How Much More…Can or are we willing to Take, part 2

Andrew Carnegie was born in Dunfermline, Scotland, and immigrated to the United States with his parents in 1848. His first job in the United States was as a factory worker in a bobbin factory. Later on he became a bill logger for the owner of the company; furthermore, soon after he became a messenger boy.

Eventually he progressed up the ranks of a telegraph company. He built Pittsburgh’s Carnegie Steel Company, which was later merged with Elbert H. Gary’s Federal Steel Company and several smaller companies to create U.S. Steel. With the fortune he made from business among others he built Carnegie Hall, later he turned to philanthropy and interests in education, founding the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Carnegie Mellon University and the Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh.

That was just a quick word about Mr. Andrew Carnegie, hard-working Scotsman, who went from a factory worker to one of the wealthiest men in American history; all this and so much more without anything from the government.

In December, Congressional Republicans forced President Obama to make a decision within 60 days on whether to approve or reject Canada’s offer to build the Keystone XL oil pipeline all the way through the U.S. and down to the Gulf of Mexico.

The Obama administration claims that three years has not been enough time to fully evaluate the environmental impact of the project; consequently, a claim we find to be totally false.

Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) says that is “political bull” and explains why that excuse from Obama runs contrary to recent statements from the State Department as well as announcements made in the administration’s White House.

“We’re going to have Secretary of State Clinton come to our committee and explain why denying this plan was in the nation’s best interest.”

Terry discusses the ecological issues involved with the pipeline and has some more choice comments for pipeline critics who claim the resources in the pipeline would end up in China anyway.

“This pipeline would create energy security for us so we don’t have to rely on OPEC.” 

In an attempt to illustrate exactly what we are dissenting about comes to us by way of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). As late as November 2011 Speaker Boehner with his House of Representatives have been working on three energy bills that will be a part of Speaker Boehner’s American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act to create new jobs, increase American energy production and fund our aging infrastructure: 

“The bills before us today are not just energy bills, they are job bills. Increased American energy production is one of the best ways to help jumpstart our economy. It will create over a million energy jobs and thousands of indirect jobs in a variety of sectors in every state throughout the country. Given the tremendous economic benefits – not to mention the national security implications – there is no reason why we should not provide access to our own energy resources located here at home,” said Chairman Hastings.

“One thing that’s certain, doing nothing will not create any new jobs or generate any new revenue. During these difficult economic times, with soaring debts and deficits and a highway fund that needs to be replenished, Congress should not pass up an opportunity to create jobs and generate billions in new revenue.”

That being said what could be behind Obama’s refusal to engage with the Canadians with obviously an awesome deal? Lessening our dependence on OPEC, providing thousands of jobs, and diligently trying to do what he’s promised is what one would expect from a logical and sane person. This person does not deserve to be in political office any longer. Did Obama have three years to sort out Solyndra before investing $556 billion of taxpayer funds? Nope.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: