Category: Politics

PM Harper made it very clear where he and his party stand on Islamic terrorism, when he stated publicly, in response to the Charlie Hebdo killings in Paris:

“The fact of the matter is this, ladies and gentleman: The international jihadist movement has declared war. They have declared war on anybody who does not think and act exactly as they wish they would think and act. They have declared war and are already executing it on a massive scale on a whole range of countries with which they are in contact…

And they have declared war on any country like ourselves that values freedom, openness and tolerance. And we may not like this and wish it would go away, but it is not going to go away and the reality is we are going to have to confront it.”

Harper then further stated the invasion of Iraq and Syria by the Islamic State militants last year is only one example of many examples of the conflict between western democratic forces and the international jihadist movement. Harper cited the attacks on soldiers in Canada and a December hostage-taking in Sydney, Australia, in which two hostages died, as other examples of this jihadist war in which Canada and the west are involved.

Harper further explained that Canada’s military interventions in Iraq—both advisers and air strikes against militants—are a response to the rising conflict between the west and Islamic terrorist forces. The Prime Minister said:

“That is what obviously we are doing in concert with our allies—dealing with the very worst manifestation of this—which is an entire jihadist army that is now occupying large parts of Iraq and Syria and obviously other things we are doing both here and in concert with our allies to try and prevent and deal with terrorist planning on our own soil.”

On the domestic front, the Conservatives will go on the offensive with increased legal tools to combat home grown Islamic terrorism.

Remember in hockey as in real life, the best defence against Islamic terrorism is a very good offence.

I predict the Conservatives shortly will come in with aggressive new legislation that will provide police, RCMP, CSIS and other domestic security agencies with the legal tools, powers and measures to deal with Canadian citizens or residents who openly support terrorist attacks on Canadians or back groups that promote this goal, as well as to monitor terrorist groups or groups and individuals who sympathize with such terrorist groups. Specifically, lowering the bar to preventive arrests.

Interestingly, Justin Trudeau, leader of the Federal Liberals, in this hard fought Federal pre-election campaign, is beginning to look more and more like the male Olivia Chow, another early frontrunner, whose Toronto mayoral campaign and appeal stumbled badly and collapsed well before election day.

Since Trudeau became leader, his campaign for Prime Minister was built upon the major plank that he was not Stephen Harper ( as Chow was not Mayor Rob Ford). And that Trudeau was new, shiny, tall, good-looking, with great hair and that serious and substantive policies, ( as Trudeau’s flippant view that the all-important federal budget that will balance itself) would just take care of themselves.

Unfortunately, for Trudeau and the Liberals, national security-related events have sideswiped Trudeau’s lead, namely:

1. the murder of two Canadian soldiers, one in Quebec and one on Ottawa’s Parliament Hill, by home-grown Canadian Islamic terrorists;
2. the takeover of portions of Syria and Iraq by the murderous Islamic terrorists, ISIS, and the very real threat by ISIS against Canada;
3. the Islamic terrorist hostage-taking in Sydney, Australia: and more recently,
4. the Islamic terrorist killings of Charlie Hebdo journalists and Parisian Jewish citizens in Paris.

According to recent Ipso-Reid poll, the Conservatives have increased their lead over the Liberals by a 35% to 31% margin.

The reasons are obvious for Trudeau’s decline.

The Canadian people have lost confidence in Trudeau and his party being up to the job of performing the most fundamental function of the federal government, that is, to protect the Canadian people and Canada’s democratic way of life.

In the wake of these above events, Trudeau and his party are missing in action. And when they are not missing in action, they are fumbling, stumbling, bumbling and scrambling. All for naught.

Trudeau and the Liberal gang who cannot talk or shoot straight, cannot bring themselves to admit that the killings of the two Canadian soldiers were terrorist events ( they claim these wrongdoers were mentally ill, not terrorists.). Alternatively, if they were terrorists, they were not Islamic terrorists, because Islam is a peaceful religion. Alternatively, if they were inspired by Islam to commit terrorist acts, it is more important for Trudeau and the Liberals ( and their cowardly liberal enablers like the CBC, CTV, the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail) not to offend the Canadian Muslim community, than to root out Canadian Islamic terrorists and prevent future Canadian home-grown Islamic terrorist acts against Canadians.

