The title to this post is definitely provocative. People will question it. This video verifies the validity of the title:
Here’s the transcript from the video:
“But know right now, we are struggling. We are struggling because we are trying to do our jobs. Lisa Jackson has put forth a very powerful message to the country. Just two days ago, the decision on greenhouse gas performance standard and saying basically gas plants are the performance standard which means if you want to build a coal plant you got a big problem.
That was a huge decision. You can’t imagine how tough that was. Because you got to remember that if you go to West Virginia, Pennsylvania and all those places, you have coal communities who depend on coal. And to say that we just think those communities should just go away, we can’t do that. But she had to do what the law and policy suggested. And it’s painful. It’s painful every step of the way.”
This is the ‘indictment phrase':
“If you go to West Virginia, Pennsylvania and all those places, you have coal communities who depend on coal. And to say that we just think those communities should just go away, we can’t do that.”
It’s like saying ‘We can’t admit we’re killing their cities, their economies and their livelihoods, especially in an election year. We have to be secretive about our ultimate goal.’
This is politically damaging stuff to this administration, especially because it fits with what President Obama said during the 2008 campaign:
What I’ve said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else’s out there.
I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.
That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.
The only thing I’ve said with respect to coal, I haven’t been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.
It doesn’t require a crystal ball to interpret Lisa Jackson’s, Curt Spalding’s or President Obama’s intentions. It’s their intent to kill the coal industry. That means killing coal towns in Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia.
That’s where the political danger comes in. Each of those states are states that President Obama won. Those 4 states contain a total of 65 electoral votes. President Obama won 338 electoral votes in 2008. Subtracting 65 electoral votes from 338 leaves him with 273, just barely enough to win.
That means President Obama must hold every state he won in 2008 or he should start writing his concession speech.
At this point, he’d better start writing his concession speech because he’s lost North Carolina and Florida, too. Those states have 15 and 29 electoral votes respectively. That drops President Obama’s total to 229 electoral votes.
Anyone saying that President Obama is ahead in Ohio and Pennsylvania are right. For now. The minute Crossroads GPS, the pro-Mitt Romney PAC and the Romney campaign start bombarding those states with ads highlighting President Obama’s past statements and current policies, President Obama’s lead will disappear instantly.
Killing local economies is a great way to kill a president’s political future. It couldn’t happen to a more heartless guy.