought I'd try.
Autumn
(45,019 posts)on getting the garden ready. It's been such a long winter.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I struck, rather than removed the statement, so that others would see that a made the statement and have retracted it. If I had deleted the comment, the record of what I said would have been corrupted and the post that prompted my retraction would have made no sense to other reading the thread later.
I do not believe in making my words disappear.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Yeah, it does no good to go out and just attack, TBH; though it's not the same as criticizing the actions & mistakes of individuals when needed; for example, some people(myself included) have pointed out how flawed the concept of literal "white privilege" is, or why Edward Snowden isn't actually a hero and why saying that ALL spying is bad, period, is a flawed argument(namely that intel can do *good* things; we did kill Bin Laden with help from that, after all.), etc., without going out into personal attacks territory.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the dog that yelps, be the dog done got hit.
Pointing out the numerous time folks have been speculative, and wrong, is not a personal attack.
madokie
(51,076 posts)
Romulox
(25,960 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)If you want "Elizabeth Warren" or "Bernie Sanders" or any other Democratic Candidate.. to not be in the EXACT same shape as President Obama then WE HAVE to provide them a majority in the House!
You want to ensure Pres. Obama covers your "issues"....then GOTV and help elect Democrats in the Midterms.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)Yes, we know it's a nakedly political decision. Any idiot with a Poli Sci class on his transcript could tell you that. Political decisions don't always taste good, but this one will get you the result you want. I don't know about you, but I'm going to sleep fine tonight, and so is President Obama.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)some around here need to understand the rules of the game!
Arkana
(24,347 posts)1) Laws
2) Sausages
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)it is not a sport for the weak.....
I just saw that yesterday on Brainyquote.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)More 15th Dimensional Chess, anyone? 
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)to your own peril. He has been handling this Presidency against the obstructionism and attacks from the Left quite successfully. He knows what he is doing....that you throw out that "15 Dimensional Chess" line shows that you are still underestimating his prowess.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Are you completely out of your mind? The obstructionism has been coming from the RIGHT...the Left has been holding him to account...big, BIG difference there bub..
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)truebrit71
(20,805 posts)....what obstructionism? Holding him to account? Asking him to follow-up on his campaign rhetoric?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)that this President faces, I think you naively underestimate the Right, and the faux Left.
How many stories, on this very website, come from posters who claim to be progressive, excoriate the President, and yet, are so easily debunked as false?
Quite a few. You Better Believe It!
Arkana
(24,347 posts)And that would not have taken any political calculus. If the President and the Democrats thought they'd gain more votes than they'd lose by approving the Keystone pipeline, they would have done it. Now.
Their polling is telling them that this is the driving issue for a lot of Democrats, and even if the President personally wanted the pipeline he'd be stupid not to realize that vetoing it is the politically smart thing. Like it or not, the Democrats are fighting an uphill battle--we're trying to win Senate elections in a lot of traditionally red states, and right now our BEST chance of a pickup? Unseating the goddamn Senate Minority Leader. Like it or not, this is how we keep those candidates out of trouble.
Doing it now would hurt Dems in November in oil/gas states, a lot of which have Senators on the hot seat that are defending their position. Ergo, he's waiting till after. Political? Yes. Hard to swallow? Yes. Are you going to get the result you want? Most likely.
So why does it bother you?
Romulox
(25,960 posts)vote-loser in 2014.
This is a political discussion board. Discussing politics is 100% on topic.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Seems as though both you and the OP have different interpretations on what the move means... seems as though you minimize the interpretation of others while rationalizing yours.
I'm sure there's an equitable and objective reason for that...
Romulox
(25,960 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)speculation is more acceptable on this message board when it cuts against this Democratic President.
Gotcha!
Romulox
(25,960 posts)
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)How about the 2.5 million comments that were made in the review process. No, that really couldn't have anything to do with it. I guess that has to do with "selective proof" on your part.
Romulox
(25,960 posts) 
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I see....
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)More Americans approve of it than disapprove of it -mainly thanks to Koch money. But it is what it is.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that has yet to be demonstrated (it is, however, incredibly unpopular with DU ... which BTW is NOT the Democratic Party's "Rank and File"
; but that said, the politic risk is the pipeline IS incredibly popular among Landrieu's (D-LA) electorate and the voters in Heitkamp (D-NE), Begich (D-Alaska), Pryor (D-Arkansas), Manchin (D-W.Va.), McCaskill (D-Mo.), Tester (D-Mont.), Walsh (D-Mont.) and Hagan's (D-N.C.) district. All of which are needed if Democrats hope to retain the Senate.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-senate-democrats-keystone-pipeline-20140410,0,447898.story#ixzz2zdBBuYZs
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)so yes, deciding in favor of it now would alienate the base he needs to get out this year while not approving would help the GOP in the general election. kicking the can is the smartest thin to do.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)What effect would killing the XL Pipeline, before the 2014 elections, have on Pryor's, Landrieu's, Udall's and the open seat in SD, races in the Senate and Matheson's, Barber's and Gallego's, race in the House?
If you want to know, just look at how the gop is responding to the postponement.
You're right though ... This ain't 15th Dimensional chess ... It's common sense!
Romulox
(25,960 posts)
hatrack
(59,583 posts)It doesn't matter how much inside baseball one surrounds it with, the President still hasn't made the decision.
Until he does, we don't know, and the Growth Imperative remains unchallenged by right or left, and Keystone is one among many parts of the Growth Imperative.
JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts)That aren't gonna like ya for this! 
But I do! 
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)..a opposed to, oh I dunno, just saying "it isn't approved and here's why"....
I know he's kicking the can down the road, and so do you, and it has bugger-all to do with his fans being right, or the "disruptors' being wrong...but don't let that stop your hero-worship...
Me? I'll wait 'til he actually makes the announcement...whenever that turns out to be..
JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts)Bro hug! 
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)"One must only speculate the worst with this Democratic President, lest one be labeled a 'hero-worshipper'."
Funny thing is ... my speculation answers all of the respondent's questions that he/she poses, and is supported by the strategic/tactical history of this President; but because there is/has been no press conference, announcing: "I'm delaying announcing the XL decision until after the election because I need to support Landrieu and Udall and others, so that we can hold the Senate", then it's not happening.
Even though the gop, and pundits on both sides, can plainly see the move for what it is.
JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts)
I suspect you already knew that! 
I'm at a place where ALL politicians are rats. For now though - I'm sticking with the 'devil' I've come to know.
Pssst - I really hope one of the 'Saints' gets elected in 2016 just so I can come to DU in 2017 and laugh at their disappointment in their 'Saint' and point out how radically naive they were and remain.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but do not share your hope, as such a loss would be more tragic than having to suffer the daily name-calling.
I do, however, get a kick out of watching folks that demonstrate on a daily basis, a complete lack of strategic and operational thinking, proclaim that they know more/better than a proven strategist ... and when they are proven wrong, time after time, they do the internutz thing ... on to their next demonstration of superior strategic/operational brilliance!
JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts)He doesn't do what they say he's going to do. 
If he had done one thing that they looked into their crystal ball and determined he was going to do - I could take it seriously. But right now I'm still waiting on him to to take our guns and for that starve granny thing to happen.
Negrodamus has a far better track record than anyone at DU.
Where is Paul Mooney when ya really need him?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and it's really really gonna happen, this time ... I swear!
JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts) When that happens I'll take all of their other 'predictions' seriously. 
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... their anger level is just as high as if he DID cut Social Security.
Or didn't end DADT, or didn't end the Iraq war, or didn't end the Bush tax cuts for the 1%.
They whip themselves into a frenzy, and then when the evil deed doesn't happen, they stay just as angry as if it had.
JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts)I've noticed that.
I wonder how they will act however - if Warren or Sanders WERE to win in 2016 - and gavea Greenwald a seat in their cabinet? That would be very interesting. Just to see - how they do with that.
Pssst - If my scenario is ridiculous well - so are theirs.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...and despite his alleged 9th level Ninja mind-chess skills, he has proven that he can't negotiate his way out of wet paper bag...
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)The hair-on-fire club loves to freak out about things that aren't happening.
They predicted endless wars in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Iran ... never happened.
Social Security and Medicare were going to be destroyed ... not happening.
Obama was going to cave and make the Bush tax cuts for the top 1% permanent ... wrong again.
He was never going to end DADT ... then when he got that killed via new legislation ... well, he was going to let the military not actually do it ... then he was going to slow walk it so it wouldn't take effect ... wrong again every time.
Over and over, the combustible hair club has gone crazy, then the outrage du jour dies a sad death.
Its fun to watch as they jump from outrage to outrage ... becoming more and more disgruntled with each failed prediction of doom.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...but SS is still on the table, he's opened up more areas for more drilling, continues to talk about 'clean coal' whatever the FUCK that imaginary substance is, he HASN'T restored habeas corpus, he HASN'T stopped drone attacks, he HASN'T stopped extra-judicial executions of American citizens, he HASN'T stopped the NSA from recording every fucking thing we do online, he HAS prosecuted more whistle-blowers than any other administration before, he HASN'T prosecuted any Wall Street crooks, he HAS deported more immigrants than ever before...
Those issues still smolder...but my hair is not on fire...
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)SS won't be cut ... I've predicted that here on DU, folks will continue to be absolutely sure he's going to cut it up until the day he walks out the door, at which point they will declare that THEY stopped him.
As a candidate, he never said he would not open new areas for drilling. And he said he was for an "all of the above" strategy. Were you asleep?
Then there's the drone stuff ... you claimed he can't negotiate ... now you are whining about something that's not part of a negotiation.
Personally, I prefer drones over boots on the ground. Join Al Qaeda and move to Yemin ... decisions like that have consequences.
NSA ... sure, the President should just shut it down completely. Get real.
And you definitely should have said he prosecuted 3 times more whistle blowers than anyone sle in history ... that's a better way to make 9 or so look a lot bigger than 3.
Bottom line: You did not back up your argument about the President not being able to negotiate ... what you did is list your favorite points of disgruntlement.
And please, about the combustible hair .... you'd be bald if not for the flame retardant hair.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...some example of his inability to negotiate are things like the budget, the ACA (where he started from the middle ground and then gave away even more...just like his budget "negotiations"...)..glad you're fine with the NAS spying...land of the free? Don't make me laugh...
Bottom line: please tell me this year's winner of the Stanley Cup, World Series and Superbowl...or does your crystal ball only see the political future?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Any version of it???
Let's go through the ACA. Let's say YOU are the President. Explain how YOU get a better version of the ACA passed.
Now, let's assume that the ACA is the current version, plus a public option (feel free to make other changes if that helps you). No Republican is going to vote for your ACA. And while you have almost all of the other Dems lined up, there are 6 bluedogs who are straddling the fence.
I'll spot you 5 of those 6 bluedogs ... you are such a better negoriator than Obama, YOU some how got 5 of them to flip ... you only need one more ... Joe Lieberman.
How do YOU as President get him to vote YES?
When you prove the current President is a bad negotiator by flipping Lieberman, please address these three points.
1) Lieberman ran against you and campaigned for your opponent, John McCain. McCain was going to make him SecDEF, or SECoS. You prevented this.
2) Lieberman is not going to run again, and has said so. He's already preparing for a 7 figure position with a think tank (A position that he now holds btw).
3) Lieberman is known as the "Senator from Aetna". His ties are so close to the insurance industry, multiple members of his family have careers dependent on it.
So please demonstrate how you as President get this one vote. Certainly, given you think Obama could have done better, you can handle flipping Lieberman.
