h/t Robert from oz – President Obama has stepped up efforts to sabotage Trump’s mandate from the American people, this time by attempting to mess up Trump’s commitment to open public land to oil and gas exploration.
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Obama Places Sweeping Ban on Offshore Drilling in Atlantic and Arctic Waters
by AMANDA SAKUMA
In the final stretch of his term President Barack Obama is implementing new environmental protections that stand to thwart Donald Trump’s agenda on oil and gas extraction in ways that may prove difficult for the president-elect to roll back.
The Obama administration announced on Tuesday that it will place an indefinite ban on offshore oil and gas drilling across large swaths of Atlantic and Arctic waters. The actions come in conjunction with news that Canada will implement a sweeping ban of its own, launching a set of actions to be reviewed every five years.
“President Obama and Prime Minister Trudeau are proud to launch actions ensuring a strong, sustainable and viable Arctic economy and ecosystem, with low-impact shipping, science based management of marine resources, and free from the future risks of offshore oil and gas activity,” the White House said in a joint statement with the Canadian leader.
…
The latest action hinges on a provision of the 1953 the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, a law designed to protect coral reefs and marine sanctuaries. The seldom used measure allows the executive to permanently freeze offshore drilling in specified regions. Senior Obama administration officials stress that there is no provision in the law providing the president authority draw those actions back.
Environmental groups hailed the announcement as a major victory and symbolic milestone in ending offshore drilling in a region where it is exceedingly difficult to prevent and respond to potential oil spills.
“We are confident that this is an announcement that will stick. We have both the law and public opinion on our side,” Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune said.
There is currently no precedent for a president to hit rewind on bans against offshore drilling in the name of environmental protections. And because the actions are not up for review for another five years, advocacy groups say they are optimistic Trump will not be able to reverse the tide.
…
Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/obama-places-sweeping-ban-offshore-drilling-n698461
I’ve never heard of such a graceless act of contempt for the will of the American people. Opening public land to oil and gas was a central promise of President-elect Trump’s campaign manifesto. Trump won the electoral college, by a wide margin.
But President Obama doesn’t care about the will of the American people – all he seems to care about is hurting the voters who rejected his legacy.
Trump will be able to overturn this nonsense, but the effort required to undo this senseless regulatory vandalism will waste Trump’s time – precious time Trump could have used to fix the US tax code, cut the Federal deficit, drain the climate research swamp, sort out Common Core, fix Obamacare, or sort out the shambolic Department of Veterans Affairs.
Ordinary people will suffer because of Obama’s spiteful attempt to thwart the will of the American people.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Gee why did I leave the Leftist party 25 years ago?
While I’m not a hard core birther. It may be time to look into whether he really could be president. If he was smart, he would have had Joe Biden sign duplicate orders, just in case the truth is not on Obama’s side.
Go for it. The AGW crowd has moved heaven and earth to misrepresent the climate situation, so it’s conceivable that Obama’s crowd is doing the same. In both cases the stakes amount to Trillions of dollars.
Most people don’t know that the birther issue hinges on the fact that Hawaii used to issue birth certificates for children born to Hawaiian residents, who were not in Hawaii at the time of birth. I believe this was because of the large number of US military on tour in Asia. The only way to know for sure is to examine the original, paper, long form certificate.
Sheriff Arpaio’s recent birther update is timed perfectly to segue into a Trump supported Justice Dept investigation.
(C) such States, and through such States, affected local governments, are entitled to an opportunity to participate, to the extent consistent with the national interest, in the policy and planning decisions made by the Federal Government relating to exploration for, and development and production of, minerals of the outer Continental Shelf.
If Obama denied Alaska an adequate opportunity to participate in policy and planning decisions, his puerile “pen and phone” stunt should be vulnerable to legal challenge, and court recession..
The mere existence of a “law that cannot be challenged” flies in the face of our constitutional construction and original intent. No laws, including the constitution, are immutable. To enact such a law invites SCOTUS intervention. We will and can make some laws intentionally difficult to circumvent, but none are without the capability of change.
It may require an rewrite of the law to insert provisions to permit it to be amended.
