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."
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
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...
Anonymous wrote:It's a conspiracy....
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?
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?
Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is with the fall in oil prices, the tar sand are unprofitable, but the pipeline will be built. LOL
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.
Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is with the fall in oil prices, the tar sand are unprofitable, but the pipeline will be built. LOL