Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

FINAL SUBSCRIPTION DRIVE OF 2014

We've just started our final subscription drive of the year.   People subscribe or donate to Urgent Agenda for two reasons – first, and most important, to support our work, and, second, to receive The Angel's Corner, our most popular feature.  The Angel's Corner is our e-mailed page sent twice a week only to subscribers and donators.   It contains the Forum, where you can write at any reasonable length on any subject you wish.  Readers eagerly await the Forum to see what their Urgent Agenda colleagues are saying, and they say a great deal.

To subscribe, to support our work and receive The Angel's Corner, simply go to SUBSCRIPTIONS, in the right-hand column of our site, right opposite these words.  You can subscribe or donate through PayPal, which most readers do.  But we offer other subscription methods.  If you don't like any of them, send us an e-mail at service@urgentagenda.com, and we'll give you a standard mailing address.

Current subscribers or donators can enhance their participation, which is doubly appreciated.

We are in critical times.  We are already covering the runup to the 2016 presidential election, which will be one of the most important in our modern history.  Urgent Agenda will be there every day.  We hope you'll join us.

NOVEMBER 18,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. ET: 

TOASTED MARY – The Senate rejected the Keystone Pipeline by one vote today, crushing Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who hoped to get the project passed as a way of boosting her chances in her runoff election December 6th.  Polls show her trailing Republican Bill Cassidy by double digits, so they will almost certainly lose her seat.  The victory for pipeline opponents is only symbolic, though.  The new Senate, which will be controlled by Republicans, will vote on the project after it's seated in January, and pass it.  Then, of course, Obama will decide whether to veto a project popular with the American people.

GOOD MOVE – From Powerline:  "The House of Representative has chosen law professor Jonathan Turley to represent it in a lawsuit against the Obama administration. The suit challenges changes the administration made to Obamacare without congressional authorization.  The hiring of Turley has been praised by some conservatives because Turley is a liberal. He voted for Obama in 2008, supports national health care, and so forth.  Turley’s status as a liberal may, indeed, be one reason why the Republican House hired him. The leadership may believe that having Turley on the case dispels the view that the lawsuit is a partisan crusade."  I can't wait for the courtroom fireworks.  Get your popcorn now.

SUCH CLASS – From Fox:  "Muslim groups have stepped up efforts to co-opt protests over the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., with a drive to equate the teen’s death to the death of a radical Islamist shot during an FBI raid in 2009, a Washington-based security watchdog group is warning.  Using social media, conference calling and traditional outreach methods, leaders of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) are portraying Brown and Detroit mosque leader Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah as African-American victims of police targeting, according to the Washington-based Center for Security Policy (CSP). In a conference call organized by CAIR-linked 'Muslims for Ferguson,' a CAIR official called Abdullah a 'Shaheed,' or martyr, and said both he and Brown were victims of a national security apparatus that had 'completely gone wild' and engaged in 'demonizing and criminalizing Muslims.'"  This can get very ugly.  I'd love to see how CNN justifies Muslim involvement.  I'm sure Christiane Amanpour will have a deep answer.

DON'T FORGET UKRAINE – From AFP:  "Moscow (AFP) - Germany's foreign minister said Tuesday he was not optimistic about an end to the conflict in Ukraine because of a 'dangerous' escalation of fighting in the east.  Frank-Walter Steinmeier made the downbeat assessment after NATO's secretary-general spoke of a 'very serious build-up' of troops, artillery and air defence systems inside Ukraine and on the Russian side of the border.  Steinmeier was the first senior European minister to visit Moscow since July, in a sign of how relations between the West and Russia have dived to a post-Cold War low over the conflict in eastern Ukraine.  'There are no grounds for optimism in the current situation,' Steinmeier said at a press conference after talks with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in Moscow."  Notice the deep concern in Washington and in the Obama press.  This has the potential to blow up in our faces.  Actual combat in that region, with Russian involvement, is a lit fuse.  Someone tell Obama.  Someone tell him where Ukraine is.

November 18, 2014       Permalink

OUTRAGEOUS – AT 11:51 A.M. ET:  The Obama administration is making another intrusion into our educational system.  This cannot be good.  From Investor's Business Daily: 

Just as school boards across the country scramble to meet new federal limits for punishing black students, Obama's educrats now want them to hit racial quotas for academic performance, too.

Last month, slipping almost everybody's notice, the Education Department's office for civil rights issued a guidance letter to 14,000 local school districts that expands "racial equity" beyond school discipline into virtually every aspect of public education.

Breathtaking in its scope, the 37-page edict warns school boards that they have to reach the same equity, based on "disparate impact" statistics, in:

1) advanced placement courses;
2) gifted and talented programs;
3) distribution of funds;
4) school facilities;
5) technology; and,
6) teacher talent, experience and diversity.

Those who don't get their numbers right risk forfeiting federal funding and being investigated for discrimination. It doesn't matter if school policies provide black students equal access to fast-track programs and resources. Or if standards are color-blind.

If disproportionate numbers of African-Americans don't avail themselves of those policies, schools can expect a visit from Obama's diversity cops.

"School districts that receive federal funds must not implement facially neutral policies that have the unjustified effect of discriminating against students on the basis of race," warned Catherine E. Lhamon, assistant education secretary for civil rights.

"In assessing the allocation of educational resources, OCR (Office of Civil Rights) will investigate and analyze the evidence found under both theories of discrimination — intentional discrimination and disparate impact — to ensure that students are not subjected to unlawful discrimination."

From now on, racial imbalances in "advanced placement and international baccalaureate courses, gifted and talent programs" and other honors programs will be flagged by Obama's racial bean counters. If your school has "too many" whites and Asians and "too few" blacks in those programs, you might want to lawyer up.

"Students of color are less likely than their white peers to be enrolled in those courses and programs," Lhamon says, adding that "such disparities may be indicative of broader discriminatory policies or practices that, even if facially neutral, disadvantage students of color.

COMMENT:  In other words, parents, community leaders, and students themselves, have no responsibility here.  That, of course, is the very source of the problem.  Groups are not the same.  Cultures are not the same.  They are not "equal."  Schools are now ordered to ignore real differences and take responsibility for outcomes that are impossible to achieve, given the cultural gaps that exist in society.

This is left-wing madness, but I doubt if you'll see too much about it in the mainstream media.  The mainstreamers are too busy waiting around for their honorary degrees and commencement-address invitations. 

The civil rights office of the Department of Education is one of the most reckless offices of the government.  Run by extreme leftists, it is set up essentially to serve only certain favored groups.  No one else need apply.

Only a change in administrations will force reform.

November 18, 2014       Permalink

SOMEONE NOTICED – AT 10:58 A.M. ET:  There does seem to be at least some awareness on the left that part of the Democratic Party is nuts.  From Dana Milbank at the Washington Post, who notes protests by environmentally fanatical Democrats outside Mary Landrieu's house because she's for the Keystone Pipeline: 

The emerging purists on the left aren’t nearly as strong as the tea party was (and they won’t be, as long as there’s a Democrat in the White House), but it’s noteworthy that Democrats are becoming more willing to purge those who aren’t ideologically pure.

The midterm elections, a protest against Washington dysfunction, have paradoxically reinforced the problem by sweeping moderate Democrats out of the Senate (and a few who had remained in the House). Many liberals will now say — as Republicans did after the 2006 and 2008 defeats — that the way back to the majority is to be pugnaciously progressive. This will be seen with immigration and other issues, too. President Obama has shown little interest so far in compromise, and Harry Reid, becoming Senate minority leader, is a former boxer who still loves to brawl.

There were seven police vehicles outside Landrieu’s house, a double-size, red-brick townhouse with shutters drawn, pink roses still blooming in front, a New Orleans Saints door ornament and a bumper sticker in the sidelight announcing “I’m with Mary.” But they didn’t intervene, even when the activists posed for photos on Landrieu’s front steps with their “Vote No KXL” signs. A guy in a San Francisco Giants cap led a call-and-repeat chant taunting Landrieu.

Karthik Ganapathy, a coordinator of the event from the climate-change group 350, was also pleased with the prospect of a smaller, more liberal Democratic caucus in the Senate. I asked whether he saw any difference between Landrieu and Cassidy.

“If there is, it’s marginal,” Ganapathy said. “And we think the value gained in showing the Democratic Party that they need to be better on climate issues outweighs the marginal differences. . . . This is about sort of instigating a cultural shift and a political shift that sends a message to politicians that they all need to be better on climate issues.”

In other words: Be pure, or be afraid.

COMMENT:  The genius of American politics historically is that we stressed practicality and common sense.  What happened to those virtues?  Today, as Milbank notes, the stress is on ideological correctness, much as it is on the European left.  I don't want us to become like Europe.  Europe, from demographic trends alone, is dying.  We're not going to die for ideology.