But, that’s what congress is for.
The governor of Alaska just said he did deny Alaskan input.
The idea that the president can write an EO that is not subject to being undone by another EO is, well, “Unprecedented,” as the climate crisis crew likes to say.
What is said to be law, that is, an Executive Order, rather flies in the face of the Constitution anyway. It does not, and no act of congress can give, the executive branch the authority to create law. The Constitution requires law to be created in the House, as in House of Representatives, not the White House, be presented to and pass the Senate, and move on to be signed into law by the executive branch. The only way congress could give the executive branch that authority is through Constitutional amendment, and only the people can make that happen. There is no amendment that authorizes the president to create law.
Also, since this is involves cooperation with a foreign nation, this would have to be ratified by the Senate. Obama has played fast and easy with the rules, but that doesn’t mean they still aren’t enforceable. It will depend, instead, on what the “agenda” of the Senate is going to be – to support the outgoing democrat or the incoming Republican. It is time that the party supports its President.
So does the OCSLA cover the area up to 3 miles offshore or only beyond 3 miles?
Seems to be a possible loophole either way…a loophole large enough to do some (horizontal) directional drilling through
Surely to be binding, such a piece of legislation will need congressional approval?
Roger
http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com
No, it is already a law. However, Congressional action can repeal or modify the law and free up the drilling in these areas.
Here is the law.
https://www.boem.gov/Outer-Continental-Shelf-Lands-Act/
“Congressional action can repeal or modify the law and free up the drilling in these areas.”
That is the key. The Left thinks it is clever, but there will be a Republican president and a majority Republican House and Senate in 31 days, and between them they can undo anything Obama has done.
The changes they are a comin’.
Obama ignored Immigration and Border Protection Laws of the US when he ignored the actions of “sanctuary cities” in their protection of illegal aliens …….. so all that President Trump has to do is tell his Secretaries and/or Agency/Department Directors to ignore Obummers “ban” on offshore oil and gas drilling in US Coastal waters.
Liberals are relying on the Senate filibuster to prevent Congress from re-writing laws to upend these last minute actions. To the extent that they do so, they add weight to the argument that the Senate filibuster rule (already seriously modified by the Democrats when they deemed it necessary) should be done away with in its present form. Then only 50 votes, plus a tie-breaker by the Senate President, VP Pence, will enable the GOP to write whatever laws, and changes in law, that they desire, subject only to rejection by the Supreme Court for unconstitutionality.
I say, keep pushing libs, keep pushing. There’s a straw somewhere in your quiver that will break the camel’s back.
Good thing Obama normalized the selective enforcement of the law.
Under section 1341, it says:
It does NOT say he can’t rescind the withdrawal. “Everything not forbidden is permitted.”
Everything not forbidden is permitted.
=================
exactly. Obama must have signed something to invoke the section 1341 clause. Trump need only rescind the document Obama signed.
What the Press has ignored is that the important thing is not the law itself, but rather the document that allowed Obama to turn the law “on”. Which is likely an Executive Order of some kind. Which Trump can cancel at his pleasure. Once the order is cancelled, the land is no longer removed, because there is no longer any document signed by the President enabling the land to be removed.
Once the order is rescinded, there is no document saying that the land has been withdrawn. So if an official says “the President withdrew the Land”, any company wishing to drill can simply say “show us the order”, and the official will not be able to produce the order because it was rescinded. The courts would laugh at any official that tried to use a rescinded Presidential Order as justification for anything.
Obama doesn’t care if this sticks. He is building credibility for his next position. He want’s to be Secretary-General of the United Nations. His goal all along has been to diminish the power of the US and position the UN as the world governing power
If Trump is smart, he’ll already have a team reviewing every one of Obama’s presidential orders and preparing a single presidential order to rescind all of the bad ones.
Citizens from countries with a permanent seat on the security council are not permitted to be Secretary General.
Of course, leftists are big on just ignoring any law that is inconvenient, or Obama can give up his US citizenship.
Mark W
I wonder how long it would take Obama to prove his birth certificate was a fake so he could prove he isn’t really a citizen and can then run for Secretary General?
