Scheming aside, this was good

November 7, 2015


Tar Sands in Alberta, from which the oil would be transported.

Tar Sands in Alberta, from which the oil would be transported.

Trust me. Things slip through your fingers when you’re fending off a potentially fatal illness — like blog entries.  I’ve been in and out of the hospital since August 24th in an attempt to rescue the rest of body from a rabid tongue, which did its best to kill me in its second cancer go-round in 27 years. I lost two thirds of the vicious beast and gained it all back thanks to reconstructive surgery. My accent reminds me of Daffy Duck, a hero for our time.

Thus, nothing has come from this spot.

But more on that in another entry.

Today, I simply link up with President Obama’s short explanation for his rejection of Keystone XL. I do that because many are second guessing his “inner motives.” Some view this decision as the predictable brain child of a schemer bent on America’s destruction; others see him as the ultimate altruist. In an eerie coincidence, the two camps roughly correspond to anti-Obama and pro-Obama voting camps.

Personally, I don’t know what his motivations were. I don’t live in his head — but his reasoning is sound. I present it below, in his own words, unfiltered through pundits.

About Charles Redfern

Charles Redfern is a writer, activist, and clergyman living in Connecticut with his wife and family. He's currently writing two books, with more in his head.

View all posts by Charles Redfern


Subscribe to our RSS feed and social profiles to receive updates.

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: