Breaking: Clinton Opposes Keystone Pipeline
September 22, 2015
Say WHAT?
After months of declining to take a position on the Keystone XL pipeline, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton says she opposes the construction of the project.
“I think it is imperative that we look at the Keystone XL pipeline as what I believe it is: A distraction from the important work we have to do to combat climate change, and, unfortunately from my perspective, one that interferes with our ability to move forward and deal with other issues,” she said during a campaign event in Iowa Tuesday.
“Therefore, I oppose it. I oppose it because I don’t think it’s in the best interest of what we need to do to combat climate change.”
Climate Denial Crock of the Week 
September 22, 2015 at 6:37 pm
Feel the Bern
September 22, 2015 at 6:53 pm
Well put. This is exactly why Bernie Sanders (and to a more limited degree, Martin O’Malley) should be in the race, and how he helps push a friendlier agenda to a mainstream candidate. If the race was just Biden vs. Clinton, I don’t see this happening.
Honestly, I don’t have a lot of trust for Hillary Clinton, and I wouldn’t be surprised if that means another pipeline with a different name would be acceptable eventually in an administration run by her, but at least she finally came out and said something concrete about the issue.
More info here:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/22/politics/hillary-clinton-opposes-keystone-xl-pipeline/index.html
Jeb Bush says she’s favoring ‘environmental extremists’ over jobs (perhaps more specifically, two jobs held by brothers with ‘K’ as a last initial), and Jindal’s going all conspiracy up in hurra.
The big question remaining on Keystone itself is whether the Obama Administration will have the billiards to squash it before the end of its term or if they’ll pass it on to the next President.
September 22, 2015 at 6:41 pm
I’ll bet Clinton opposes the pipeline like Obama was for transparent government .
September 22, 2015 at 8:13 pm
Finally. No going back now.
September 23, 2015 at 1:14 am
She didn’t say she wouldn’t approve it. She said she opposed it.
Now watch out for it being a bargaining object with the republicans.
September 23, 2015 at 6:34 am
True, but hopefully it won’t be needed as it would be such a backward step.
September 23, 2015 at 7:42 am
Under what circumstances would she need to use KXL as a “bargaining object”? We shall see what the next 13 months bring and whether Clinton is too cozy with Wall Street and the moneyed folk after her election (as Obama was), but IMO, KXL is a done deal.
And I wouldn’t give The Bern and O’Malley too much credit. Clinton has been criticized for being too measured, analytical, “strategic”, slow, and not “real” and “folksy” enough as she rolls out her positions. IMO, it is more likely that she deliberately made this announcement on the day the Pope arrived so that it would be submerged in the hoopla and perhaps mostly forgotten by the time the Pope leaves—-actually, it’s a slick move
The Repugnants are so busy accusing the Pope of witchcraft and setting up stakes to burn him that they may not find the time and energy to go after Clinton on KXL right now. If they do, they will look like the bunch of rabid dogs that they are, whirling and snapping with foaming mouths at anyone who displeases them.
PS We in the DC metropolitan area are again being bombarded with
TV, radio, and print ads from the American Petroleum Institute, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the coal and natural gas folks. They all have the same lying message—if the EPA is allowed to implement the new rules, the economy will lose over a trillion dollars and a million jobs, which are BS and PFTA numbers that they are going to repeat until they become true in the minds of the ignorant. I’m sure Clinton’s KXL position will work its way into their ads soon.
September 23, 2015 at 10:16 am
“We shall see what the next 13 months bring and whether Clinton is too cozy with Wall Street and the moneyed folk after her election.”
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000019
I don’t think we need to wait to make that call. She and her husband have a long history of coziness with Wall Street, and it’s naïve to think that will magically change if she’s elected President.
That said, I also saw this today:
http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/22/9374583/jeb-bush-fcc-net-neutrality
I don’t see how Sanders gets past Clinton’s money, the media (which will be relentless if Sanders is truly a threat), and the South during the nomination, so it’s pretty much already decided (at least in my opinion) who will get the Democratic nomination. At that point, it won’t be so much whether or not Clinton is a great candidate, but just how bad her opponent is, and the GOP is trending super bad as a whole.
September 23, 2015 at 10:20 am
Wall Street during this cycle:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/wall-street-is-putting-money-behind-these-presidential-candidates_55b143e7e4b08f57d5d414ad
This is a drop compared to their current coffers, but then, it’s still early in the race.
Sanders IS influencing the race, just as the presence of more extreme candidates in the GOP are pushing their side of the field to the right. This article has some interesting stuff:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/wall-street-hillary-clinton-2016-bernie-sanders-118759
“Wall Street Democrats and some independents are growing increasingly nervous that the presence of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley in the race and the continuing leftward tilt of the Democratic Party could push Hillary Clinton to take a tougher stance on financial reform issues in ways that could make their lives uncomfortable.”
September 23, 2015 at 5:20 pm
I’m not so sure this was a difficult decision. Can anyone make money on tar sand refining with oil below $50/barrel? I’m sure the project was dead in the water for economic rather than political reasons.
September 23, 2015 at 6:45 pm
exactly the point I have been making for some time.