In Trudeau and the Liberals’ view, the promotion of multiculturalism, diversity and tolerance trumps the concern for safety and national security.

Fortunately, Harper and the Conservatives take a strong opposing view. The Canadian principles of peace, order and good government and the respect for the rule of law and democratic values and institutions trump political correctness and the appeasement to cultures and to a radical militant form of a religion which wishes to destroy Canadian values and kill and maim its people.

Because stark choices have been provided by Harper and Trudeau, as above noted, that is why Harper will be seeking a decisive and popular mandate from the Canadian people in the spring to fight Islamic jihadism at home and abroad in order to protect the Canadian people and its way of life.

After six years of deadlock and gridlock within the Obama Administration, the American people gave the Republican-controlled Congress and Senate the right to proceed with Keystone, notwithstanding Obama’s opposition.In the first week of January 2015, the Republican leadership in Congress announced that its first order of business would be to pass in both Houses, a bill approving the Keystone pipeline. Due to its majorities in both Houses, the vote in both Houses should be filibuster-proof.

However, in the Senate, though the Republicans have some rare bipartisan support from certain Senate Democrats, ( a combined total of about 63 votes of Republicans and Democrats), to date, the Senate Republicans do not have the necessary 67 Senate votes to override Obama’s veto of the said legislation.

Within hours of the Republicans announcing their intention to proceed with a pro Keystone bill, Obama, through his press secretary, announced that he would veto this bill.

To Obama, it is personal pay back time against the Republicans for always opposing his own policy initiatives, these past six years.

By vetoing Keystone, Obama is also burnishing his image, during his last two years of office and post-presidency, as a serious pro environment, climate change president.

In addition, it is also pay back to Obama’s wealthy pro environment supporters in the blue states of California and New York- his billionaire hedge fund buddy, Tom Steyer, and his precious Hollywood supporters, ie Robert Redford, Barbra Streisand, Tom Hanks and Darryl Hannah and other Hollywood movers and shakers, who have raised big bucks for Obama’s two presidential campaigns and to whom Obama still makes a “Splash”.

But this is where things get really interesting, politically speaking, folks!

Let us assume 37 Senate Democrats follow Obama, like lemmings, to prevent the Senate Republicans and the pro-Keystone Senate Democrats from obtaining the required 67 votes to over-ride Obama’s veto.

The Democrats have just screwed themselves with the American people for the 2016 Congressional elections and the presidential election.

Obama will have handed the Republicans a great populist election issue with which to campaign against the Democrats, fund-raise and oppose the inevitable Hilary Clinton candidacy for the 2016 presidency.

Obama’s very own State Department has estimated that this $8+ billion project, which is privately financed, will generate over 42,000 related jobs. That may be a drop in the bucket in the context of the United States’ entire employment picture. But those jobs would be very important to 42,000 American families who would benefit from such employment, income and benefits paid for by private dollars, not by government deficit spending or taxpayer dollars.

Accordingly, the proposed construction of the Keystone pipeline has attracted moderate Democratic Congressmen and very strong moderate and independent support and key union support among the American people. These latter groups could very easily leave the Democratic fold and move to the Republicans in 2016.

In addition, there is great support for Keystone across the board, among Democrats, Republicans and independents for national energy security purposes.  Notwithstanding American oil and gas supplies are increasing, the US still imports foreign oil from such unreliable countries as Venezuela, Nigeria and the Middle East.

Canadian oil from America’s neighbor and most reliable ally, is clearly preferable for national security purposes.

Lastly, the environmental case, even according to American climate scientists , is very weak. More symbolic, than substantive.

Obama’s own State Department has concluded that the Keystone pipeline will have no material effect on the environment, as Alberta oil will still be extracted and shipped by rail or the Eastern pipeline, with or without the Keystone pipeline.

Also the exploitation of the world’s coal reserves create 30 times more damage to the environment than the Alberta oil sands. And pro environment climate scientists strongly suggest the emphasis should be directed against coal and not the Alberta oil sands.

