Does anyone else ever notice Barack Obama’s logical inconsistencies?
Obama vetoes the XL pipeline, saying: “Shipping dirtier crude oil into our country would not increase America’s energy security. What has increased America’s energy security is our strategy over the past several years to reduce our reliance on dirty fossil fuels from unstable parts of the world.”
Obama’s apparent strategy is to “reduce our reliance on dirty fossil fuels from unstable parts of the world.” Obama, therefore, admits that America is dependent upon foreign oil imports. Now for the inconsistency: If Obama acknowledges that America is dependent upon oil imports, why wouldn’t our “energy security” be improved if we could import oil from Canada, a “stable” part of the world? At the very least, we could substitute the more stable Canadian source for the imports which we secure from unstable OPEC nations. By his own admission, switching to Canadian imports would increase our energy security.
Vetoing the XL pipeline will allow China to acquire Canadian oil. Is it in our national interests to hand this valuable resource over to China?
Finally, Obama’s policies concerning the use of fossil fuels clearly defy reason. Nontoxic alternate energy sources — wind, solar, geothermal — can provide only a slight fraction of the energy this nation needs to function in a vibrant manner. For the foreseeable future, we can’t possibly produce the energy needed to sustain this nation without heavy reliance upon fossil fuels.
Alas, Obama’s America is truly a rudderless ship.
Chris Tabing, Coulterville