Eminent domain by TransCanada for Keystone XL

[Anonymous]

The funny thing is with the fall in oil prices, the tar sand are unprofitable, but the pipeline will be built. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is with the fall in oil prices, the tar sand are unprofitable, but the pipeline will be built. LOL

Don't go trying to impose logic on conservatives. They'll build this pipeline even if no one wants it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bills and votes came from Republicans, and the court decisions came from the conservative judges. That's who says it was Republican driven.

They totally caved on property rights to pander to big polluting industry.

Links

Keystone was always top of the list for Republicans. Democrats were fighting it. Now that the people have spoken we get what we get.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/16/us-usa-congress-keystone-idUSKBN0JU2GJ20141216

Opposition to Keystone on environmental grounds was always silly. That stuff is going to be developed one way or another. The alternative to sending it by pipeline to the U.S. is to send it to China by tanker, with far greater environmental risk and an even worse GHG profile due too the energy cost of shipping it that far.

Keystone ALREADY HAS an approved pipeline route that is much safer for the environment, as it goes around the Oglala aquifer, and which doesn't require eminent domain takings of private ranchers lands. This is *literally* about cutting corners, solely for the sake of lining pockets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is with the fall in oil prices, the tar sand are unprofitable, but the pipeline will be built. LOL

Anyone consider that the state dept might be working with the Sauds and whoever else in the middle east to bring down prices and destroy the fracking industry?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is with the fall in oil prices, the tar sand are unprofitable, but the pipeline will be built. LOL

Anyone consider that the state dept might be working with the Sauds and whoever else in the middle east to bring down prices and destroy the fracking industry?

Why would the State Department be interested in doing that? Also, why do you always call them "Sauds" instead of "Saudis". Is that sort of like calling the "Democratic Party" the "Democrat Party"? Finally, if the Saudis wanted to destroy the fracking industry, why would they need help from the State Department?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is with the fall in oil prices, the tar sand are unprofitable, but the pipeline will be built. LOL

Anyone consider that the state dept might be working with the Sauds and whoever else in the middle east to bring down prices and destroy the fracking industry?

Why would the State Department be interested in doing that? Also, why do you always call them "Sauds" instead of "Saudis". Is that sort of like calling the "Democratic Party" the "Democrat Party"? Finally, if the Saudis wanted to destroy the fracking industry, why would they need help from the State Department?

Because Obama and his ilk would like nothing more than destroy our oil independence so they can continue to push green energy. I have nothing against green energy, I just want it out there when it's ready to roll for the masses, not pushed before the infrastructure can really handle it.

Why does it matter to you if I call them Sauds or Saudis? I'm not the type to usually bring those things up to other people, so I wonder why people do.

I didn't say the Saud(i)s want to destroy the fracking industry...

[Anonymous]

^^Correction: The Saud(i)s have a financial stake in the game, never mind leverage.

[Anonymous]

It's a conspiracy....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a conspiracy....

Could be. Just thinking out loud. Could be completely incorrect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is with the fall in oil prices, the tar sand are unprofitable, but the pipeline will be built. LOL

Anyone consider that the state dept might be working with the Sauds and whoever else in the middle east to bring down prices and destroy the fracking industry?

Why would the State Department be interested in doing that? Also, why do you always call them "Sauds" instead of "Saudis". Is that sort of like calling the "Democratic Party" the "Democrat Party"? Finally, if the Saudis wanted to destroy the fracking industry, why would they need help from the State Department?

Because Obama and his ilk would like nothing more than destroy our oil independence so they can continue to push green energy. I have nothing against green energy, I just want it out there when it's ready to roll for the masses, not pushed before the infrastructure can really handle it.

Why does it matter to you if I call them Sauds or Saudis? I'm not the type to usually bring those things up to other people, so I wonder why people do.

I didn't say the Saud(i)s want to destroy the fracking industry...

You "and your ilk" are totally and completely full of shit, because we are producing more domestic oil right now than we did under G. W. Bush.

[Anonymous]

And, in yet ANOTHER totally hypocritical move, while the Republicans trot around claiming Keystone XL is about jobs (with grotesquely overinflated numbers, and ignoring the fact that many of the jobs will be Canadian, not US jobs) - they today voted AGAINST a job-creating amendment that would have promoted the use of US-made steel in constructing Keystone XL. So again, that PROVES it's not really about US jobs, it PROVES the Republicans are liars, and PROVES they are in the pocket of big oil interests, because they are screwing over US steel workers and the US steel industry.

http://www.minnpost.com/dc-dispatches/2015/01/franken-renews-push-american-made-steel-keystone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And, in yet ANOTHER totally hypocritical move, while the Republicans trot around claiming Keystone XL is about jobs (with grotesquely overinflated numbers, and ignoring the fact that many of the jobs will be Canadian, not US jobs) - they today voted AGAINST a job-creating amendment that would have promoted the use of US-made steel in constructing Keystone XL. So again, that PROVES it's not really about US jobs, it PROVES the Republicans are liars, and PROVES they are in the pocket of big oil interests, because they are screwing over US steel workers and the US steel industry.

http://www.minnpost.com/dc-dispatches/2015/01/franken-renews-push-american-made-steel-keystone

ANDY, they voted against an amendment that would have prohibited the oil from the pipeline to be exported. So not only is the pipeline not about U.S. jobs, it's not even about "increasing our oil independence."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And, in yet ANOTHER totally hypocritical move, while the Republicans trot around claiming Keystone XL is about jobs (with grotesquely overinflated numbers, and ignoring the fact that many of the jobs will be Canadian, not US jobs) - they today voted AGAINST a job-creating amendment that would have promoted the use of US-made steel in constructing Keystone XL. So again, that PROVES it's not really about US jobs, it PROVES the Republicans are liars, and PROVES they are in the pocket of big oil interests, because they are screwing over US steel workers and the US steel industry.

http://www.minnpost.com/dc-dispatches/2015/01/franken-renews-push-american-made-steel-keystone

ANDY, they voted against an amendment that would have prohibited the oil from the pipeline to be exported. So not only is the pipeline not about U.S. jobs, it's not even about "increasing our oil independence."

AND, not andy **

[Anonymous]

So once again the Republicans demonstrate what immense frauds they are. Yet their fanatic followers will ignore all of this and defend them to the end...

[Anonymous]

Don't feel sorry for the rancher landowners - they are all on the government dole.