Read all of Milbank's piece.  It's well done.

November 18, 2014       Permalink

IRAN TALKS DOWN TO THE WIRE – AT 9:46 A.M. ET:  Next Monday is the deadline for achieving an agreement in the Iran nuclear talks.  The sides are still very far apart, but there is a fear among grown-ups in the United States that, in the end, Obama will cave in and grant dangerous concessions, just to get a deal.  I stress that this is a fear.  We'd like to be pleasantly surprised and learn that it isn't true.  From Business Week: 

Iranians are expressing more optimism than their U.S. and European counterparts as international negotiations resume over the Islamic Republic’s disputed nuclear program.

In the final push to reach a deal before a self-imposed Nov. 24 deadline, each side in the negotiations between Iran and six world powers is making the case that an accord is still possible, if only the other side would act reasonably when the talks resume today in Vienna.

An accord would place curbs on Iran’s nuclear program in return for easing or lifting economic sanctions that have hobbled its economy. Russia has emerged as a potential linchpin if the two sides can agree for Iran to ship enriched uranium out of the country for the Russians to fabricate into fuel for nuclear reactors.

Even so, Russia’s chief negotiator, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, said in an interview that his government sees no sign of political will in either Iran or the U.S. to make the concessions required for a deal.

“We have no evidence that the necessary decisions have been taken in the major capitals,” Ryabkov said.

U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the closed-door talks, said gaps remain even after some progress that stemmed from last week’s meeting between Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in Oman.

Kerry, who plans to join the talks in Vienna later this week, is scheduled to meet in London today with Oman’s foreign minister, who has just visited Tehran.

COMMENT:  It is just so adolescent to believe that Iran will give up its nuclear program simply because we say, "Pretty please."  Tehran knows it is dealing with a weak, leftist, American president.  It is clear that the Iranians believe time is on their side.  Each day without a permanent agreement, including inspections, brings them closer to the bomb. 

And if no agreement is reached?  What do we do then?  Obama has claimed that the military option is still on the table, but his body language suggests otherwise.  I suspect that, if we can't reach an agreement, Obama will allow a nuclear Iran, and go into a deterrence mode.  To put it mildly, that will unsettle the Middle East and make Iran a major player in regional politics.  As the Iranians perfect their long-range missiles, that will make them a major player in world politics.  Another Obama victory.

November 18, 2014       Permalink

INCIDENT IN JERUSALEM – AT 9:05 A.M. ET:  Four people have been murdered in a Jerusalem synagogue by Palestinian terrorists.  Americans are among the victims.  From Fox: 

Three Americans were among four worshipers killed in a Jerusalem synagogue Tuesday by a pair of Palestinians wielding meat cleavers and a gun and shouting "Allahu Akbar" in a brutal attack that prompted a vow from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to "respond harshly."

The American citizens -- identified as Aryeh Kupinsky, Kalmen Levin and Moshe Twersky -- were killed along with a Briton when the assailants, identified as cousins, stormed the building and began attacking people. Police said those killed were all immigrants to Israel and held dual citizenship.

Eight others were injured -- one critically -- before the attackers were killed in a shootout with police. The Times of Israel cited witnesses who said the attackers stormed the synagogue, in the ultra-Orthodox Har Nof neighborhood in the western part of Jerusalem, shouting "Allahu Akbar," Arabic for "God is Great," and creating a horrific scene of bloody carnage.

"I tried to escape. The man with the knife approached me. There was a chair and table between us ... my prayer shawl got caught. I left it there and escaped," a man who identified himself as Yossi, who was praying at the synagogue at the time of the attack, told Israeli Channel 2 TV. He declined to give his last name.

The attack was the deadliest in Israel's capital since 2008, when a Palestinian gunman shot eight people in a religious seminary school.

Netanyahu vowed that Israel will "respond harshly" to the attack, which he denounced as a "cruel murder of Jews who came to pray and were killed by despicable murderers." U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said he spoke to Netanyahu after the assault and denounced it as an "act of pure terror and senseless brutality and violence."

COMMENT:  Yeah, everyone takes Big John seriously when he "condemns" these attacks.  We all know the guy he works for, who comes from a political class that teaches that we "understand" the attackers. 

We are facing horrible ideologies.  But too many of those in power, in government and journalism, really don't want to know.  They remind me of some American diplomats in Germany in the 1930s, who really didn't want to know very much about Nazi ideology.   Our young men paid a price.

