Hillary Clinton Unifies Democrats – Opposes Keystone XL On Climate Change Grounds

hillary clinton dnc summer meeting

There must be ten or twenty immediate reasons a person can give for opposing a foreign corporation, TransCanada’s crusade to build a dangerous tar sand pipeline across America’s heartland, and they are all valid. However, the overriding, and immediate, cause for alarm should be the devastation tar sand development, production, and transport will have on the Earth’s climate. Now, after questions about whether Democratic candidate for president Hillary Rodham Clinton will do as many disaffected “progressives” claimed was inevitable and come down on the side of big oil and the Koch brothers, the former Secretary of  State and Senator announced she opposed building the Keystone XL pipeline.

What is remarkable about Clinton’s announcement was that it came in response to an audience member’s question during a campaign stop in Iowa, and not at a specially-called press briefing to make a major policy statement and grab headlines. Obviously, the subject has been on Clinton’s mind for some time or she would not have come back with such a forceful statement, or with the most valid reason for opposing Keystone XL’s construction other than restricting profits of the Koch brothers or Speaker of the House John A. Boehner’s stock portfolio.

Former Senator Clinton made a promise last week that she would finally make her position on the pipeline public, and unlike lying Republicans, Clinton kept her word. This is good news for the environment, efforts to combat climate change, and Americans who are rightly terrified at the prospect of a leak-prone foreign corporation’s pipeline over precious agriculture land and a major water resource for millions of Americans. Many Americans concerned about the environment were anxious because they claim President Obama is “dragging his feet on deciding its fate.” Even if President Obama decides to nix the pipeline, Republicans will continue doing the Koch brothers’ bidding and push the foreign project on the next administration.


Although Clinton was Secretary of State, the department tasked with granting a foreign corporation’s permit to build a project across America’s international border with Canada, the Koch Republican push and resulting furor over Keystone was just beginning when she left office. Just three months ago Clinton said, “If it’s undecided when I become president, I will answer your question. This is President Obama’s decision and I’m not going to second-guess him.” However, this is a presidential run and last week Hillary Clinton finally decided that, “I have been waiting for the administration to make a decision. I thought I owed them that. I can’t wait too much longer. I am putting the White House on notice. I am going to tell you what I think soon.”

What Hillary Rodham Clinton thinks about allowing a foreign corporation to endanger Americans’ water and food sources is that,

I oppose it. I oppose it because I don’t think it’s in the best interest of what we need to do to combat climate change.”

She also rightly said that the pipeline, or the push by Republicans to get it built tomorrow, was and has been “a distraction for the work we have to do to combat climate change; we need to move beyond the issue. I thought this would be decided by now. And therefore, I could tell you whether I agreed or I disagreed. But it hasn’t been decided, and I feel now I’ve got a responsibility to you and other voters who ask me about this.” Apparently Clinton feels she has a responsibility to speak out about the most important reason to oppose the pipeline. As noted NASA climate scientist James Hansen has been screaming for five years; building Keystone XL and further developing Canada’s tar sands means “game over for Earth’s climate.”

Clinton’s announcement was, for lack of a better term, ‘responded to’ in a strange way by Senator Bernie Sanders and former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley. Sanders said that,

I am glad that Secretary Clinton finally has made a decision and I welcome her opposition to the pipeline.” He also added that he has opposed the pipeline “from the beginning.”

Martin O’Malley’s response was less-gracious than Senator Sanders and naturally he took what some would call a cheap shot at Clinton instead of welcoming another strong Democratic voice opposing the climate-destroying pipeline. He said,

On issue after issue-marriage equality, drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants, children fleeing violence in Central America, the Syrian refugee crisis, and now the Keystone Pipeline, Secretary Clinton has followed – not forged – public opinion.”

Good to know that Martin O’Malley has forged public opinion on so many important issues; particularly when most Americans have little clue exactly who Martin O’Malley is much less how he “forged” their opinions.

One risks outraged EmoProg’s condemnation, but really, with something as dangerous to the Earth’s climate as Keystone XL, it does not matter one iota who among Democrats opposed the project first, or who thinks they drove public opinion against it. Frankly, it is likely that no politician ever forges public opinion; not Bernie Sanders, not Martin O’Malley, not Hillary Clinton and not Barack Obama and it is political vanity to believe otherwise. Perhaps just welcoming Hillary Clinton’s opposition would have sufficed in a unified Democratic base, but Senator Sanders and former governor O’Malley both understand that many of their supporters on the ‘Emoprog’ left demand attacks against Clinton; even if they are tepid and amount to “I did it first;” they are childish like that.

