Obama says he’ll address Keystone Pipeline concerns

posted at 4:05 pm on October 27, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Barack Obama is busy, busy, scattering largesse to the populace. Whatever he can say to win votes — he’ll say it. His address in Denver yesterday included not only the announcement of his highly impactful student loan program reforms, but also a testy reassurance that he’s taking into consideration concerns about a proposed pipeline — the Keystone XL — that would run from Canada to Texas:

During an event with young people in Denver, one activist interrupted Obama’s remarks, urging the president to reject the project.

“We’re looking at it right now, all right?” Obama replied. “No decision’s been made and I know your deep concern about it, so we will address it.”

Protesters who held up a banner reading: “Stop the Keystone Pipeline Project” were asked to leave.

Obama has been none too popular with his environmentalist constituency lately — not least because he hired Broderick Johnson, a former lobbyist for the Keystone XL, to be a senior adviser to his campaign. Given that, it’s difficult to envision Obama overriding the countless anti-pipeline protesters — including a number of celebrities — to throw his weight behind the Keystone project. He’ll probably just continue to hear their concerns and delay a decision.

But consider: By the Department of Energy’s own admission, access to Canadian oil sands could significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Some supporters for the pipeline have even made the case that construction and use of the pipeline is more ethical than the continued purchase of oil from a country that discriminates against women. Environmentalists insist the pipeline poses a risk to endangered species because spills could occur — but a State Department report has shown that to be unlikely. (Incidentally, in response to that report, three environmental groups sued the U.S. government this past Tuesday — another element of the Keystone drama that seems likely to push Obama to the left on this issue.) Perhaps most importantly, the pipeline will be a vehicle for the creation of thousands of jobs — the president’s purported top priority.

The only reason for Obama not to support the pipeline project is that it might cost him a few votes with lefty enviros. Oh, right. So, never mind. No wonder he’s delaying his decision.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The only reason for Obama not to support the pipeline project is that it might cost him a few votes with lefty enviros. Oh, right. So, never mind. No wonder he’s delaying his decision.

Oh, he’ll make a decision. Once the election is over.

Doughboy on October 27, 2011 at 4:09 PM

Delaying until he can get an accurate reading on which way the wind is blowing and how that translates into votes! A rudderless pathetic liar and loser.

rjoco1 on October 27, 2011 at 4:09 PM

If it was just about votes I don’t think he would hesitate to throw his green folks under the bus but he seems to want to destroy the energy sector and killing this would help do that.

Cindy Munford on October 27, 2011 at 4:11 PM

By the Department of Energy’s own admission, access to Canadian oil sands could significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Canada is one of the 57 states?

DaydreamBeliever on October 27, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Oil is dirty!!!!!

We need more GE Wind farms that kill wildlife by the tens of thousands (bats, birds, etc.)

OBAMA 2012!!!!………..cause you ain’t seen nuttin yet!!

PappyD61 on October 27, 2011 at 4:17 PM

I am just waiting with bated breath for bho to lose it when someone asks him a question he does not want to answer! Please let it be on film when he does so! I never listen to bho, but if this happens, I would watch and listen to it for hours! Dear joe, mo, and bho can not handle anyone who is not in lock step with them.
L

letget on October 27, 2011 at 4:17 PM

DOTUS!

D_________ of the United States.

PappyD61 on October 27, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Building the pipeline would create jobs and revenue. An alternative to the pipeline would be to build more refineries closer to the source of the oil. This would create a whole lot of construction jobs in several states as well as provide jobs for workers in the refineries. Then there would be the spin-off jobs created to support the construction and eventual refining. The steel, concrete, heavy machinery, and other industries would see benefits. This would also create a bunch of new tax revenue. Or, they can just do nothing. No pipeline, no refineries, no jobs, no revenue, but they can feel good about themselves.

DAT60A3 on October 27, 2011 at 4:21 PM

It does not matter what he goes for. Alberta oil will be burned somewhere and they will get the energy and the wealth from it. If not Texas and all of America as a whole it will be China.

tjexcite on October 27, 2011 at 4:27 PM

His address in Denver yesterday included not only the announcement of his highly impactful student loan program reforms….

The only impactful thing about that announcement was that it was a clear display of severe cranial-rectal impaction.

In other words, his head is up his you-know-what.

UltimateBob on October 27, 2011 at 4:30 PM

He’s delaying the decision so he can get contributions from both sides. He’ll come down against it because, in his view, oil is evil, at least from Canada or the U.S.

zmdavid on October 27, 2011 at 4:31 PM

He’ll probably just continue to hear their concerns and delay a decision.

