Professor Keck's Reality 101

profkeck

profkeck
Location
Michigan, USA
Birthday
December 31
Bio
Mary Keck is a writer and blogger. Her articles have appeared on Open Salon, The Public Intellectual, and The Huffington Post. She is currently a columnist for The Times Herald where she writes about nature, outdoor recreation, and wildlife.

SEPTEMBER 19, 2011 10:56PM

Obama's Stand-up Routine

Rate: 6 Flag

For a president who believes "that we can be the ones to build everything from fuel-efficient cars to advanced biofuels to semiconductors that we sell all around the world," Barack Obama has a funny way of showing it. The administration's poor investment in Solyndra may not only give the president something other than "Obamacare" to defend on stage when debating the next Republican candidate, but it may also damage our chances for a greener future and of lowering unemployment rates. 

Obama Solyndra 

Green energy is one issue that many conservaties feel more progressive about. Though it may not seem like it, some do believe the overwhelming evidence. According to one poll,  50 percent of Republicans think global warming should be a top priority for our elected officials. Sure, it's still sad that half of those who were polled don't take climate change as seriously as they should, but it's better than this blogger expected. 

Obama had a unique opportunity with so many Americans behind him after his election and so many in the middle (and maybe to the right) who hoped to see progress on the green front. What does he do? He squanders his chance to make a sound investment that not only would have led us in the right direction to curb our oil addiction but that also might have created jobs for the citizens who have been most affected by this economic crisis. And for what? A chance for a photo with some solar panels. 

Once again, our president puts on a show instead of putting forth the effort to enact real change. It kind of reminds me of how he promised to put solar panels back on the white house, apparently he was just kidding. 

While this unfortunate incident with Solyndra is a blow not only for the green industry but also for Obama's popularity, the president still has a chance to pull off a strong performance. For instance, he could avoid approving the tar sands pipeline. Maybe he could pardon Tim DeChristopher. I bet he could even get those solar panels on the white house before the 2012 election.

That is, if he's not entertaining a different crowd. One filled with oil lovers like Hillary Clinton's former campaign aide who also happens to be one of Transcanada's lead lobbyists. Approving this pipeline will devastate indigenous species and wildlife habitats, and it will  impact farmers who depend on the land for their income. To convince a wide range of energy-conscious Americans that he isn't just joking about the words in his recent job speech, he can't approve this pipeline. If Obama's dedication to creating jobs and ending our dependence on oil is more than just another act, he needs to make sounder investments with our tax dollars rather than rushing to smile for the cameras, and he needs to remember his unemployed, low-income constituents who are running out of options. 

The ramifications of this failed venture with Solyndra are yet to be seen, but hopefully Obama has only crippled his future.

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Good stuff again, Professor.

Saw an article in NY Times today about GOP interest in green energy that is right in line with your essay.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/us/politics/republicans-sought-clean-energy-money-for-home-states.html?_r=1
Good piece. If he doesn't stop the XL Pipeline I suspect a somewhat less than peaceful reaction when construction begins. Hope it doesn't come to that, but I doubt it gets built one way or another. rated
The ramifications of this failed venture with Solyndra are yet to be seen, but hopefully Obama has only crippled his future.

The professional liberals with their unrealistic and unattainable expectations (read that, dreams)…will take care of crippling the future of all the rest of us.

When you well-meaning folk finally realize what you are doing…which most likely will not occur until it is “what you have done…you will hang your heads in shame. I see a moment for you like that final scene of Alec Guiness’ in Bridge on the River Kwai, where his character, Colonel Nicholson laments, “What have I done?”
Frank,

You've got to do more than assert something. Tell us, how again does holding a slippery politician to a standard betray that standard? How is the good Professor's defense of the environment an attack on that environment?

Perhaps you've got an argument somewhere, but you've yet to show it. Instead, you sling ad hominems and logic-free rants. I'd listen if you could say that the XL pipeline was somehow not a threat, and thus Obama is justified. That's an argument. But just saying: "you're hurting my boyfriend, please stop it or the bad Republicans will come rape the environment" will not convince anyone; it only makes you sound like a spineless party loyalist. Are you?