The fact is that as a lame duck president, Obama does not give two fracks about the Democratic party or the electoral chances of the Democratic Congress. And certainly Obama does not care about the chances of Hillary Clinton to replace him as president in 2016.

The Republican leadership knows this and it will hammer Obama and the Democrats on Obama’s Keystone veto, for the next two years if it has to,  as further evidence of Obama’s ignoring the popular will of the people. Also as another example ( together with Obama’s illegal executive order granting citizenship to 6 million illegal immigrants)  of Obama’s elitist, imperial,  and non-populist presidency, which has been aided and abetted by the dastardly Democrats.

I believe that the Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot by blindly supporting Obama’s veto of Keystone.

And by supporting Obama on this veto and probably other politically tone-deaf Obama vetoes or measures, the Democrats will be handing Jeb Bush or Governor Christie, or some other Republican presidential aspirant, the keys to the White House in 2016.

Historically, prior to the McGuinty/Wynne governments, the Ontario government would go out to the public bond and institutional markets and borrow very low interest rate funds to finance its capital projects. These borrowed funds would be added to the province’s debt.The Government would retain outside third parties to build the public buildings and Ontario would retain ownership and operate the said buildings.

Under the AFP model, the Liberal government developed a scheme by which new public buildings( or existing public institution expansions)  would be built, but financed, constructed and operated by the private sector, and very importantly, without the Ontario government adding to its increasing overall debt.

Typically, Infrastructure Ontario, through public tender, selects a single purpose shell company made of a group of finance, design, construction and operational partners. This shell company then typically goes out to public/ private bond and institutional markets and raises 100% financing, in order to fund the construction of the project, on the basis, that once completed and operational, Ontario government grants to the public institution would be used to pay interest on the 30-35 year bonds.

Because these public/private projects have the support and authorization of the Ontario government, these shell companies are able to obtain 100% financing without putting any “skin in the game”, that is, their own hard cash equity and without providing their own corporate guarantees.

Because the Ontario government is neither the direct borrower (debtor under the bond) or a guarantor of the bond, legally these bonds are not included in Ontario’s overall government debt.
Pretty clever.

Except on closer inspection and in practice, this scheme seems to be more like “off the public books” financing.

Because in actual fact and practice, the Ontario government is still in control of,  and responsible for, these public buildings and institutions, financially and is still ultimately on the financial hook for ongoing interest payments of the bonds and ultimately repayment of these bonds and for any defaults under these bonds.

Firstly, whether a hospital is owned by the Ontario government or is owned/operated by a private shell company, the interest payments on the bond, come from the same source, i.e. government revenues collected as personal and corporate taxes- which are in turn are appropriated or granted to the said hospital by the Ontario government.

Secondly, in the event of a default in the bond, or the bondholder requires the repayment of the bond on maturity, because the private shell company has no equity or guarantees at risk, it will do nothing. The ultimate responsibility will fall to the Ontario government to take over the facility or refinance the bond – because no Ontario government would permit a bondholder to take over a public hospital, university, school or courthouse due to a default in the bond, notwithstanding that the Ontario government is neither a borrower or guarantor of the bond.

Recall the examples of Ornge, the air ambulance and ground transportation service for Ontario and the cancelled Mississauga gas plant.

In the case of Ornge,  on the basis of annual legislated grants to its public service company, Ornge, set up separate private companies and went out to the private markets and borrowed about $250 million to buy helicopters and aircraft to expand Ornge and another $25 million to buy a new Mississauga head office building.

When Ornge’s executives were terminated for cause, in order to maintain the public Ornge service and Ontario’s reputation in the capital and bond markets, the Liberal government took over the payment of both loans, notwithstanding that the province of Ontario was neither a borrower or guarantor of either loan.

Similarly, though the Ontario government was not a party to the construction loan agreement between the Mississauga gas plant developer and its American lender, the Liberal government agreed to pay the American lender well in excess of what it was owed as a result of the cancellation.

Recently, the Ontario government stepped in and agreed to purchase a 70% vacant MaRS II building, purportedly to protect MaRS’ work on behalf of Ontario, notwithstanding that Ontario was neither a debtor or guarantor, and that IO was the actual construction lender in this case!

