The Last Barrel

 Vol. 233 No. 12

The dark skies and frequent rainfall that often accompany autumn are a perfect metaphor to describe last month’s U.S. presidential election. In a depressing, stultifying turn-of-events, a very thin majority of the U.S. electorate allowed itself to be fooled once again by one of the great political shamans of all time, Barack H. Obama.

Although he now claims a “mandate,” Mr. Obama won by a fairly thin margin, garnering 50.94% of the electorate, compared to 47.31% that went to Republican nominee Mitt Romney. Obama’s electoral college win was more decisive at 332 votes versus 206 for Gov. Romney.

In a brutal campaign, the Obama side practiced a “take no prisoners”/scorched earth approach that Romney seemed unable to counter. It looked like local election tactics on the South Side of Chicago, employed on a national level. And if you think about it, that’s how Mr. Obama has governed his first four years, with a South Side of Chicago mentality and methods.

So, how did Obama win? Here are some factors:

Media cheerleading. The duplicitous role played by most national media was a huge plus for Obama. Day after day, the left-leaning media did a disservice to the American public, presenting a slanted view of campaign issues, in an effort to bolster Obama. There was no objectivity, with a disproportionate amount of negative coverage heaped on Romney.

Lies, lies and more lies. Obama’s campaign people lied often about a host of issues. They said that Republicans wanted “dirty air and water,” or that Romney wanted to gut Social Security. They accused Republicans of “waging a war on women,” and tried to claim credit for the increase in U.S. oil production.

The “47%” statement. At a private, Republican primary fundraiser, Romney was secretly recorded on video, saying that 47% of Americans are dependent on government and, therefore, would never vote for him. In a recent speech at Yale University, Gov. Mitch Daniels (Rep.-Ind.) said, “I believe that the self-inflicted fatal blow of Mr. Romney’s statement came among Americans who find themselves in receipt of some form of government transfer, but reject or even despise the notion that they are permanent parasites for doing so.” Daniels cited people on Social Security, “men thrown out of work” by a bad economy and poorly paid military personnel, whose families need food stamps.

Santa Claus handouts. Obama turned out his base by dispensing “gifts.” Examples include Executive Orders that allow the children of illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S.; an Obamacare provision that permits “children” to stay on their parents’ insurance longer; and a measure that forgives student loan interest.

Obama’s summer verbiage. Romney’s failure to answer Obama’s barrage of negative ads during the summer resulted in a cumulative image of the governor that was not flattering.

“Likeability.” In the U.S. “culture of celebrity,” polls were taken during the campaign on the nominees’ “likeability,” with Obama declared more likeable by a wide margin. Voters under 30 saw Obama as more “cool” and “hip,” and 60% voted for him, said the Pew Research Center.

Christian voters stayed home. Several million Christian/evangelical voters stayed home, ensuring Obama’s win. Supposedly, some Christians refused to vote for a Mormon (Romney) or felt that Romney was not conservative enough.

Fraud. A number of reports of voter fraud (favoring Obama) surfaced in several states. For instance, in Ohio, several couples that went to vote in suburban Cincinnati were told that they had already voted absentee, which was not true. Also, in 59 different Philadelphia precincts, Romney received zero votes compared to Obama’s 19,605. What are the statistical chances of that?

Chris Christie. Not only did the New Jersey governor not get out and campaign for Romney, he also shamelessly embraced Obama on the Jersey shoreline. His praise for Obama’s efforts to help Hurricane Sandy victims made the Prez look more credible and competent, and influenced many last-minute voter decisions.

What to expect from Obama’s second term. As relates to oil and gas, the second term will be a repeat of his first term, but with added vengeance:

The administration will continue to seal off federal land, where it can. Indeed, three days after the election, the Interior Department issued a final plan to close off 1.6 million acres of federal land in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, originally slated for oil shale development.

The White House will continue to use the EPA as its personal attack dog. There will be frequent rulemaking attempts and “enforcement” decisions aimed at the industry, particularly for air emissions, fracing and water usage.

Another tough offshore year. Federal bureaucrats will continue to grant new drilling permits slowly, while enforcing new safety and operating rules with heightened zeal.

Obama will try, again, to target tax changes. He will attempt, repeatedly, to get rid of the Intangible Drilling Cost write-off and Percentage Depletion.

The White House will, repeatedly, circumvent Congress, on oil and gas matters, by issuing Executive Orders and instructing federal departments to issue “rulemaking” on a host of items.

Obama will try to grab power more overtly. In one example, several weeks after the election, Obama declared that he wants the “right” to raise the U.S. debt ceiling without the traditional permission from Congress. Such power-grabbing mischief is what one might expect from a Third World banana republic.

So there you have it—another four years of South Side of Chicago governance. Or to put it another way, if you like what Hugo Chavez has done to Venezuela, you’ll love Barack Obama’s second term.