For many Americans concerned about the devastation already being wreaked on the environment, Americans’ health, and the economy, a unified Democratic front in opposition to the pipeline is great news. It is particularly great news because this week all eyes are focused on Pope Francis’ visit to America and his address to Congress that will surely include schooling Republicans on their obstructionist tactics to block action on climate change. Whatever one thinks about Hillary Clinton, or why they think she waited to come out against allowing a foreign corporation’s project being built on American soil, her statement that she opposes the pipeline because it is a distraction for the work “we have to do to combat climate change” means that Democrats are unified on the subject; something that should worry Republicans.

73 Replies to “Hillary Clinton Unifies Democrats – Opposes Keystone XL On Climate Change Grounds”

  1. With the price of gas tanking the way it is (pun intended), I don’t think the Keystone is economically feasible anymore. I’m surprized anyone is still pushing for it.

  2. Its a lie! Clinton is beholden to wall street just look at her pacs. Plus emails and Benghazi. She is a Clinton and feel the bern was against it first. I will stay home if you don’t signed the pledge Bernie or else

  3. …I understand why Hillary had to wait; I’m also glad the wait’s over…
    …what I’m still pissed off about is O’Malleys continued cheap shots towards fellow Dems…tempted to go on his FB page and chew his ass out Navy style…

  4. This means NOTHING. Clinton is still supportive of Alberta imports of tar sands oil, the environmental worst.

    Her coming out “against” KeystoneXL is a political stunt. The Pope is in town and she fully expects him to talk about environmental issues. She’s trying to align herself with him. Her “putting Obama on notice” was BS. For the longest time Clinton was leaning for KeystoneXL. She’s rarely consistent.

    Such shenanigans!!

  5. She is a rethug through and through and I will never vote for her. I will write in Bernie in the general. WAKE UP people.

  6. No specifics required I guess.

    People who call Hillary a rethug are the 1st people to scream when rights are taken away by the right wing.

  7. She didn’t answer because it is nothing but a paid rethug troll or a naderite, same thing but one thing they have in common is they are both idiots

  8. Did Hillary Clinton unify Democrats?

    Is Rmuse suggesting that Democrats were united *by* Hillary Clinton? That seems to be your interpretation. If you’re right, a lot of people — including me — would agree with you. Taking a cue from PolitiFact, it’s definitely FALSE to say Democrats were unified by Clinton.

    On the other hand, I got a different meaning from the title: the candidates show a united front now that Clinton has come out against the Keystone XL deal. That interpretation gets a TRUE rating.

    …Unless Rmuse meant something else?

  9. Lol I’m glad you’re finally seeing things clearly.

    All joking aside, only Hillary is insecure enough to force people to sign ridiculous “pledges of support.”

  10. Well, Hillary opposes the Keystone pipeline because of climate change *or* because polling told her to.

    Definitely one of those two reasons. But it was actually the later.

  11. The Kochroaches deserve one more spraying of
    pesticide. Their Alberta tar sand oil should be kept
    off American railroads. Let those arrogant billionaires
    drown in their own sludge. Serves ’em right. Just be-
    cause they can’t pipe that goo doesn’t mean it’s still
    not going to cause major problems for an already
    over burdened transportation system that repugs
    refuse to appropriate funds to restore. Just sayin’…

  12. The real problem with Tar Sands is a Canadian problem. Oil is struggling to say above $40 per barrel and the break even point for Tar Sands oil is closer to $70. The Canadians make up the difference.

    Canada has an election next month. Do they want to keep loosing $30 per barrel and somehow make it up with volume? (yes it is a joke) :)

  13. Sorry if I wasn’t clear.

    “Polling told her [that dodging the question these last few months has damaged how voters view her (trustworthiness, transparency, etc.].”

  14. I live in the SF Bay area. The latest plan for much of that Tar Sands oil is to ship it via rail, over the Altamont pass or through downtown Berkeley, to Philips refinery in Santa Barbara.
    The Center for Biological Diversity has calculated that at least 500,000 students will be in the “blast zone” if one of the rail cars used, which are not up to NTSB standards, were to explode.
    Unfortunately, little can be done regarding right-of-way as the tracks all belong to Southern Pacific and other railroads.
    Although the NTSB came out with revised standards for tanker cars which are to carry tar sands oil, the railroads/oil companies have deigned to ignore them.
    THESE aspects of the transportation of Tar Sands Oil by rail are not controlled by Hillary Clinton nor any other politician at this time.
    Not voting Democratic if your preferred candidate isn’t the nominee is a recipe for disaster, pure and simple. #UniteBlue

  15. Greenzis,
    Your exaggeration of vague scientific consensus and certainty to billions of children makes BUSH look like the “progressive” in the coming history books, no matter how much you hissy fit hate conservatives.