As an aside ... on the NSA ... way back when the patriot act passed, I told some Republican friends that (a) it was too broad, and (b) no President was ever going to give back ANY of that authority because not one of them would be willing to risk a 2nd 9/11. Yet, Obama has actually pulled it back some. Bush wasn't using the FISA courts, Obama has. And the President is changing how the data is collected, and the scope of future warrents that go through the FISA court. That's far more than I expected from any President over the next 50 years, let alone within 10 to 12.
I focus on politics ... because, unlike some, I see the larger picture and its not so hard to spot the relevant trends. The perpetually disgruntled, however, spend so much time with their outrage meter pegged to 11, they have trouble focusing on any topic at all. And when their predictions of doom fail, they get even angrier.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Why not go whole-hog and START at single-payer, rather than in the middle...oh and get someone OTHER than Max Fucking Baucus as your lead negotiator...
Ah, so the President is using the law to violate our rights, as opposed to just violating them outright...isn't that rather like saying it's better to get a kiss before you get fucked, rather than just getting bent over and fucked anyway?
Not good enough.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Lieberman was never voting for single payer. NEVER. And no amount of negotiating was going to change that. So, I'm not surprised you punted on that question. Don't feel bad ... not one of the "Obama should have got us single payer" folks has ever come close to explaining how anyone gets something better passed.
Which law is the President breaking? When's the trial?
I like the way you ended your response with a trip to the middle school bathroom.
Gives me a better sense of your intellectual age. So thanks for that.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Me? I prefer something a little less pungent...
Nice snark on the intellectual age...really elevates your argument, no?
Which law did he break? The Fourth Amendment...it's in the U.S. Constitution...look it up sometime...
Oh, and the Eagles always have, and always will suck balls...middle school enough for you?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
ProfessorGAC
(64,960 posts)The accusation of hero worship is seldom as empty as in your post.
Absolutely no evidence of hero worship at all in this entire thread to this point. But, since you have no other recourse, you accuse your debate opponent of something not said, nor even implied. Only inferred by you with a clearly jaundiced view.
Please note: nothing here showing what side i take. That's on purpose. Just pointing out the lack of a point in your post.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...specifically as it was attacking those that disagree with the President and don't automatically love and defend everything he does, most especially from those on "the left"...
That was the point, "professor"
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I edited the OP to strike the offending "attack" more than 4 hours before you appeared in this thread. (As I mentioned to the DUer that first made the "attack" point and to another that questioned the sincerity of my edit ... I do not delete my words, as that would corrupt the record; I do, will, however, strike a phrase/comment.)
Your "hero-worship" comment is because, in your world, anyone not so aggrieved as to constantly doubt/second guess this President is somehow worthy of denigration.
Note to you: Pointing out your faulty thinking (using anecdotal evidence ... e.g., the President's history of being strategically correct versus the other's history of being wrong; and/or, the reaction of the gop, that gets the effectiveness of the move versus the other's inability to see the forest for the trees) is not an attack on the other; nor is it a display of "hero-worship" ... it's an attempt to open the other's eye.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)..those that engage in 'hero worship' are the ones that attack ANYONE that dares criticize the President and has actions and policies regardless of the fact that if a republican president had done the same thing they would have been screaming blue, bloody murder...
Your OP was a direct attack on DU'ers that choose to apply the same levels and standards to the President REGARDLESS OF PARTY.
Somehow that offends members of the swarm who seem to think that torture under a Democratic President is fine, but not under a Republican one, or drone attacks with MASSIVE civilian collateral damage under a Dem President are 'the unfortunate costs of war', but 'indiscriminate killing' when done by a Republican President. I could go on and on, but I know it is a completely waste of time.
Is he better than President McCain or President Rmoney? Yes. By a country mile. But that does NOT make him immune from criticism when he does something wrong, in fact because he's "one of us" we should hold him to a HIGHER standard than the republicans do, not make excuses when he continues on with the same policies that were decried and howled at when implemented by his predecessor.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)stomp your feet and yell, "La, La, La", Mate?
Did you happen to note that the offending "attack" was edited to put a line through it? What does that denote, Mate?
BTW ...
That's not "hero-worship" that's American partisan politics.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)And No, that's not American partisan politics it's actually called 'Hypocrisy'...
