Alert reader/blogger lori notes the LA Times’ report of Barack Obama’s backing-off yesterday of his previous support for promoting coal-to-liquid technology.
With pressure mounting on Democratic presidential candidates to adopt hard-line positions on curbing global warming, Sen. Barack Obama on Tuesday backtracked from his long-held support for a controversial plan to promote the use of coal as an alternative fuel to power motor vehicles….
At issue is legislation, introduced in January, that would give the coal industry tax breaks and other incentives to harness the abundant natural resource as an alternative fuel. A bipartisan group of lawmakers, led by Obama and Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), promoted the idea as a way to reduce U.S. reliance on foreign oil….
With his statement Tuesday, Obama seemed to be making his choice clear: pledging to oppose any plan to turn coal into liquid fuel unless it adhered to strict environmental safeguards….
Obama’s aides described the statement as a “clarification,” distributed to correct what they said were false media reports describing the senator’s views on the issue. But it sparked confusion among coal industry officials, who until Tuesday had viewed Obama as an ally on the issue, and drew cheers from environmentalists, who described it as a change.
Better late than never, Senator — welcome aboard.
In other Obama-related news, the general counsel to the Obama campaign, Robert Bauer, bizarrely advocates that the president pardon Scooter Libby over at HuffPo.
A pardon is just what Bush’s opponents should want. A pardon brings the president into the heart of the case. It compels him to do what he has so far managed to avoid: accept in some way responsibility for the conduct of his Administration in communicating with the public about national security and in its treatment of dissent. If the pardon would be politically explosive, then this is what the administration’s critics, hungering for accountability, have been waiting for. The case against this government on the larger charge of abuse of power is diminished, made even laughable, by resolving into a 30-month sentence for an obscure figure named Libby.
Read the whole thing, if you want — it’s not terribly convincing, or terribly interesting, on its own merits. But Bauer’s role as general counsel for the Obama campaign makes the post awkward, to say the least, for Obama. Obama’s spokesman has already issued a statement distancing itself from Bauer:
Bob was speaking on his own behalf. Senator Obama opposes a pardon and strongly believes that Libby should be held accountable for his actions.
And, to be fair, Bauer’s article now features a disclaimer (which, I think, was not there earlier today when I first saw the article):
All the views expressed in this post are those of the author and not of any client of his firm.
That’s all well and good, but the real question is, why was it so important to Bauer to opine on this? Why create a political problem for the campaign he presumably wants to win, when there was no pressing need to do so? Bad judgment, Bob.
I don’t think Obama is backing off of coal-to-liquid. He co-sponsored this ridiculous bill. I think he is just being a bit tricky rhetorically by “pledging to oppose any plan to turn coal into liquid fuel unless it adhered to strict environmental safeguards.” Here’s a safegaurd: don’t turn coal into liquid. It sucks for the environment. I appreciate his position. Illinois has alot of coal. In the short-term, coal-to-liquid may be good for his constituents. But, it’s a really bad idea. We need to get off fossil fuels.
If Bauer wants to be GC for a Presidential contender he has to realize that his own views directly impact those of his boss. If he can’t toe the line, he should resign from the team. Plus, he’s wrong about the pardon: Libby did the crime, now he should do the time. If Bush pardons him with the support of the Democrats, that just makes Dub look loyal and the Democrats look Rosencrantz-and-Guildensternian as they are hoist by their own petard.