Ha wouldn’t that be a joke!
@ur momisugly ferdberple
“Everything not forbidden is permitted”
Not hardly.
It is actually the converse WRT the powers of the federal govt., to undo something it has done.
“everything not permitted is impossible” is about the long and short of it.
If there is no process under current law to “re-instate” leasable land that has been withdrawn — it is literally impossible under current law.
Can Congress remedy the deficiency? Certainly.
@ur momisugly DJH
completely WRONG
Here is an example — Virginia Law provides a formula for restitution for wrongful imprisonment. The formula provides for about $800,000 in restitution for a particular person (Mr. Haynesworth).
Virginia lawmakers believe he should get more, but in order to pay him more than statute they have to enact a piece of special legislation.
FYI — nowhere in the VA statute that provides the formula is there any verbiage that prohibits the State from paying more — the fact is that the State can only do what the law compels or permits.
https://vacode.org/2016/8.01/3/18.2/8.01-195.11/
Link to Haynesworth legislation
https://capitalnews.vcu.edu/2012/05/15/virginia-makes-amends-for-wrongful-imprisonment/
@ur momisugly Bob boder – December 21, 2016 at 8:44 am
My guess is, bout two (2) hours, maybe three (3).
All Obummer would have to do is “authorize” the release of his Harvard University records, specifically his …… Application for “Special Needs” Student Enrollment …… or is it Enrollment Application for “Special Needs” Student.
All waters from shoreline up to the territorial limit. The text mentions the Department of Energy (est. 1977), so that limit would be 200 miles, not 1953’s 3 miles..
(a) Withdrawal of unleased lands by President: The President of the United States may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the outer Continental Shelf.
There is no specification that withdrawn lands may not be reinstated as leasable by a President without approval from Congress. The Secretary of the Interior has primary power to issue and regulate leases.
This may imply that President Trump can reinstate leasable territory solely through administrative action upon finding that it serves the national interest.
@ilfpm
If the law does not provide for reinstatement of lands — they cannot be.
That’s how laws work.
The law may be amended to allow for re-instatement (unless it was passed with a clause that precludes amendment, and only allows repeal), or repealed.
A new law may be enacted that is at odds with the current law — meaning almost certainly an injunction until SCOTUS sorts out the mess.
What is not in question: POTUS Trump cannot use an Executive Order, because POTUS Obama executed a statutory clause, not an executive order.
karl==> the law is silent on reinstatement of leasing for drilling. Arguing that as there is no explicit procedure for reversal, it cannot be done will probably be the positon in court of Greenpeace, NRDC, et al. However, the greens will be the ones suing to overcome an action they cannot block in advance.
@ur momisugly tom
Which means the government is not allowed to act upon anything it is silent about DUH!
@ur momisugly Tom
What law allows for re-instatement?
If there is no legal basis for a governmental act, the govt. can’t act. And you can’t use EO to overrule statute.
Karl, your legal analysis is very shallow and faulty. See why in comments below.
The article in question uses the limit Bill Clinton signed into effect, 24 nautical miles.
You need to cross-reference this with the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea to determine how far out it runs. Territorial waters only covers about 12-24 nm, but if there is a continental shelf extending out from US territory, it can potentially extend that up to about 200 nm. I believe this is what this law refers to as the outer shelf. Drilling outside of this area and outside of US territorial waters would be subject to international maritime law.
200nm is the exclusive economic zone. 12nm is the territorial limit.
By the Russians?
Trump’s going to get severe writer’s cramp from rescinding all those Exec. Orders. Invest in BIC.
You can do a single EO that lists all the existing EOs that are being rescinded.
You can’t use an EO to rescind executive action under statute. That is what this is, execution of Presidential Power granted by the ACT.
The ACT includes no language to reverse the withdrawal of withdrawn lands by POTUS, accordingly, there is no lawful, legal process to do so.
Unless and until an amendment is made, they are withdrawn permanently.
It is of note that the Secretary can exclude lands that are up for disposition from being leased, but Congress explicitly provided that POTUS could withdraw lands from even being up for disposition.
You are relying upon the actions on President “constitutional lawyer expert”.