What you're doing is called projection. It's you who lacks courage, and yet you're hoping no one notices that you FAIL to stand up for things like fresh water; instead, you effectively vote for corporate rule with your pseudo-wizened faux-pragmatism. What are you doing to advance your principles? Do you have any, or are they all up for sale if it helps get your guy elected? What will you stand for?
Hi Lance…how ya doin’ fella?

You've got to do more than assert something.

Really! And that is written where?

Tell us, how again does holding a slippery politician to a standard betray that standard?

No. I’d rather you tell me why you are making that assertion, since I never said anything like that.

How is the good Professor's defense of the environment an attack on that environment?

Do you just make silly stuff up so you have silly things against which to argue…or do you have other motivation?



Perhaps you've got an argument somewhere, but you've yet to show it. Instead, you sling ad hominems and logic-free rants.

There is a BEAUTY! Talk about ad hominems and logic free rants!
I'd listen if you could say that the XL pipeline was somehow not a threat, and thus Obama is justified. That's an argument. But just saying: "you're hurting my boyfriend, please stop it or the bad Republicans will come rape the environment" will not convince anyone; it only makes you sound like a spineless party loyalist. Are you?

I am an Independent, Lance—and I am not a liberal any more than I am a conservative. I am not defending any party…nor ideology. You ought really to save comments like “spineless” for conversations where an individual is in your presence—so that an appropriate response can be given.

What you're doing is called projection. It's you who lacks courage, and yet you're hoping no one notices that you FAIL to stand up for things like fresh water; instead, you effectively vote for corporate rule with your pseudo-wizened faux-pragmatism. What are you doing to advance your principles? Do you have any, or are they all up for sale if it helps get your guy elected? What will you stand for?

You ought really to save that kind of stuff for personal meetings, Lance…if you have the guts for it.

But you sound like an interesting person…and if you want to get off y0ur soapbox; stop the pontificating; and actually discuss anything I have written…just quote it and then make your comment and I will respond…in a respectful response. (Look the term up—or have someone explain it to you.)
Yes Frank, we all realize that threats, intimidation, and fear are powerful motivators for you, but they don't motivate the rest of us in quite the same way, and they certainly don't substitute for a sound argument. You've failed to explain why the current president should remain unaccountable to his electorate. We're all waiting for your reasoned defense of your principles.

Let me hazard a a guess at your forthcoming retort: something like:
"BOO!! Republicans Bad!!"
yeah. if solyndra was a bank, it would be Too Big to Fail and just merged with another big bank after a multibilliondollar bailout.
Lance

You wrote: Yes Frank, we all realize that threats, intimidation, and fear are powerful motivators for you, but they don't motivate the rest of us in quite the same way, and they certainly don't substitute for a sound argument.

Once again you have not quoted anything I’ve said and given a reason for why you take issue with it. Instead, you pretend I said something…and then argue against your pretence.

By now we all realize you know how to invent stuff and argue against it. How about trying to pick out something I actually did write…and argue against that?

You've failed to explain why the current president should remain unaccountable to his electorate. We're all waiting for your reasoned defense of your principles.

Where did I say this? Quote where I said this. Why do you make stuff up…and then argue against what you make up? Why not actually quote what I said and then tell me why you disagree?

Let me hazard a a guess at your forthcoming retort: something like:
"BOO!! Republicans Bad!!"


I am sure this kind of stuff works beautifully on a playground when one kid is arguing with another, but it really looks childish here in an adult forum. Try to avoid it. It makes you look foolish.
Hi Frank,

This is not the first time you've commented on one of my posts that criticizes Obama, which makes me wonder when/if it is ever okay to criticize the president. You seem to be making the point that if I continue to criticize him, he won't get reelected and this concerns you because you think the country will end up worse than it already is. Am I right?

If so, I have to say that I'm not afraid of who will come next even if it is Rick Perry or Mitt Romney. To me, Obama's policies have been republican. His recent jobs plan is the first step he's made that seems to be anywhere near progress. So, if you believe that the republicans are worse, can you tell me why?

Thanks!