November 18,  2014     Permalink

NOVEMBER 17,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:40 P.M. ET: 

TROUBLE AHEAD – From the Washington Post:  "Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon (D) declared a state of emergency Monday in anticipation of possible unrest following the announcement of findings of two separate criminal investigations into the death of Michael Brown, the unarmed black teenager killed by a Ferguson, Mo. police officer.  'Regardless of the outcomes of the federal and state criminal investigations, there is the possibility of expanded unrest,' Nixon said in an executive order. 'The state of Missouri will be prepared to appropriately respond to any reaction to these announcements.'  Nixon said in the order he directed the Missouri State Highway Patrol, St. Louis County Police Department, and St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department to 'operate as a Unified Command to protect civil rights' and put the St. Louis County Police Department in charge of security in Ferguson related to protest areas and demonstrations."  Pretty pathetic when people will riot because they don't agree with a verdict.  This isn't about civil rights.  It's about power in the community.

MARY'S CLAIM – From the Washington Examiner:  "Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., told reporters that she has enough votes to pass a bill to build the Keystone XL oil sands pipeline, which comes up for a vote Tuesday.  Asked whether the vote count was still at 59 — one shy of the 60 needed to blow up a filibuster — Landrieu said, 'It's not. I feel very comfortable,' Landrieu said in the Capitol, with a smile. 'It may be more [than 60].'  There's few senators still in play for the bill from Landrieu and Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., which comes on the heels of the House last week passing identical legislation sponsored by Rep. Bill Cassidy, R-La., Landrieu's Dec. 6 runoff opponent.  It's a bill that's rife with electoral politics. Landrieu has portrayed herself as a dealmaker in the upper chamber while national Republican organizations have said she's ineffective, in part because a May attempt to bring up the same legislation failed."  If Landrieu cannot produce 60 votes, she's toast.  Even if she can, Obama will veto the bill, leaving Mary with bragging rights, but no pipeline.  She is considered an almost certain loser in the Louisiana runoff.

THE LUCKY BRIDE – From London's Daily Mail:  "Mass murderer Charles Manson has been issued a license to marry a 26-year-old woman who visits him in prison.  The Kings County marriage license, viewed Monday by The Associated Press, was issued Nov. 7 for the 80-year-old Manson and Afton Elaine Burton, who left her Midwestern home nine years ago and moved to Corcoran, California — the site of the prison — to be near Manson.  She maintains several websites advocating Manson's innocence."  To quote the legendary Hollywood producer, David Brown, in regard to another matter, "This will do for marriage what 'Jaws' did for beaches."

AL GORE KNOWS – From Accuweather:  "The coldest air since last winter, now over the Plains and Midwest, will blast into the East during the first half of this week.  The core of the frigid air will focus over the northern Plains and the Great Lakes through at least Wednesday with overnight lows dipping down into the teens, single digits and even near zero F in the coldest spots.  Bone-chilling nights will be followed up by frosty cold days with highs struggling to reach the 20-degree mark over the regions on Monday and Tuesday. Some locations in the Central states are forecast to stay below 20 F until Wednesday afternoon, including Minneapolis."  Al Gore knows this is caused by global warming.  And the unusually mild summer we just had?  Global warming.  Blizzards?  Global warming.  No weather at all?  Global warming.  I'm going to the doctor tomorrow.  I have signs of global warming.

November 17,  2014     Permalink

IN CRITICAL CONDITION – AT 11:58 A.M. ET:  The latest polling on Obamacare gives us a perfect picture of a sinking ship.  From The Hill:

A new survey finds that approval of ObamaCare is lower than ever before.

Thirty-seven percent of Americans approve of the Affordable Care Act, according to a new survey from Gallup.

The previous low was in January, when 38 percent said they approved of the law. At that time, the White House was still recovering from the disastrous launch of HealthCare.gov, the website where consumers could search for health insurance plans.

Gallup found that approval of the law splits radically along party lines.

Democrats approve of ObamaCare at much higher rates, while just 8 percent of Republicans approve.

Approval fell among independents. In October, 39 percent of independents approved of the law. Now, 33 percent approve.

The survey found that a majority of nonwhites still approved of the law. But for the first time, Gallup found that nonwhite approval did not top 60 percent, as approval ratings among nonwhites dropped 6 points. Twenty-nine percent of whites approved of the law.