The Ontario Auditor General, in her recent report called into question the necessity of the Wynne Government paying about $70 million to the American real estate developer, instead of just foreclosing on its loan and extinguishing the entire equity stake of this American investor in the infamous MaR2 Tower, aka, “The White Elephant on College Street.“

For the sake of accurate and honest government financial reporting and accounting, the same auditor should review the whole $42 billion AFP program with a view to properly bringing those financial obligations and any other wonky loans (  incurred by Ontario green energy wind farms and solar companies), back on the Ontario government books and treated as Ontario debt, as the Auditor General did with $800 million of Catholic School Board debt in 2009.

About $800 million of Catholic School Board debt, ( which was originally issued and treated as off balance sheet financing) was deemed by the Auditor General in 2009 to be in reality debt of the province of Ontario.

If Ontario’s true financial debt picture is closer to $350 billion than $300 billion, then Ontario is much closer to hitting the fiscal wall, and appropriate fiscal action should be taken sooner, than later.

Obama’s apologists are now suggesting that Obama’s previous comments were based upon other people’s faulty legal opinions. That explanation is also invalid. Obama has always prided himself as “the smartest man in the room”, if not the country. In constitutional matters, he is his own best counsel.So what has changed in the last year? The immigration laws have not changed. The Constitution has not changed.

The fundamental principles of separation of powers and checks and balances are still embedded in the Constitution.

At least for now.

In Obama’s recent speech to the nation, the only fact on the ground that has changed is Congress’ failure to act on immigration reform, that is, Congress has failed to fix a broken system.

For Obama and his Democratic acolytes, lackeys and cult-like followers, the ends of granting amnesty to five million illegal immigrants, justify the means of trampling on America’s hallowed Constitution.

Recall the very founding of America was based on the rejection of the superior power of the monarchy or executive over the people, the governed. America was founded and was to be governed on the basis of the separation of the powers of three co-equal main branches of government. And that the power of each branch would be constrained by checks and balances.

It is not acceptable legally or constitutionally for Obama to justify his unilateral executive actions on the basis that since Congress has not exercised its constitutional power to enact laws reforming immigration, that reluctance gives Obama carte blanche to extend his executive powers into Congress’ exclusive legislative jurisdiction.

This is a dangerous extension and abuse of presidential power.

Note that Obama and his apologists have defended this unlawful executive action on the basis that former Republican Presidents Reagan and Bush 1, also issued similar type executive orders to prevent illegal immigrants from being deported.

You have to hand it to Obama and his Ivy League elitist henchmen. They are evil and devious geniuses. For six years, Obama and his people have tried to baffle the American people with their convoluted, complex and deceptive legal hocus pocus and BS.

Thanks to Jonathan Gruber, ObamaCare’s architect, we now know that Obama and his people have been playing us for fools, for being stupid. Clearly not up to their lofty Ivy League elitist intellectual standards.

According to Gruber, in order to pass ObamaCare, the people were misled into thinking: (1) ObamaCare was not a tax; (2) it would lower, not increase health and medical costs; and (3) the biggest whopper, if you liked your doctor and insurance plan, you could keep them both.

Similarly, according to Obama, his ImmigrationCare, has legal precedent.

Lies, lies and more lies.

Unlike what Obama is about to do, Presidents Reagan and Bush 41 issued immigration regulations that were expressly authorized by a law passed by Congress. (PowerLineBlog, Nov. 20, 2014)

In 1986, Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act. The Act required him to adjust the status of certain illegal immigrants to the category of “alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence.”The Act also authorized the Attorney General to allow other illegal immigrants who did not qualify for the amnesty to remain in the U.S. if needed “to assure family unity.”

Based on this Congressional act, Reagan’s Justice Department issued regulations that permitted some illegal immigrant spouses and children to stay in the country for the sake of family unity.

It is critical to note that this regulation was not an exercise of prosecutorial discretion or the assertion of a generalized right to suspend “oppressive” immigration laws. Rather, the Reagan administration made it clear that it was carrying out the direction of Congress.