What can be accomplished in a fit of spite can be undone through multiple methods.
A) Guaranteed is that Congress will view this latest abuse of Presidential power as a challenge to be deflated. Look for any “Presidential invoked” clauses outside of the Constitution to be revoked.
B) The basis for the law is proper remunerations and fees to States for mineral/oil leases.
a) Unilateral executive action without due process and involving the impacted states. Sue for illegal actions without due process and no intention to repair the States for their losses in revenues.
b) Sue for improper due process procedures.
President Obama is going to get a rude awakening. I’d like to think there will FOI for communications between the Chicago kid, activists, Secretary of the Interior.
karl, I believe the argument is the original intent of the statute
As usual, the eco-looney are off in lala land.
If the lands had allegedly been truly withdrawn, I wondered by the oil markets were not concerned?
These characters whose income depends on explicitly knowing legal details are the real experts on what the OCSLA law is and what can be done.
It turns out that not only can the President withdraw lands, but that there is existing precedent for re-instating lands withdrawn from availability and prospecting.
Oh don’t worry. There might not be a precedent for a lot of things that Trump is planning to do. My guess, he is going to chuckle as he changes this.
All Trump has to do is rescind the executive action and let them sue him if they want.
It wasn’t an EO — do you guys even pay attention before your Trumpfetish kicks in?
I doubt it will take much effort for Trump to undo it.
But it does demonstrate for posterity just what kind of a person Obama is.
my thoughts exactly as I heard it on the radio today in Aus!
not that many of us had any doubt how devious n twofaced the bummer was
just confirmation of that
really spoilt bratty behaviour
Are there any examples of other Presidents making large-scale changes in government policy within the last month of being in office? Or is this kind of action something which only Obama has ever done?
Alba==> Bill Clinton lowered the allowable arsenic in drinking water levels at the end of his eight years. I do not know if that counts as “large scale”.
Obama is the only president in the modern era that believes he is a god…master of all things. Kind of humorous that he thinks he is relevant in the era of Trump. Such a pechilant little man.
Opps…petulant…got to proof read
it’s not about proofreading.
such errors are the domain of those who don’t read at all and acquiire vocabulary simply by mimicry from hearing other people speak – the lazy, ineffective way.
so read more in the first place and use a dictionary often.
My opinion of the motive is: not that the prohibition will be difficult to undo but the green outrage that the undoing will do (cause). It seems a bit of scorched earth policy.
exactly…
The more pain for the greens the better.
Which will only strengthen the resolve of the current ruling party.
A vindictive S.O.B.
POTUS Trump will have adifficult time leglally circumventing this action by POTUS Obama.
GOP Congress + POTUS Trump … easy peasy to overrule The Petulent Obama.
He will have zero effort to rescind the order. And if Greenpeace sues, he can countersue and drain their bank account. Or declare them a terrorist organization and close their bank accounts.
That should probably be done anyway.
Remove their charity based tax free status, and make it retrospective.
Right you are, Donald K, ….. as my ole papa said, ….. “There’s more than one way to skin a cat.“
It’s not an Executive Order — it is statutorily granted POTUS action under the Continental Shelf … ACT.
With no process or mechanism under the law to reverse the decision.
Karl, before you spout off again do two things. Bone up on statutory interpretation case law. AND the 2008 Bush eastern Gulf of Mexico precedent. You are wrong and keep digging your hole deeper. The WaPo, as in so many things, does notnk ow what it is talking about and got it wrong. Explained already twice in comments below.
I would think if Obama were identified as an enemy agent or a series of treasons, his acts would become reviewable or overturnable beyond some point in his administration…
We all know O is guilty of many things, just that he has been protected by DoJ from blowback.
I thought the guy might finally show a little grace, but he can’t get past himself.
“I thought the guy might finally show a little grace”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Oh, wait – you were serious?
When you haven’t got a legacy worth anything, why not throw a hissy fit?
The claim the rescinding the orders will be tied up in court is false. A future president can rescind any previous executive order with a signature.
Apparently Obama is relying on a 1953 law.
It will take Congress to undo the law.
…which they most likely will.
Maybe Trump can sequester Obama on an island where his only entertainment will be golf?
It’s their legal opinion that the law does not contain a provision for repeal.. Just another example of lazy reporting (fake news?) where NBC takes the Obama administration’s, and the Serira Club’s, word for it and publishes it as fact without seeking any independent legal opinion.
Yep, journalists have such valid legal opinions. I believe everything a journalist tells me.
@RockyRoad More fitting would be for Obama to live off-grid and 100% ecological farming on an island.
Excerpted from — commieBob – December 20, 2016 at 11:09 pm
Well “DUH”, unless the above noted Law SPECIFICALLY states that ONLY a Congressional action can change or repeal said Law …….. then POTUS Trump can do whatever the hell he wants to about it or with it.
I understand Kiribati (Gilberts) will be vacated soon due to those massively rising tides, perhaps they could be renamed the Obummers
See comments above concerning the law.
Barry has completely forgotten that Congress exists.
There is nothing in the Constitution that allows a President to bind future Presidents. Only laws passed by both houses and are signed into law, which these specific actions do not qualify. Even if the law explicitly stated that following Presidents can not reverse such actions (which it doesnt), it would fail muster as it would then be rewriting how laws are passed, and thus nullify the constitution. A law, let alone a interpretation of a law, can create a situation where the president alone can write forever binding laws.
“Maybe Trump can sequester Obama on an island where his only entertainment will be golf?
With a really BIG cluster of offshore turbines to sunward.
Does the law forbid rescinding such an order? If it does not, then President Trump is free to change it at his discretion. Just because there is no provision allowing a president to rescind an order means nothing. There has to be a provision prohibiting him from rescinding the order. If so, only then would congress need to act.
Be careful as such a prohibition may be somewhere else in the code.
It is really time to quit paying attention to any media or people that puts out this nonsense. They want us to believe it, just like they wanted us to believe Hillary had a lock on the presidency. It is best to look at the legal authority rather than the pundits with an agenda. They need to cite chapter and verse. Otherwise it is nothing more than a bluff.
They-the media-are patting themselves on the back for having such a clever president. And they were patting themselves on the back the day before the election. Now we ourselves would be wise to not engage in the hubris they did. The future is always up for grabs. As Benjamin Franklin is alleged to have said “Our new Constitution is now established, and has an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”
@ur momisugly Sam
Umm — NO
POTUS can’t change ANY LAW – ever, period zip zero nada.
Did you pay attention in civics class??
POTUS can only sign or veto legislation passed to him.
He can’t veto part — that is a line item veto and the Supreme Court said that’s UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
And Executive Orders are powerless against acts performed under statute.
@ur momisugly Jeff
For EO — true
For statutory acts — FALSE
POTUS Trump is bound by every single LAW that POTUS Obama signed into law. He is powerless before them.
Only Congress can change the law, or repeal the law.
karl – December 21, 2016 at 12:45 pm
@ur momisugly karl
Well “DUH”, karl, …… my knowledge of civics is just fine, ……. it is your reading comprehension skills that are FUBAR,
In my comment I SPECIFICALLY stated that …… “unless the above noted Law”, …. which isn’t, wasn’t and never will be a duly enacted Congressional legal Statute or Law of the US of A.
That is what this entire discussion is all about, ….. people like you who truly believe that the POTUS, the EPA, the DoE, county, state & federal Public Health Departments, etc., etc., all have the power to “write Laws” that are enforceable by Officers of the Courts.
And the travesty of it is, they get by with the enforcement of said “pseudo Laws” simply because the Courts and its Officers turn a “blind eye” to it ……. and 99% of the Defendants that are charged with violating said “pseudo Laws” …….. do not have sufficient time n’ energy, or funds to pay for Lawyer and Legal fees.
there is no “law” that allows for Presidential EO’s … yet they issue them …
So let it be written, so let it be done – King Barry Soetoro, 2016
Obama is gambling that Donald is going to be a one term president. Do we really need offshore drilling in the next four years? The thing currently controlling drilling in America is the price of foreign oil.