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the entirety of what you respond to? I explain why I do not/will not delete what I have written ... I have seen, too, many times people that delete comments, then deny having made the deleted comment. I, also, do not delete my comments, because it makes any response to my comment, out of context.
And no ... that American partisan politics, mate.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)If a policy is not okay when an (R) does it, it does NOT become okay because a (D) does it...because that would be HYPOCRISY...
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)then, no one has a question as to what was, or wasn't, written.
I would have no problem if the gop delayed a decision on an issue until after an election ... especially, when I recognize that the decision would hurt a fellow Democrat's candidacy.
pragmatic_dem
(410 posts)Shipping fracking oil across the US to be processed in Texas refineries and put on boats to China is not a popular plan in either party.
Neither is TPP - a pipeline of jobs to Asia sponsored by Democratic Party leadership.
villager
(26,001 posts)...this moment.
Which, for this moment, is good.
But we're all staying tuned for a final verdict.
pragmatic_dem
(410 posts)meaning that without this minor technicality (land rights in Nebraska? Really?), it would be full steam ahead.
If they wanted to kill it, they would kill it.
This is Democratic Party leadership trying to be Democrat and Republican all at once.
You know - the middle.
Which is moving to the right faster than a Democratic conservative heavily invested in oil company stock can say:
"let's make billions selling refined fracking oil to China and India for the energy they need to power all the jobs we send there every year."
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the effect killing the XL would have on the Landrieu, Udall and other races. You don't see the harm that would inflict on these Democratic candidates?
Actually, this Administration is playing "Team Politics."
pragmatic_dem
(410 posts)I don't recognize any impact to Landrieu. If she's in trouble, Keystone won't save her.
That oil is going to Houston and onto boats to China and India.
Just like that big coal project outside Bellingham was going to load up boats with coal, create a giant fucking mess and send it to China, driving up prices here.
Net result? It's all going to India and China to fuel the jobs we send there.
We sold them all our jobs, now they are trying to sell them all our resources.
Screw that.
Dem Leadership should be more worried that at some point Democrats who kiss their conservative asses every election are going to realize it isn't doing any good and their incomes and opportunities continue to decline with or without them.
Democratic Party should be as interested in new blood and new ideas instead of preserving blue dog war horses and supply-side economic policy.
You want to talk about progress or continue to dwell on a dead end?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Progress can only be had when Democrats have a majority in the House and hold the Senate. Dead-end is your strategy.
pragmatic_dem
(410 posts)of people who know that big oil is a dead end.
Democrats have tried the "oh, we have to make sure Landrieu wins at all costs" for years. It isn't working. But that seems to be exactly by design.
Old tired cynical conservative war horses in bed with big oil at the expense of young, passionate minds and economic justice.
Blue dogs keep kicking liberals, conservatives keep cheering them on. Time to fight back.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Or he could have, more easily, approved it after 2012. That should tell you something. No?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)he'll finally decide.
ETA: There have been some nasty spills here and in Canada since Nov 2012. Any one of them would have been a golden opportunity to shut down Keystone with the legitimate reasoning that protecting our water supply is more valuable than anything gained by Keystone.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and had he killed XL, before the 2014 mid-terms, we would be almost certain to lose 3-4 Democratic Senate seats and 5-6 Democratic House seats. How would that have advanced our need to flip the House and hold/expand the Senate, so that we can get more progressive legislation out of those bodies?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)It's not unusual for the Party holding the White House to struggle in the midterms. If Obama had had any intention of killing the Keystone project, that would have been the time to do it. If he waits until this December, there will be huge pressure to use a pipeline that's already been built.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)because the Party holding the White House to struggle in the midterms; rather than, do the math and reduce the struggle? Sorry ... I disagree.
All of XL that will be built, has been built and operational since 2012/early 2013. The remaining 1,179, the part connecting Alberta through Nebraska, can't proceed without the State Department's approval.
So what pressure are you talking about being brought to bear?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)And, once finished, why not use it, no matter how many problems there are. No matter how many rivers are contaminated.