In 1990 President George H.W. Bush ( Bush 1), through regulation, expanded the Reagan Department of Justice’s interpretation of “family unity” to encompass all spouses and children. Like Reagan, Bush merely interpreted the 1986 Act, as Congress had called on the executive to do.

In both instances, Reagan and Bush 1 attempted to effect and enforce Congressional intent. In neither case, did they try to usurp Congress’ constitutional power to enact legislation.

Obama, by contrast, will not be fulfilling a congressional mandate to interpret a new statute. He will be overriding the immigration law in the name of “prosecutorial discretion” on the ground that Congress has not enacted a new statute.

As above noted, this is a dangerous and arrogant attempt by Obama to usurp the powers of Congress and in the process, undermine the American Constitution.

The Republicans have a moral and legal obligation to resist Obama and to vigorously defend the Constitution against this dangerous and out of control president.

Impeachment is neither achievable or practical. In my next article, I will try to suggest what the Republicans can and should do to properly defend the Constitution, defend the United States against this “home-grown usurper” and demonstrate to the American people that they are capable of governing this country responsibly for the people and by the people.

Clearly, in Obama’s mind, the people are not always right. In fact, Obama and his fellow Democrats, obviously channeling one of ObamaCare’s key architects, Jonathan Gruber, believe that the American people are stupid.Apparently, to Obama, the American people do not know any better. So Obama is apparently going to ignore the wishes of the people, and instead he is going to plunge ahead unilaterally, without Congress and impose an immigration solution on the entire country.

According to reliable reports, Obama is planning to issue executive orders which will in effect grant amnesty to five million illegal and undocumented immigrants. And permit them to stay and work in the United States.

Obama will argue that he has received a legal opinion from his own appointed Attorney General, Eric Holder, which will suggest that Obama has the legal and executive authority and discretion as President to order that these five million illegal immigrants not be deported and in addition, that work permits be provided to these same persons.

Ironically, for many years, Obama himself has been arguing the exact opposite- that to do what has been suggested by pro immigrant activists- is illegal.

In March 2011, Obama argued that he could not as President prevent the deportation of illegal immigrants. He stated to the effect, that the nation’s laws were clear enough, “that for me to simply, through executive order, ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.”

In February 2013, in response to an activist asking Obama if he could do more to keep illegal immigrant families from being torn apart due to deportation, Obama replied, ” the problem is, that I am the President of the United States. I am not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed.”

In November 2013, when pressed by activists to stop the deportations, Obama argued that only Congress had the authority to do what they wanted. He then stated, “the easy way out is to try to yell and pretend that I can do something by violating our laws.”

So what has substantially changed, between then and now, to cause Obama to do a complete 180 degree turn?

Well, nothing fundamentally, except as a result of the recent midterm election, Obama and his party have been crushed and the Republicans now control both Houses for the remainder of Obama’s term. And that the American people have sent a clear message to Obama that he must deal openly and honestly in a co-operative and bipartisan fashion with the Republicans, who now control Congress.

But, for Obama, once an outsider, always an outsider. I suspect that Obama believes that he is now liberated to go his own arrogant way, oblivious to constitutional checks and balances. I sense that Obama does not give a frack about the greater American people or even his own Democratic party. I sense that Obama, in his final act, has morphed into his own version of the Sun King, where American politics should just revolve around himself.

And he will do what he wants to do, regardless of the consequences.

By ignoring the majority will of Congress—by the stroke of his pen—Obama will figuratively and publicly behead the elected Congress, a co-equal branch of the American government.

With this one incredibly selfish and provocative and apparently illegal act, Obama is in effect declaring jihad on the American Constitution.

He is brazenly challenging the Republican Congress to come after him and fight him in the courts as to whether as President, he has the legal authority to issue these executive immigration orders.

In the process, Obama will do great damage to the American body politic. He is pitting millions of angry and vulnerable illegal immigrants and their supporters against the majority of very angry American people who hate and fear the abuse of presidential authority over the wishes of a majority of America’s federally elected representatives.

Obama’s proposed executive action is the act of a desperate and now dangerously out of control president, apparently unfettered by the American Constitution, that at one time, Obama swore to uphold.

What a despicable, deceitful and contemptible little man Obama is!

