Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
be silent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
ohhh....threatening tones now....
-spence[/QUOTE]
Anyone disagree with this?
yes....MANY
Regarding the Keyston XL pipeline, it's far from a no-brainer.
3/8/2012 WASHINGTON -- The Senate on Thursday narrowly rejected a GOP provision to fast-track the construction of the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline.
Eleven Democrats bucked President Barack Obama by voting in favor of the amendment. They include Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) Mark Pryor (Ark.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jim Webb (D-Va.), Robert Casey (D-Pa.) and Kent Conrad (D-N.D).
“I think we should embrace it and develop a stakeholder-driven system of high standards for doing the work,” Bill Clinton said during remarks at an energy conference in Maryland.
The agency charged with making a formal recommendation regarding the pipeline is the U.S. State Department – which is run by Clinton’s wife, former first lady Hillary Clinton. In issuing its final environmental statement on the project last August, Clinton’s agency concluded that the pipeline would have “no significant impact” on the environment and recommended that it move forward.
Last October, nearly two dozen Democrats led by U.S. Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) announced their support for the $7 billion project.
Yes, it will create "shovel ready" jobs...but only for 6-12 months. Most of the steel for the project has already been manufactured...in India.
better than Obama's non-existent shovel ready jobs, call it an "investment", not paid for by the taxpayer
WAPO Factchecker conclusion "Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle may have legitimate reasons for pushing this project, but they don’t need to oversell it. Imagine if someone actually said: “The company says this project will create an estimated 13,000 construction jobs over two years.”
Transcanada's own research for the US Government indicated the pipeline would actually INCREASE gas prices in the mid-west US and not have any real impact on domestic energy security.
"The line would create a new way to carry Canadian imports outside the Midwest and reduce an oil surplus that’s depressing prices in the central U.S. Spot gasoline was 55 cents cheaper in Chicago than in New York on June 1, the second-highest ever."
you think you are so clever
I thought you were FOR redistribution?
"Meanwhile, Clinton said he worries that increased domestic oil and natural gas production could allow many in the U.S. to lose interest in investing in other, newer cleaner forms of energy."
meet the real resistence and the desire for higher prices...call it persuasion
And perhaps worse, the company has already been bullying landowners to sign easements or be sued to have their land taken under eminent domain.
there isn't a single MSM report on this which I could locate, you'd think they'd have jumped on this given the attention to bullying and XL these days, would have fit perfectly into the template "BIG OIL BULLYING"..that's got a nice ring
All the Administration asked was for a new route that wouldn't threaten an environmentally sensitive area. Initially they said it would be impossible...then they agreed to do it.
"all they were asking for???" gimme a break, that's pathetic, "no matter how imagined"?TransCanada – the company seeking to build the pipeline – first applied for a permit in 2008.
"One of the most amazing things to me about this Keystone pipeline deal is that they ever filed that route in the first place since they could've gone around the Nebraska Sandhills and avoided most of the dangers[/COLOR], no matter how imagined, to the Ogallala [aquifer] with a different route." Bill Clinton.....
huh?..."no matter how imagined"...wonder why he said that? Keystone should have planned for "imagined dangers" when plotting the route?
Read more:
Bill Clinton on Keystone XL pipeline: 'Embrace' it - POLITICO.com
If anything, Obama isn't playing politics and is evaluating the cost/benefit tradeoff for the Americans involved. You know where that oil will be going? To refineries in the Gulf Cost where it will be EXPORTED.
Obama plays politics with EVERYTHING in case you haven't noticed...it's the "Chicago Way"
-spence[/QUOTE]
love Clinton, he can, as he says, say what he wants now that he's out of office and it might actually contain some truth now....
suggesting that Obama's resistance to the pipeline is anything but political is comical........
so Spence, that was an entire post by you which contained a wealth of claims without anything to back up any it up save for one link that you completely mischaracterized...that's just one post from a prolific poster....imagine the possibilities
probably a bad idea to start your post with...
"Anyone disagree with this?"....especially here
Hybrid Mode