No, he’ll just ignore it and hope it goes away. Or as he used to say, “PRESENT!”.

GarandFan on October 27, 2011 at 4:31 PM

What are the odds that any of the states the pipeline goes through will go for Obama? He certainly doesn’t want to help the Texas oil industry.

Perhaps most importantly, the pipeline will be a vehicle for the creation of thousands of jobs — the president’s purported top priority.

Oh, he wants to create jobs – but only union jobs and only in states that already support him.

zmdavid on October 27, 2011 at 4:36 PM

An alternative to the pipeline would be to build more refineries closer to the source of the oil.

It is better to build the refineries closer to the shipping port to send out if they need to and not for domestics use only. Hence Gulf of Mexico and Texas. If they refine it at the sources the option to ship it is not there from landlocked refinery. The raw oil is many types in one and when they send it they send it as one and if they refined it elsewhere they would need many pipes to do what one does.

tjexcite on October 27, 2011 at 4:43 PM

access to Canadian oil sands could significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil

So would drilling our own oil. This pipeline is a scheme by Big Oil/OPEC/Democrats to prevent a real drilling policy. They need to get it done while Obama is president because the scheme won’t fly once he’s out of there, unless a oil-profit-maximizer Republican like Perry takes over. If we get a decent president in 2012, we’ll be supersaturating the oil market with US oil and driving down the price so that the worthless Canadian sand oil won’t be practical in a few years.

Buddahpundit on October 27, 2011 at 4:43 PM

“By the Department of Energy’s own admission, access to Canadian oil sands could significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil…”

What about access to the United States oil sands…?

… Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on October 27, 2011 at 4:44 PM

Here’s a preview of the Wizard of Uhs’ remarks.

Left Coast Right Mind on October 27, 2011 at 4:46 PM

“His address in Denver yesterday ….. ”

Were there more than 15 people in attendance?

fogw on October 27, 2011 at 4:48 PM

An alternative to the pipeline would be to build more refineries closer to the source of the oil.

The Koch brothers used to own refineries in MN. There was a big one near Rosemount.

BobMbx on October 27, 2011 at 4:52 PM

This thing is happening. Obama will lose way many more votes from “everyone else” if he doe NOT approve this, than he would lose the environmentalist votes if he does approve it.

AlexB on October 27, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Strangely, I am seeing our grievance-monger-in-chief featured in one of those commercials where people are getting slapped in the face by the food they are trying to eat.

For a smart guy, he sure has a knack for painting himself into a corner.

singlemalt 18 on October 27, 2011 at 4:56 PM

DOTUS!

D_________ of the United States.

PappyD61 on October 27, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Ooh, so many choices – where to begin?

Midas on October 27, 2011 at 5:08 PM

The best solution would be to drill for our own oil and gas (I am sitting on a drill rig in the Gulf right now and we are not drilling at the moment). We should also be building more refineries, now in anticipation of their need. Then there is nuclear, natural gas, coal, and hydro power. Way down on the list are the unprofitable ones such as solar and wind.

DAT60A3 on October 27, 2011 at 5:15 PM

He has done so much to prevent job creation and economic recovery this would be nothing except the straw that broke the camels back, that is what he is nervous about. Pipelines are big projects billions of dollars and JOBS, well bo do you feel lucky.

tim c on October 27, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Later rather than sooner.

That’s so unlike Obama, when it comes to making decision about the oil industry and American energy independence/

Dr Evil on October 27, 2011 at 5:57 PM

Like the enviros aren’t going to vote for him anyway? What, they’ll vote for a Republican that “wants dirty air and water” over OJesus?

No chance, none at all.

Who is John Galt on October 27, 2011 at 6:17 PM

By the Department of Energy’s own admission, access to Canadian oil sands could significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil

I agree but do note that importing oil from Canada is still depending on foreign oil.

BTW Obama is voting present why am I not surprised?

skatz51 on October 27, 2011 at 6:41 PM

The only reason for Obama not to support the pipeline project is that it might cost him a few votes with lefty enviros.

Obama has more than one vote left?

percysunshine on October 27, 2011 at 8:01 PM

Now I’m really scared.

hpk1942 on October 27, 2011 at 9:25 PM

I’m nit-picking, but aren’t Canadian Oil sands a foreign source of oil? Jussayin’

Dopavash on October 28, 2011 at 9:59 AM