What a despicable, deceitful and contemptible little man Obama is! One can almost hear the disdain in his voice as he parrots anti-Keystone lobbyists’ talking points.

Obama is not referring to Canada, as America’s largest trading partner and its most loyal and trusted democratic neighbor and ally. A country that has fought with America during two World Wars, the Korean War and more recently at the request of the United States, fought bravely alongside the Americans in Afghanistan at great loss of human life and at enormous financial cost.

Instead Obama is clearly treating contemptuously Canada as if it was some rogue anti-democratic, anti-American misogynistic Middle Eastern potentate, pumping dirty oil and befouling the environment.

Obama is infamous for treating America’s closest allies- poorly and treating America’s sworn enemies- (Iran) deferentially.  It is no wonder that Obama lacks close relationships with western leaders and is generally considered to be one of America’s most untrustworthy and spineless American leaders in modern day history.

Let us look more critically Obama’s actual above comments.

Firstly, Obama is lying through his smug teeth when he states that the Keystone pipeline “is providing Canada the ability to pump their oil.”  Whereas the Keystone pipeline would provide a much-needed link between the Alberta oil sands and the Gulf Coast refineries, the absence of the Keystone pipeline has not stopped the pumping of oil from the Alberta oil sands.  In the absence of pipelines, west to British Columbia and south to the United States, there has been increased use of rail to transport Alberta crude to the American (160,000 barrels per day) and Asian markets, by way of Canada’s west coast. In addition, a eastern pipeline is being developed using an existing gas pipeline, to transport Alberta oil (estimated 1.1 million barrels per day)  to Quebec and New Brunswick for refining, thus skipping the US entirely.

Obama is merely ignorantly parroting the anti-Keystone propaganda, that rejection of the Keystone pipeline will destroy Canada’s ability to pump Alberta oil. As has been shown, nothing could be further from the truth.

Secondly, Obama falsely suggests only Canadian oil will be transported through the proposed Keystone pipeline. This pipeline will also be used to transport U.S. light oil from North Dakota’s Bakken Shale to the Gulf Coast refineries. In other words, the Keystone pipeline is not an export pipeline, as Obama wrongly suggests.

It also makes economic sense for American oil companies and refineries to have both Canadian oil and American oil be transported by Keystone to the Gulf refineries, than for the same American companies to import higher-priced oil from Venezuela and the Middle East, to be refined in the Gulf Coast refineries.

Thirdly, Obama’s ignorance of basic economics 101 supply and demand is appalling. The oil markets are global. Everyone agrees, both critics and opponents, that the existence of the Keystone pipeline will increase the supply of oil in the world. And increased worldwide oil supply will ultimately lead to reduced gas prices. Conversely, restricting the supply of Canadian oil, will lead to Middle East oil-producing nations increasing the price of oil, which will lead to higher gas prices. Homer Simpson has a better grasp of oil and gas pricing than the U.S. clueless and highly over-rated current President.

Obama further added:

“I have to constantly push back against this idea that somehow the Keystone pipeline is either this massive jobs bill for the United States or is somehow lowering gas price.”

How intellectually dishonest! None of the Keystone’s proponents has ever suggested that Keystone would create a massive number of jobs.

The U.S. State Department has estimated that a total of 42,000 jobs will be created, taking into account the temporary construction jobs, the permanent maintenance jobs and the indirect jobs created to support this construction project.

Obviously, six key American labor unions, normally supportive of the Democrats, view these proposed jobs as significant and hence are pushing their Democratic representatives to support the pro Keystone bill.

Once again, the mendacious Obama appears to be speaking out of two sides of his mouth. On one hand, Obama is constantly urging Congress to spend taxpayers’ money on infrastructure projects to create jobs. Yet he implies that the 1,179-mile Keystone infrastructure project, (which is to be privately financed) will not create much needed American jobs.

Obama’s whole pathetic opposition to the Keystone pipeline, has finally exposed him as an intellectual lightweight, way out of his depth on this energy/infrastructure file and apparently overly influenced by anti-Keystone lobbyists and special interests.

Obama’s dithering and mendacity on this whole file has even alienated many Democratic Congressmen and Senators and many of his Democratic supporters.

