http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-keystone-pipeline-rejection-is-hard-to-accept/2012/01/18/gIQAf9UG9P_story.html
In "Obama's Keystone pipeline rejection is hard to accept", the editorial board that wrote that Obama's rejection of the idea goes against his Job's Council. They also said that it doesn't help fight global warming at all, and instead just makes the oil most likely to go to China in tankers, causing the possibility of an oil spill. Thirdly, one of the major arguments of it was that it could damage a vulnerable area, but the Canadian Government agreed to possibly change the plans to go around that are. Finally, they said there were easier, cheaper, and more effective ways to try to wean the country off of gasoline usage than stopping this pipeline, such as a higher gasoline tax. This is relevant to my life because this will probably set the stage of the next election, which would decide which direction the country goes in.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Monday #12 Keystone pipeline #1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rejecting-the-keystone-pipeline-is-an-act-of-insanity/2012/01/19/gIQAowG6AQ_story.html
In this article, Robert J. Samuelson claimed that rejecting the plan for the pipeline hurts the country. For one thing, the environmental protection that was gained by rejecting the pipeline would be minimal, as it wouldn't stop Canada searching for more oil. It also hurts the relationship between the U.S. and Canada, because both countries could be helped by this. The pipeline also would have created a large amount of jobs for people in the U.S., and could have preserved other jobs in refining oil, which is something the U.S. needs. Finally, it could possibly give the U.S. a possibility to export some oil products, which would also help the economy. Samuelson also claimed that this was done more to try to help Obama get reelected than in the countries support. If these are true, it affects my life because the rejection of this plan may have hurt the economy even more, which is something everyone is living under.
In this article, Robert J. Samuelson claimed that rejecting the plan for the pipeline hurts the country. For one thing, the environmental protection that was gained by rejecting the pipeline would be minimal, as it wouldn't stop Canada searching for more oil. It also hurts the relationship between the U.S. and Canada, because both countries could be helped by this. The pipeline also would have created a large amount of jobs for people in the U.S., and could have preserved other jobs in refining oil, which is something the U.S. needs. Finally, it could possibly give the U.S. a possibility to export some oil products, which would also help the economy. Samuelson also claimed that this was done more to try to help Obama get reelected than in the countries support. If these are true, it affects my life because the rejection of this plan may have hurt the economy even more, which is something everyone is living under.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Monday #11- Steve Huntley columnist #4- Synthesis
Based on the columns by Steve Huntley that I've read, he commentates on politics from a conservative viewpoint. Every one of his articles either looks favorably on one of the candidates for the Republican Parties nomination, or criticizes one of Obama's actions. From what I've read, he is very against Obama's policies, even titling one of his columns "Obama's Political Goals Bad for Us All". Despite being against Obama's policies, he isn't antagonistic, and condemned the booing of Michelle Obama at a sporting event in Florida. His conservative viewpoint affects his articles, as they are naturally biased towards conservatives, focusing mostly on Republican successes, and Obama's failures. He doesn't just cover the political campaigns, but also focuses on some important events that are happening throughout the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)