posted
Turns out big oil cronyism isn't anathema to the Obama administration any more than it was for Bush's.
This shouldn't be so much of a surprise I guess, his comittments to transparancy quickly fell by the way side as soon as he started actually dealing with our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as our counterterroism efforts. I can understand one being naive and needing to reevalute such strictly principled, if not unnuanced stand on an issue. But when it comes to these sorts of decisions, there's no excuse.
It's a simple open and shut case of, there's no benefit to being open about this sort of coziness with big business, and there are no real repurcusions.
It wouldn't appease the drill baby drill crowd, and it certainly pisses off the environmentally conscious. But how can we the people even have accurate opinions on these issues, when the State Department doesn't even conduct a proper investigation, and then lies about its findings.
I've read quite a few things about this pipeline, both that it is a disaster environmentally, and it's really not, and it's necessary for other reasons. How on earth can the truth be known?
I suppose it was never realistic to expect Obama's administration to be even 75% as transparant as his rhetoric would have me believe. But I wanted to believe it nonetheless.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This seems more like low-level lobbyist behavior to me than some Obama-conspiracy.
1.8 M people work for the federal government in the US. True government transparency is impossible and would probably cost far more than would be worthwhile.
The article stinks of bad journalism anyway. While it's quick to point out Cheney's name, it only names a member of staff at our embassy in Canada -- then it continues to vaguely reference wrongdoing at the entire State Department (and even Obama). Mayhaps this is just a case of one staffer in the pocket of a lobbyist? Should one assume that this ISN'T common?
Posts: 1204 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It also points out that the Vice President, I presume Biden, was engaged in talks with this oil company.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are right. But this pipeline has certainly been something the Obama administration has had to be in touch with the DOS on. There has been a lot of heated debate about the proposal.
I seriously doubt the president has been entirely divorced from the entire process, or that it would be built without him knowing about it.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
