Obama, Goldman Sachs, and the “Environmental” Industry: Three Amigos Too Many

The impression one gets when one reads the news is that the people reporting are in some part of the human race that could be classed “disinterested observer.” They seem incapable of drawing lines of logic; or don’t want to, because those lines expose the elite for what they are. Exposing your source of entertainment (which is what news seems to be today) is losing access to those folks, I suppose, but where is the integrity is soft-pedalling the news?

You can read the facts about Goldman Sachs anywhere now, and there are some especially interesting facts to be had about how manipulative they are. (This article in particular will teach you about who they actually are.) They treat their customers, for example, as sump holes – which is why it isn’t surprising they sold “shitty” deals to them. The goal of Goldman Sachs is to take from everyone for their own benefit.

Now, Goldman Sachs is one of the largest direct/indirect campaign contributors of Obama. (Follow the trail from here.) It is no surprise they got a fair hunk of the public money going into the Wall Street bailout, which was the kickback one would expect. Yes, I even wrote kickback, because even if not illegal, there is absolutely no way to describe it that avoids it fitting the definition. They helped to pay to elect a man who appointed past Goldman employees to positions of power, and an ex-Goldman employee spun a tale about “too big to fail” companies, and managed to put 11 or so billion in Goldman Sachs’ accounts. That folks, is pretty much a perfect description of political kickbacks.

Again, you can read all that in any of the links you can find using Google, or starting from the two links above.

What you might also find is this: President Obama opens new areas to offshore drilling. One of those approval areas is now gushing oil into the oceans at an embarrassing rate, destroying Louisiana fisheries for a while, at least, and posing a risk to any state along the fringes of the Gulf Stream. That risk, admittedly, is not presently high, but the problem is that there has been no progress stopping the flow of oil either, so every passing hour notches up the risk to Florida, etc.

Now, being as this disaster stalls oil supply enhancements, and considering Goldman Sachs participated in an investment process before to raise the price of oil significantly (one of many links here, but especially here), one wonders how long before they start that grind again. My guess is through various opaque derivatives they already have, because Goldman Sachs is never behind the game.

But here’s the rest of the logical line (you can Google your own proof of this and will, in doing so, discover much more).

You might note that Obama tied his environmental plan (Carbon Cap & Trade) to offshore drilling, by making the offshore initiative part of his American self-supporting model – and that is what we used to refer to as hypocrisy in action. It is not possible to encourage an environmentally dangerous activity as part of an environmental plan, and even mentioning oil and gas in the same bill as cap and trade is wrong-minded if you talk about expanding oil production.

You might also note one of his other big contributors was Exelon, the nuclear power company (well, its “employees,” but indirect is the same issue as direct when its that obvious).

Now, combine these and you will observe that in one bill he paid off his nuclear (clean power?) people, and his oil interests.

But…he also paid off Goldman Sachs indirectly, since between them and Al Gore the Chicago Climate Exchange structure will net them some big returns. (I’ll give you this link. And, yes, it is Fox News, which can’t generally get its own head screwed on right – but in this case they speak the truth. And if you really can’t stand Fox, try this. You’ll reach the same conclusion either way.)

For years I’ve been suspicious of the “Environmental” movement, because it struck me as too much of an “industry.” What I mean by that, was that the focal movement for things like “clean energy” have been driven by vested interests, and that people like Al Gore have never acted as environmental shepherds, but rather more like high priests. As soon as profit is to be made, the sharks have always circled, and can we ever trust them to speak the truth? They can’t, even if they wished they could, because they don’t grasp the concept of truth as something immutable.

Anyhow, here’s the actual logical line:

Certain “environmental” and “financial” interests paid large sums to help elect Obama; Obama has shaped bills to reward them; Obama has driven a cap and trade model to reward them.

Conclusion: Obama is at least as deep in the pockets of Wall Street and big industry as any other politician, but much more disturbing is that he has managed to blindside the entire American nation into paying his debts to his donors directly and indirectly, on a scale I think may be new.

Once, Obama was a hopeful sight. Now, he is probably the worst example of a craven political hack you can imagine. Sad for the States, and sad for the world that moral integrity falls by the wayside so absolutely when cash is involved.