COMMENT:  Obviously, a disaster.  The White House won't admit it, but this is what you get when you ram through a huge social program without any bipartisan support. 

Revising Obamacare is a golden opportunity for Republicans.  Let's move, Republican leaders.  Let's get on it.

November 17, 2014        Permalink

A WARNING – AT 10:52 A.M. ET:   Readers will want to know that we're seeing a number of warnings from leaders and economists about the world economy.  There is, for example, trouble in Japan.  From BBC: 

Japan's economy unexpectedly shrank for the second consecutive quarter, leaving the world's third largest economy in technical recession.

Gross domestic product (GDP) fell at an annualised 1.6% from July to September, compared with forecasts of a 2.1% rise.

That followed a revised 7.3% contraction in the second quarter, which was the biggest fall since the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.

Economists said the weak economic data could delay a sales tax rise.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is widely expected to call a snap election to seek a mandate to delay an increase in the sales tax to 10%, scheduled for 2015.

The tax increase was legislated by the previous government in 2012 to curb Japan's huge public debt, which is the highest among developed nations.

April saw the first phase of the sales tax increase, from 5% to 8%, which hit growth in the second quarter and still appears to be having an impact on the economy.

And Prime Minister David Cameron is sounding warnings.  Again, from BBC: 

"Red warning lights" are once again flashing over the state of the global economy, the prime minister has said.

David Cameron said weak growth in Europe, a slowdown in Asia and conflicts around the world had created a "dangerous backdrop of instability".

Chancellor George Osborne said the UK was outperforming many other economies but it was vital the government was not "diverted" from its long-term goals.

Labour said Britain's economic recovery was still not being felt at home.

Mr Cameron is making a statement to Parliament on the state of global economy and the outcome of the G20 summit of world leaders in Australia.

In an article in the Guardian, Mr Cameron said "red warning lights are once again flashing on the dashboard of the global economy" - six years on from the crash that "brought the world to its knees".

He said: "The eurozone is teetering on the brink of a possible third recession, with high unemployment, falling growth and the real risk of falling prices too.

"Emerging markets, which were the driver of growth in the early stages of the recovery, are now slowing down."

COMMENT:  I have not yet heard the wisdom of Barack Obama on this (choke), but I'm sure that, if something really bad happens, he'll blame it on BUSH !!!!  Or CHENEY !!!!!!

Our economy is not doing well.  Job creation figures may have "improved," but a second look shows us that the jobs being created are nothing to write home about.  And incomes for the middle class have stagnated.

Further, we have a presidential election coming up.  The world's economic leaders will be looking to us.  Last time we gave them, as leader of the world's most powerful country, a glorified town councilman.  What will we do next time?

November 17, 2014       Permalink

WHAT WAS THE ELECTION ABOUT? – AT 9:53 A.M. ET:   We're chronically told by those who "know" that the election was about the economy.  That it's always about the economy.  But having watched public reaction to events over the last year, some of us actually believe that the American people had other serious concerns as well.  Namely, foreign policy and the growing weakness of this country.  The Weekly Standard agrees, in a piece called "A Foreign Policy Election": 

Exit polls from last week’s midterm elections challenged the conventional “it’s the economy, stupid” wisdom, as the number of voters who said the economy was the most important issue fell to just four in ten. The dark horse issue of the 2014 election was foreign policy.

Our experience campaigning on the ground in a battleground state reflected this reality. We were in Arkansas last week helping with get-out-the-vote efforts for Republican candidates. Foreign policy doesn’t usually make its way into campaign speeches, but this year’s midterm election cycle was different. At a rally the day before the election, Senate candidate Tom Cotton discussed international threats—ISIS and Iran—and the need for a strong national defense to combat these threats. And on election night, Congressman-elect French Hill talked about the need for American leadership in the world during his acceptance speech.

Candidates were talking about foreign policy issues because 2014 saw crises emerge in nearly every region of the world – and in poll after poll we saw the issues skyrocket to the top of voters’ priority lists in the weeks leading up to the elections. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll from October ranked national security as the third most important issue to voters. Exit polls last week showed foreign policy was on voters’ minds on Election Day too, staying at third on their priority lists, behind only the economy and health care and tied with immigration. Nearly 3 in 4 Americans said they were worried about a terrorist attack on U.S. soil – the highest number since the post-9/11 elections.