    Science was smart enough to say; ‘PROVEN’ for their own CO2 ARMAGEDDON before it was too late to have said it and nothing is stopping another 34 more years of debate, delay and climate action failure.

    *Is THIS how you want your kids and history remembering you?*

  16. https://mobile.twitter.com/SalenaZitoTrib/status/640877172064956416?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


    And my favorite…

    “A North Carolina superdelegate, Pat Cotham, said she had recently received phone calls and emails from Clinton aides — including one whose title was the “southern region political states director” and who sent her a pledge form.

    “This kind of irritated me,” Ms. Cotham said. “He called me and never said anything about signing a document committing to Hillary. Then he sends it to me and wants me to send it back to him signed. Uh, no.””


  17. Yes, during Clinton’s time in the Senate, she and Sanders voted the same 93% of the time. That 93% figure is a New York Times way to frame a conversation with the fear of so many willing to write-in Sanders if he is not the nomination. The other side of that conversation are the important differences between the two candidates. Such as, Iraq War Authorization- Sanders-No, Clinton-Yes, TARP aka Wall Street Bailout-Sanders-No, Clinton-Yes, Patriot Act 2001-Sanders-No, Clinton-Yes, Patriot Act Reauthorization 2006-Sanders-No, Clinton-Yes, TTP aka Trans-Pacific Partnership-Sanders-No, Clinton-Yes, 2006 Border Fence Legislation-Sanders-No, Clinton-Yes, Offshore Drilling-Sanders-No, Clinton-yes, Foreign US Military Intervention-Sanders-No, Clinton-Yes, Keystone XL Pipeline-Sanders-No, Clinton as Sec of St, said, “the state department was inclined to support the pipeline.” early campaigning Clinton said“no opinion, hedging the subject.Now she’s “evolved” again(like the gay marriag…

  18. When you go by a poll that has more republicans than democrats then your dumbass will get the result you want. But this is what matters
    PPP Poll out of Iowa.

    Clinton: 43
    He’s Your First, Your Last, Your Everything: 22
    Biden: 17

    And subtract Biden and Hillary still leads at 50 to 25.

  19. DJ thanks for that link.

    I’ve been hearing the same thing from foolish people, and I will refer them to this link.

  20. I really have a very hard time believing SOS Clinton when she says she opposes the Keystone XL Pipeline for a multitude of reasons the biggest one being that one of her biggest bundlers is the fossil fuel industry. I really don’t give a rat’s ass about Benghazi, email, original birther…. That’s all bullshit as far as I’m concerned. It’s the money stupid, and specifically SuperPAC, Bundlers, and special interest money that she happily accepts. That tells me right there where her loyalties will lie if or when she takes office.


  21. What is there to defend? That idiots like you have bought into the right wing lies? Now tell me what has she has done that you found her to be untrustworthy

  22. I was referring more to her making people sign support pledges.

    But if you want to mix threads…

    My only real problem with her trustworthiness, is that she literally does make decisions based on polling. Whether you want to admit it or not, that’s the ONLY reason she now, finally, decided to announce her opinion on the keystone pipeline.

    Polling told her that people didn’t like her “if it’s an issue when I’m elected, than I’ll tell you my position” response.

    So you really don’t know what she’ll do next, it’s all based on the polling.

  23. So if more people are for keystone how is she going by polling to come out against it? You sound like an idiot

  24. Von, how long have you been interested in politics? Do you know what a pledge form is? It is used for superdelegates, always. That is why they are called PLEDGED DELEGATES. They go to the convention pledged to one candidate.

    Here is the form the H camp uses in 2016 and she has 440 of them signed. O’Malley and Biden also have them but just a few. Bernie has none but if he gets any they will pledge.


  25. It is for LEGAL MATTERS of the DNC.

    “Pledge Delegate
    The Democratic National Committee collects demographic information on each delegate to ensure that affirmative action goals are met. Therefore, the following information is required on every delegate”

  26. Lol, always talking in circles.

    My problem is that polling had to tell her to pick a side. It didn’t matter which side she picked, Democrats wanted an answer.

  27. Look, I am on record here as having one of my most important issues personally to be the environment. I said here long ago I was a member of Greenpeace for decades and was ridiculed for it by Republicans here.