We should have "done the math" and canceled the pipeline as quickly and quietly as possible in the immediate aftermath of the 2012 win, if not long before that. Instead, all that's happened is a lot of equivocal footdragging that depresses Dem confidence in the President. Yeah, that's a genius move.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that is not likely to change; but will have little effect because everyone know that nothing can happen until the State Department says so.
"Doing the Math" can only refer to counting votes in 2014.
That's all you see ... the rest of the world sees 2014.
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)There is no "good time" for not firing up the Rebs.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)whatever action that is being postponed will not upset the wider Democratic base, and will be too late to hurt Landrieu's candidacy?
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)just doesn't meet the definition.
I hope the picture develops as you foresee but I can't see it as certain and I do wish the cooler heads like yourself would fire up a bit to keep the pressure on to make sure it does. You know make them do it rather than hoping and expecting the best as we are way behind the count on the environment, quite possibly to the point of some dire ramifications already in the pipeline.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)what I believe is already in the works?
No ... I'd much rather save my fire for those that have demonstrated to be my opposition.
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)carry about every day even with tremendous public pressure and win every time left unchecked.
I also accept that the TeaPubliKlans are fucking intractable and wrong about virtually everything in time and space and what pitiful and precious things they might on rare occasion appear correct on is arrived at by some tortured logic that dictates hundreds of trillions of gallons of disgusting sewage of a "bathwater" that make finding any baby to be statistically impossible once applied consistently.
So, the only point of fire on those fools is to eliminate them and their utterly bankrupt and failed ideology but there seems to be considerable resistance to both from roots to the tippy top so hellfire on the politicians supposedly on our side is mission critical to even tread water from my point of view.
These folks only ever work for us at great need in fear that the powerful will be brought down or the golden goose might get cooked.
It is best to maintain constant pressure in the correct direction and gnawing need to serve the people because power never concedes.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,294 posts)You're guessing, and hoping, that he won't support XL. But, as winter is coming says, if he knew he didn't want it, he could have killed it long ago. It looks more likely that he still hasn't decided what to do.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)If you find yourself agreeing with the gop and at odds with many duers, you might want to reevaluate your position.
What you are really saying.
Funny how the gop(and 1StrongBlackMan) can see this but DUers, can't. That is the exact thought you are having here.
Please show where Obama has said Keysone will not happen during his term. Don't stop fighting against it because of your feelings that are based off very limited information. Stand with us and fight against it, it has not been shot down in any way.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I should ignore the gop when a Democratic President does something to make them wince because DUers that do not support this Democratic President wish to ignore the gop's wincing.
Autumn
(45,019 posts)Then all DUers can see.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)
G_j
(40,366 posts)what he will do.. It ain't over yet.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)There is money galore on an issue like this. It would be short sighted to throw that away. What we do know is that the united states will surpass saudi arabia in oil production. That doesn't happen in an anti oil environment.
That BP apparently got a wrist slap for the gulf disaster speaks to that.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)Which way it is pending is elusive.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)And I have no idea what he'll ultimately do and when. He doesn't have to ask for my advice or tell me which way he'll decide. I'll bet he doesn't tell you either.
I remain hopeful that he'll do the right thing and kill this thing, even though I've been disappointed in him many times in the past.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)..if he'd have approved it, Dems would be pissed at him and stayed home this fall, and if he didn't approve it his DINO candidates would have had an even harder time..
This way, he removes it as a political football until after the election and THEN he can approve it with zero repercussions electorally from his own party...
Trust me...he's signing the deal...
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I'll grant you ... he is playing politics; Democratic politics.
Have you ever paused to consider, if he were so hot on approving XL, why didn't he do it in 2009 ... when he had better standing in the House and the Senate and a willing Sec. of State?
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...and that's hard to do when as a "dem" you've just screwed the planet..
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)The Administration won't denounce the XL pipeline because certain Democratic Senators need the President to support the issue in order to get elected. Chances are those Senators would continue to support the pipeline after they are elected.