CB,
While your comment is OK from a theory POV, it is the practical effect that matters.
Large investors in resource developments place certainty of acts and regs quite high on their wanted lists. Sovereign risk and all that.
There is already far too much stupid interference in the affairs of corporations by bureaucratic meddlers. Muzzle the corporations at your peril. Depression is never far behind.
Geoff.
What about Labour…generally oil companies have had a need of 80 dollars a barrel to pay the bills. What if Trump’s need to bring back jobs inspires a lower drilling price. Tax incentives; Royalty fees; Lower wages; here in Canada, guys will jump at 75% of what they use to get to get back out there, it’s been a long halt. Most lost everything.
Obama is doing his best to protect his Clean air/Clean fuel act which protects whom, Soros and all his American coal he now owns, and that new fangled Methanol process for clean fuel enabling him to drink deeply from that government trough. And arn’t the auto manufacturers with Flexifuel 20 on board withit.
All that captured CO2, and Trump is promising to end the free money.
“Trump will be able to overturn this nonsense, but the effort required to undo this senseless regulatory vandalism will waste Trump’s time – precious time Trump could have used to fix the US tax code, cut the Federal deficit, drain the climate research swamp, sort out Common Core, fix Obamacare, or sort out the shambolic Department of Veterans Affairs.”
Trump worked in the real world where he had teams to do the work. He never had to do the work himself but rather had teams to pour concrete, lay bricks, erect steel. He will do the same when in office, assemble demolition teams to take apart all Obama’s destructive legislation. Just have the teams report back when it is done.
Easy Peasy !
A smart man would have these teams already at work reviewing all of Obama’s EO’s and listing the ones to rescind.
And Trump is obviously a smart man.
Must admit when I heard this early today (oz time) I thought it was a spoilt brat / sore loser type action and I hope Donald can Trump the order .
Although a petty, spiteful action by arch-ecoloon Obama, the rise of shale oil and gas largely makes this an empty gesture.
You mean the 950 Billion worth of oil that will cost 1.4 Trillion to get out of the ground?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/arthurberman/2016/11/20/permian-giant-oil-field-would-lose-500-billion-at-todays-prices/#171954789dbc
That Oil?
Cherrypicker
Also love the quote from the sierra club saying “they have public opinion on their side” , who won the election ? And by promising to do what with oil,gas and coal !
I bet they don’t know anyone in their circle of friends who voted for Trump either.
You mean lying — right?
Every campaign promise he made he has walked back. Drain the Swamp — no not really
“I’m told he now just disclaims that,” Gingrich said on “Morning Edition.” “He now says it was cute, but he doesn’t want to use it anymore.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/21/newt-gingrich-says-trump-is-done-with-drain-the-swamp/?utm_term=.85010e88e30b
No Jail for HRC
No coal jobs for WVA — even if we increase coal production — those jobs are gone, automation will continue
The wall — ROTFLMAO
You guys got suckered by a demagogue out to enrich his family.
So,why are you here?Maybe to push”Misinformation”perhaps
And you got suckered by a “Constitutional scholar” who has and is using his knowledge to dismember the Constitution. In other words you put the fox in charge of the henhouse. Obama’s only governing philosophy is “the end justifies the means”. Corruption personified.
wow you really think he is Hitler … sad really how ignorant you have to be to believe that … grow up …
“ROTFLMAO”?
More like LOTFITFP (Lying On The Floor In The Fetal Position)
No arctic drilling, except for Russia… he can’t stop that.
Obama is right to give up hope of collecting money the way the Clintons did . Pay for play
and green wash have been done .
Now I see why Michelle was talking about having ‘no hope’ !
She was hoping that people would be sad to see her and the big con leave power. Reality is hitting and she is losing that hope.
The mind boggles. What next? An Executive Order closing all oil wells in the USA?
“The mind boggles. What next? An Executive Order closing all oil wells in the USA?”
Please don’t give the man ideas.
Executive orders are easy to overturn. Even Obama admitted using executive orders rather than laws means anything you did can be wiped out by the next president.
Lower energy prices, largely due to an exploration and development boom that started under George Bush, saved Obama’s presidency.