    I knew she was against it. I said so long ago. I couldn’t prove it but I know her, she was my Senator – I know her record. I have read her books and I know the amazing things her foundation has done around the world.

    The lies about her are hideous and the truth will prevail.

    She didn’t come out earlier out of respect for Obama and Kerry. She answered finally because she was under unreasonable pressure by very unreasonable people who were making unreasonable demands. Those same unreasonable people are being unreasonable about her answer.

    What a surprise.

  28. If I’m being honest, I am a little annoyed that she seems to be stealing everyone of Bernie’s positions, including his campaign style. Regarding the positions, it’s probably because they’re polling well.

  29. Von, if you were really being honest, you’d come right out and say you’ll never vote for SOS Clinton because you hate her.

  30. Djchefron……SERIOUSLY….!!! and “far left bernie-bots and progressives”….I think would be a MISNOMER..!!!!.. when used in the Same Sentence Me Thinks….!!!!!….SERIOUSLY….!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  31. At this point, no I probably would not vote for her. But I supported her before Bernie jumped in the race, and even donated her $25 back in April.

  32. “Rmuse” writes that “Hillary Clinton Unifies Democrats–Opposes Keystone XL…” On the contrary, the majority of Americans informed about climate change have been opposed to Keystone all along, and it is a fact that Sanders articulated vehement opposition to it from the beginning. Clinton did not denounce it, she supported it. Rmuse must be aware that Clinton has been re-imaging her positions when political expediency forces her to do that. Since she started campaigning months ago, she has been silent on the matter. People don’t forget that. So at least publicly, she has come around. Her timing for jumping on the bandwagon is more suspect than “unifying.” Then Sanders introduces a bill to reign in Big Pharma price gouging, and when a story about that riles the public, suddenly Clinton has an opinion on what the price of an Rx should be? I am not impressed. In this article Rmuse does a good job of showing his allegiance to Mrs. Clinton. Unfortunately, that doesn’t qualify as journ…

  33. Someone stated here that Clinton and Sanders records were the same 93% of the time. That’s dead wrong. Their positions historically are polar opposites on many vital issues:
    1. Iraq War:Sanders opposed, Clinton supported. 2. Wall Street Bailout (TARP): Sanders opposed, Clinton supported. 3.
    Patriot Act 2001: Sanders opposed, Clinton supported. Clinton supports. 4. 2006 Border Fence Legislation: Sanders opposed, Clinton supported. 5. Off Shore Drilling: Sanders opposed, Clinton supported. 6. Trans-Pacific Partnership: Sanders opposed, Clinton supported. 7. Keystone XL: Sanders has always opposed, Clinton kept her mouth shut until the mood of the voters moved her. 8. Wealth Inequality and Citizens United? Sanders has Zero dollars from any Super PAC. Half of the donations to Clinton and Republicans as of 9/22/15 came from fewer than 400 families, with 62 donors giving at least $1 million. Source: commondreams.org

  34. 1. Sanders supported by funding it like al the wars since Kosovo
    2. We got our money back with interest. Now why is Sanders killing jobs by opposing export/import bank
    3. When did Clinton support keystone? Please provide links
    For the rest of this bullshit you should read this and this is why you bernbots wont win
    Reframing for the Win

  35. PPP Poll out of Iowa.

    Clinton: 43
    He’s Your First, Your Last, Your Everything: 22
    Biden: 17

    And subtract Biden and Hillary still leads at 50 to 25.

    Looks like summer’s over, Berniebers. Normal people are starting to pay attention to all this silliness now…
    Is that fluffy enough for you

  36. Did you read the article? Look we already have pipelines in fact over 2 million miles of them. She is talking about modernized the ones we got. She is talking about rebuilding the rail lines and safer tanker cars since we are transporting more oil by rail. As much as you would want to get rid of oil it just aint happening and if Bernie say that’s what he going to do then he is lying as usual

  37. If people support Keystone it’s because the corporate media does not give them any facts about the project.

    The owners testified before Congress that the refined oil was destined to be sold to China and India–but Republicans claim the oil will make American independent.

    Republicans claim the pipeline will create 20,000 jobs–a total lie. (It’s 2500-6000 temporary jobs and a minimum of 20 permanent jobs.) Republicans then claimed the State Dept. report said 42,000 jobs would be created. I read that report–it says 42,000 EXISTING business and jobs will benefit.

    On NO news program were these facts ever stated.

  38. Why do you think I call people idiots. In no way do I support the pipeline and the reason I ever brought it up was the Hillary haters said she only changed her mind because of the public when clearly she is going against public opinion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.