Bottom line: Liberals have to support policies that we vehemently oppose in order to elect Senators that will do things we don't want.
Cha
(297,029 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)but were selective when it came to choosing facts about it. Case in point was the Politico garbage article posted in another thread on Saturday. Everyone was up in a huff with the delay, but no one mentioned that during the comment period there were 2.5 million comments made. The number of comments were "unprecedented" (not my words, that is the description from the State Department).
The Politico article:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251360963
Here's another thread, no mention of the public comments:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024841347
How about another, nope:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024852248
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,868 posts)Even if the ruling is upheld by the Supreme Court, I think the NPSC is inclined to approve it. If that happens I think the administration will approve it.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Last edited Tue Apr 22, 2014, 09:59 AM - Edit history (1)
But frankly, I don't see putting the decision off til after the elections as indicating anything about the actual fate of the decision, merely a political decision based upon how he and his advisors see the various elections shaping up.
Not having decided beforehand lets him avoid all sorts of political pitfalls, and allows the RW of the Dem party to keep talking up how they're pressing him to decide in favour of it to boost their own re-election chances, and helps the LWers of the party not to lose votes from people skipping the elections if he were to decide in favour of it in advance of elections.
No matter what he decides, some large chunk of the party is going to be upset, so really, again, all it tells me is that he'd rather make that section upset after the midterms, and with a full two years until the next Presidentials.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)were to support marriage equality, the election would be lost and it would be a Republican sweep.' The week before Obama announced that he's 'evolved' on the matter many on DU were still insisting that if he supported prior to the election, he could not win and Democrats would all be sent packing, it was pragmatic and we could not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. But then Obama spoke out before the election and guess what? He won that election. So the 'if then' crowd was not correct, nor pragmatic nor strategic. What they were was fearful, craven and lacking in confidence in Obama and Democratic voters.
So it has become impossible to take the 'I see the future and if we do X then Y will happen' crowd seriously at all. When such claims are made simply to insult other Democratic voters, I have to wonder about the whole thing.
Skip Intro
(19,768 posts)But doing so now would demoralize part of the Dem base the party hopes to fire up before the November elections.
Why postpone good news?
Kinda like with the ACA - if the law is working so wonderfully, why has he put off large chunks of it until after the 14 and 16 elections?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)would not be Good News for Landrieu's (D-LA), Heitkamp (D-NE), Begich (D-Alaska), Pryor (D-Arkansas), Manchin (D-W.Va.), McCaskill (D-Mo.), Tester (D-Mont.), Walsh (D-Mont.) or Hagan (D-N.C.). Or rather, their electorate.
All of which are needed if Democrats hope to retain the Senate.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Now the question is, if/when the State Department kills, or send XL back to the drawing board (effectively killing it), we you revisit your bookmark ... Or will this just be another issue that gets ignored?
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Democrats would need to support all Democrats running to win the House and hold the Senate. I doesn't take much far-sightedness to see that .., even back in 2012, after the election, the pundit class began identifying vulnerable Democrats for 2014; Landrieu has consistently been at the top of the list.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)any reason is an excuse for those unwilling to acknowledge the legitimacy of the reason. That does not make the reason illegitimate or incorrect.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)They're excuses.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)All reasons are excuses for those unwilling to acknowledge the legitimacy of the reason.
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)It'll make it easier for me to find after the 2014 elections.
Now the question is, if/when the State Department kills, or send XL back to the drawing board (effectively killing it), we you revisit your bookmark ... Or will this just be another issue that gets ignored?
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)Did you have to defend a schoolbus bully again?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Not hardly.
The question stands ... Will you re-visit your book-mark after the 2014 election?
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)All the evidence I can see is certainly pointing that way.....let's make sure it STAYS that way.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)a significant segment of Landrieu's voter pool absolutely hates everything President Obama. The best thing that President Obama can do for her is give her something she can appear to fight against. The delay gives her exactly that.
TransitJohn
(6,932 posts)I read it a lot differently.