Republicans in Arkansas and around the country benefitted from the increased emphasis on national security issues this election cycle. Exit poll data indicated that a majority of voters who said foreign policy was the most important issue voted for Republican candidates. Now that Republicans will have majorities on both sides of Capitol Hill in January, the question remains what if anything they will do to steer the direction of foreign policy.

COMMENT:  Read the whole piece.  It's worth it.  Foreign policy (or national security) is what I call a "foundation issue."  It's basic, but people often don't bring it up without being asked.  It's something citizens assume is being taken care of, like policing or criminal justice.  But when the electorate gets the sense that something is wrong – and they've gotten that sense with Obama – they do react at the polls.

Some years ago I interviewed the late Charles Kuralt of CBS News.  Many of you will recall that he did the "On the Road" series, traveling around the country speaking to ordinary Americans.  I asked him, "What is the most important thing you learned in all your years driving around this country?"  Without hesitation, he replied, "I am always amazed at how well informed Americans are."   Now, the intellectual classes would sneer at that, but it's true.  Americans, despite all the exceptions, are generally well informed, at least on the basics of issues.  And they are serious.  (Proof:  Notice, during election campaigns, how tracking polls change as soon as something important happens.  Americans are listening.)

Foreign policy is always an issue, even in background.  When the editor, Tina Brown, was recently asked why many women seem to be turning away from Obama, she replied that Obama doesn't make women feel safe.  That is a foreign-policy judgment.

And yes, I think those judgments will seriously count in 2016.  And the Democratic candidate, assuming it's Hillary, will have to defend the failed foreign policy that she administered.

November 17, 2014       Permalink

KEYSTONE, THE SENATE VOTE – AT 9:07 A.M. ET:  The House passed authorization for the Keystone Pipeline last week, in a sudden coming-to-life of the issue.  The Senate votes tomorrow.  There may well be cynical reasons, but this is the first time both houses will get a chance to vote on the issue.  From Fox: 

The Democrat-controlled Senate is expected to take a long-awaited vote Tuesday on approving the Keystone XL oil pipeline -- in an unexpected and politically-charged turn of events for legislation that has languished in the upper chamber for roughly six years.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will allow the vote in part to give Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu an opportunity to vote “yea” and perhaps help her win her runoff election next month against Republican challenger Rep. Bill Cassidy.

However, Landrieu’s political future and the fate of the bill remain highly uncertain.

Most political analysts think Landrieu’s effort to win a fourth term by trying to show voters in oil-rich Louisiana how much she supports Keystone is a lost cause, with reports of Washington Democrats pulling out and polls showing Cassidy ahead by double digits.

South Dakota GOP Sen. John Thune said on “Fox News Sunday” the vote will be a “cynical attempt to save a Senate seat in Louisiana," considering Reid has blocked the vote for years.

President Obama appears to be giving every indication that he will veto the bill, repeatedly saying the only way the $8 billion pipeline can be approved is after the completion of a long-stalled State Department review. There is also the pending outcome of a legal challenge to the pipeline's route through Nebraska.

They've studied this to death.  The real reason for Obama's position is the power of radical environmentalists within the Democratic Party.  Some of them write large checks to campaigns.

And during his recent trip to Australia for an economic summit Obama said: “I have to constantly push back against this idea that somehow the Keystone pipeline is either this massive jobs bill for the United States or is somehow lowering gas prices.”

Maybe, maybe not.  But the oil will be flowing from Canada, one of our closest allies, and they want that pipeline.  It will also give us a ready supply of petroleum, adding to the new finds in this country that are improving our energy picture so much. 

Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse told “Fox News Sunday” that he hopes Obama will veto the bill, considering the oil is “the filthiest fuel on the planet.”

Same old stuff.  We now have ways of making petroleum energy cleaner as we wait for green energy to finally prove itself.

Whitehouse said he thinks the new Senate Republican majority “has long despised and denigrated this president and if they can roll him I think they would like to.”

He also argued that Senate Republicans twice passed on voting on a Democrat-sponsored Keystone bill.

The analysts think the 100-member Senate is now one vote shy of the 60 needed for passing Keystone. (They have the 59 votes as 14 Democrats and all 45 Republicans.)

COMMENT:  The pipeline has always been a net positive for the United States.  It will actually add very little to the thousands of miles of existing pipelines.  It will prevent the Canadian oil from going to China, which has lower environmental standards.  But Obama will veto the bill, even if it passes the Senate.  It will take a new president to get Keystone.

November 17,  2014     Permalink