I predict Obama will become the most reviled and unpopular Democratic President since the Peanut President and Palestinian terrorist sympathizer,  Jimmy Carter.

By Obama’s own admission,  the midterm election of 2014 was a referendum on Obama’s Presidency, his policies and Obama, the man

But once the Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives in 2010 (mostly as a result of Obama’s own policies and his failure to compromise and attract bipartisan support) Obama’s legislative record has been dismal.

By Obama’s own admission,  the midterm election of 2014 was a referendum on Obama’s Presidency, his policies and Obama, the man. In all three instances, the American people voted loud and clear against Obama. As a result, the Democrats lost control of the Senate to the Republicans. (As of this writing, the Republicans have elected fifty-two Senators.)

Accordingly, with two years left in his second term, Obama has become the lamest of lame duck Presidents.

Since Obama’s most effective years are behind him and he will leave the Presidency in about two years,  I believe that Obama’s main priority, above all political concerns, will be his legacy, that is, his view of his place in history.

Obama has always looked upon himself as a pro-environment,  climate change President. He has specifically courted and attracted the activist environmental base of the Democratic party. And the wealthy individual and corporate sponsors of the green environmental movement.

Though Obama has failed to enact any significant cap and trade legislation or carbon tax legislation, Obama has succeeded to date in doing an end run around the Republican Congress through executive fiat- by using his executive power to diminish America’s coal industry through punitive administrative regulations, which do not require Congressional approval.

In order for Obama, in his own mind,  to solidify his reputation as a fierce defender of the environment, I firmly believe that Obama will oppose any proposed bill from the Republican-controlled Congress which would approve the construction of the Keystone pipeline for the purpose of transporting Alberta oil to American refineries in the south.

Though the US State Department has opined that the existence of this pipeline will have no material effect on the production of greenhouse gases, (Alberta oil will be produced and transported with or without the Keystone pipeline.) Obama to date has opposed the pipeline and has hidden behind process and review.

I also believe that Obama will reject Keystone in order to burnish his international green record image ahead of a global climate conference at the end of 2015.

Obama does not give two fracks about the future political fate of the Democratic Party

Obama does not give two fracks about the future political fate of the Democratic Party. However,  I do believe that Obama does care about the opinions of his closest and long time advisers Valerie Jarrett and John Podesta and his many long time pro-enviro supporters in the western and eastern red states, including his wealthy liberal Hollywood supporters (Babs Streisand, New Agey Gynneth Paltrow) and his many multi-millionaire hedge fund financial supporters ( ie.Tom Steyer), all anti-Keystoners.

Again, with Obama, it is personal, not political.

If Obama was truly concerned about the political implications for the Democratic party and for the re-election chances of Democrats in 2016, he would not have permitted the Keystone issue to take on such politically dramatic and symbolic significance.

Because the politics of the Keystone pipeline cuts both ways in the Democratic party. It has deeply divided the Democratic party. On one side are those who are in favor of the pipeline, i.e., union members who support the pipeline for the construction and maintenance jobs that it will bring as well as a measure of energy independence and national security. Democratic advocates of the pipeline believe that it is in America’s national self-interest to import oil from Canada, a more reliable ally than Venezuela or certain volatile Middle Eastern countries.

On the other side, Democratic opponents believe that rejecting the pipeline will deal a grievous blow to the Alberta oil sands, significantly reduce Alberta oil production, which they believe will reduce greenhouse gases to the benefit of the environment.

Because Obama will be damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t, Obama will choose his personal legacy and veto the Keystone pipeline and force those Democratic Congressmen and Senators in pro Keystone states to fend for themselves in the 2016 elections.

Apparently the Republicans, with their fifty-two senators, believe they have to date sixty-one pro Keystone Senators onboard (nine Democratic Senators), sufficient to pass a pro Keystone bill.

I predict that when Obama vetoes this bill, he will be surprised that other Democratic Senators, based on their own fear of personal defeat in 2016, will abandon Obama and join with the Republicans in overriding Obama’s veto.  (67 votes are required to override a Presidential veto)

Yes, Virginia, Barack Obama will have finally unified the Congress and the country – against himself. Now that would be truly epic and historic.