Obama is worse than I thought. A Scorched earth president
Early december Obama grants waiver for military support of foreign fighters in Syria.
I think he’s aiming for scorched oceans before the bell rings.
Jihadi Obama is a criminal devoted to the cause of destroying the United States of America…
Gabriel
December 21, 2016 at 12:00 am
Jihadi Obama is a criminal devoted to the cause of destroying the United States of America…
Yes, and it became easy to prove that ideologically, Obama was either a Communist or a dhimmi, or both, well before his first Election. David Yeagley also made the “Communist” call. But this was still an hypothesis about his future acts, so I gave Obama about 6-8 months in office to start to prove me wrong by just one of his actions as President. He didn’t and hasn’t. Meanwhile, Limbaugh had said right off, “I hope he fails,” and anyone viewing Obama from the point of view of an empirical skepticism based upon Obama’s past knew exactly what he meant.
People who don’t act in the best interest of others and themselves are generally considered mentally ill…. There has to be a way around it. If there is, Trump will find it.
This is a pointless gesture. Offshore exploration and development is expensive and unlikely to be profitable for quite a while. It should be reversed but it’s actually in the interest of current lease holders that it remain.
Unfortunately, Stephan, slightly less than half of America still thinks this jerk is a good President.
Sorry, I didn’t understand that. Did you reply to the wrong post?
Yes – for some reason the post seems to have jumped – this is the second time it happened.
If Congress enacts a law, Congress can repeal the law. If Congress authorizes an agency to do certain things, it can rescind its authorization. If Congress creates an agency or department, it can abolish it. However, Congress prefers to complain loudly when its creations take outrageous actions or when they consistently abuse their power–blame it on the creations–but then take none of the remedial action that is within its power–the creator consents by its inaction. So we will hear moans and groans from “conservative” members of the House and Senate, who will then (being their usual indolent selves) do nothing. It took years, but I finally figured it out–say something, do nothing, betray my constituents but sound good while doing it.
In Europe, the politicians invented something called the “EU” to do pretty much the same. Any policy they knew would never get through the electorate at home (from immigration to massive cost rises for “climate”) they just got the EU to pass it for them and then when they had their arm “twisted” to have open borders, massive fuel rises – they just blamed the EU Eurocrats.
But we in the UK, come from a centuries old culture where our leaders do what they are told to do, not what they would like us to do.
But soon (here in England, at least!) they won’t be able to do that. Scotland? Well, that’s another story – if little Krankie gets her own way. Scottish Sceptic, I wish you all the luck in the world…you’re going to need it. Who knows what the future holds for your part of the UK?
“But we in the UK, come from a centuries old culture where our leaders do what they are told to do, not what they would like us to do.”
May it ever be so.
But you guys in the UK have a lot of politicians who look a lot like Obama and the Left in the U.S., in other words, clueless undesirables, and you need to get these people out of power fast.
Yep. Same all over the world.
“The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives.
The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes.
The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected.” –
GK Chesterton ILN, 4/19/24
Yes. For the best part of a hundred years, ‘conservatives’ have spent most of their time trying to maintain the things ‘progressives’ did twenty years earlier.
That’s now changing fast, because it’s no longer sustainable. We either roll back a century of ‘progressivism’ or Western civilization collapses.
“That’s now changing fast, because it’s no longer sustainable. We either roll back a century of ‘progressivism’ or Western civilization collapses.”
Yes. Clueless ‘progressivism’ has western Europe in a precarious position now, and would put us all there eventually if given enough time. It looks like enough people may be waking up now to stop ‘progressivism’ from continuing to take us down this ruinous path.
JoAnn—congress has no desire nor incentive to reduce the size of government, hence loud noises only. Both parties have only one aim–increase the size and power of the central government. Previous GOP majorities have proved that.
Cannot exclude Obama’s retropurge of thought criminals lost Democrats the 2016 presidential election. He shocked at least those with intelligentsia blood in their veins, irrespective of their political preferences otherwise.
Similarly it’s possible Obama’s latest offers Trump not only a precedent for removing these bans, but also an opportunity for gaining more public support while at it.