Color me unimpressed.
News that President Obama has authorized limited drilling by Shell off the Alaskan coast was just the latest in a series of energy decisions made by the President that betray his environmental credibility.
Although the Republicans have attempted to make a lot of hay with the Solyndra failure, relatively little initiative toward a clean energy future has been forthcoming under Obama. He continues to favor nuclear and the oxymoronic “clean coal,” still prioritizing expansion of domestic supply over any real progress in the country’s commitment to energy efficiency.
I will not dispute the fact that he has temporarily halted the Keystone XL pipeline, and, through the EPA, advanced the timeline for more fuel-efficient automobiles; but let’s not kid ourselves, there is every reason to believe that he will ultimately cave on Keystone as he has on Arctic drilling; and we know that even with the EPA’s new timeline, the U.S. is way behind the fuel efficiency curve and not trying all that hard to catch-up.
We can see where this drilling off the coast of Alaska is headed. It may begin as a “cautious” trial but is almost guaranteed to expand to deep-water drilling before you know it.
Instead of making a stronger argument for reducing consumption; an argument that, even economically, makes the best long-term sense; President Obama has moved further to the right on this issue.
By embracing the Republican meme that we cannot do more with less oil, he has given them the upper hand on all things energy; because whatever drilling he authorizes, whatever regulations he relaxes and whatever dirty industry he enables, it will never be enough to satisfy the right-wing demand for total deregulation.
I think that this is a strategic mistake not just from an environmental standpoint, but also from a political one.
I seem to recall a successful candidate for Hope and Change who wasn’t afraid to be a one-term president.
By drawing a sharp contrast between his social positions and those of his Republican opponents, the President has solidified and expanded his appeal, even in the face of discouraging economic times.
I believe that he stands a better chance of winning over the undecideds by not caving to the right on environmental regulation.
By making the case for bolder rules and clean energy initiatives, drawing a deep and vivid distinction between the economic future that responsible environmental decisions will provide for our children and the toxic spiral of catastrophe that would result from deregulation under a Republican administration, the President can demonstrate his charismatic leadership and make good on his promise of real change.
I Hope it isn’t too late for that Change!
Obama’s environmental record – and specifically his record on energy policies and climate change — is certainly mixed, but he never made any bones about his support for nuclear and “clean coal.” Both positions have been consistent since before he took office.
Still, it’s quite unfair to write “… relatively little initiative toward a clean energy future has been forthcoming under Obama.” Unless I’m quite mistaken, Obama’s stimulus bill included more money for renewables than all presidents before him COMBINED. The amount, as I recall, was in the range of $90 billion.
There remains a great deal to be done, and considerable doubt as to how much more Obama is willing to do. Those who care about this issue and climate change must put pressure on the President to insure that he will continue to invest heavily in these areas.
Every time — default is to the right. The republicans move the (political football) to 3rd down and 20, Obama defense has 22 men on the field. Obama has a man wide open in the end zone and looks at him, instead he tosses a lateral for a gain of 2 yards. Sound familiar? This is the Democratic party on leadership in Washington DC. and it’s pretty sickening, so much so it’s melting the ice cap!
“News that President Obama has authorized limited drilling by Shell off the Alaskan coast”
The Democrat’s role in politics (since the Democratic leadership handed over control of the Democratic Party to the GOP in the Iran-Contra Treason of the 1980s) has been to be the Backup Party.
Whenever the GOP screws up really, really badly, such as after the 12 years of George Bush, the Elder and 8 years of George Bush, Junior, the nation votes for the other guy. The role of The Other Guy is not to change anything the GOP has set in motion, or to craft new policies on their own, the sole purpose of the Democratic Leadership today is to pass as much
proGOP legislation as possible.The purpose of this is two-fold. 1) to continue the programs of the GOP no matter what (see: more pro-GOP legislation passed under Clinton than Bush Sr
andhow Obama has been ‘pandering’ to the right the whole time in office), and 2) to piss of the Democratic Voter so that the GOP wins the next election cycle. (vis: Obama’s pre-caving to the far right in almost all important legislation negotiations).Also note how Obama and the Dems did almost nothing while they had 2 years of majority and since then have passed the far-right wing ACA (Euphemistically called ‘Obamacare’).
The sole purpose of National Dems is to be a release valve for the discontent against the GOP and to hand power back to the GOP ASAP.
Of course Obama is in favor of the far-right plan to drill for oil everywhere. Obama is in reality a moderate Republican, as evidenced by the policies Obama has been promulgating.