PDA

View Full Version : Obama Jobs President to kill job project


HonestChieffan
01-18-2012, 09:50 AM
Keystone pipeline to be killed today, China will be thrilled, gas will be over $4 by summer. Way to go Obama.

patteeu
01-18-2012, 09:56 AM
He knows what's best for us and apparently that involves deindustrialization as well as denuclearization. Trust him. We'll have some really nice prairie on which to scratch out our subsistence.

KILLER_CLOWN
01-18-2012, 09:58 AM
Keystone pipeline to be killed today, China will be thrilled, gas will be over $4 by summer. Way to go Obama.

That and demanding a war with Iran will put gas at $5-6/gal by the end of the year.

vailpass
01-18-2012, 10:01 AM
If the electorate are somehow stupid enough to put obama in office for a 2nd term they deserve everything they get. hussein obama is making President Bush look good.

alnorth
01-18-2012, 10:03 AM
At least the republicans managed to force him to make a decision on this during an election year, rather than rely on bureaucratic stalling until 2013. Give them credit for that, this is now a campaign issue.

DJ's left nut
01-18-2012, 10:04 AM
My buddy is fairly high up at Quanta Services in Houston, the folks that have kinda bankrolled and pushed this project. He's been central to the development of it. Obama's quasi-killed this thing a couple of times but the hope was that he'd eventually come around on it w/ the election cycle approaching.

Needless to say, he has countless man-hours and career capital in this thing.

I....uh....think I'll leave him alone today.

alnorth
01-18-2012, 10:04 AM
If the electorate are somehow stupid enough to put obama in office for a 2nd term they deserve everything they get. This asshole is making President Bush look good.

If the economy continues to improve, Obama promises to get out of Afghanistan ASAP, and Romney pounds the drums of war vs Iran (or 2 out of 3), this issue is not going to matter.

vailpass
01-18-2012, 10:07 AM
If the economy continues to improve, Obama promises to get out of Afghanistan ASAP, and Romney pounds the drums of war vs Iran (or 2 out of 3), this issue is not going to matter.

That depends on whether there are enough voter ignorant enough to believe the economy is improving. Our pilot has crashed our jet into a mountain and you want to give him credit for finding a piece of luggage that wasn't burned in the wreck?

alnorth
01-18-2012, 10:16 AM
That depends on whether there are enough voter ignorant enough to believe the economy is improving. Our pilot has crashed our jet into a mountain and you want to give him credit for finding a piece of luggage that wasn't burned in the wreck?

1) People do not blame him for the crash in the first place. This is Bush's wreckage. To the extent that Obama should have any blame, the only valid argument is the one Romney's attempting, which is: "yes, you didn't cause this, but you are failing to pull us out of it"

2) The economy is improving. Not very quickly, but it is. It remains to be seen whether this recovery will be too slow to save his presidency, or if he'll just manage to pull out of the stall before his plane hits the earth. I also think it would be fair to try to make the argument of: "well hell, the economy was never going to continue to fall for this long no matter what he did, it was going to recover at least a little bit at SOME point, its doing so now, weakly, IN SPITE of Obama, not because of him", but to say the economy is not recovering at all is simply incorrect.

thecoffeeguy
01-18-2012, 10:19 AM
1) People do not blame him for the crash in the first place. This is Bush's wreckage. To the extent that Obama should have any blame, the only valid argument is the one Romney's attempting, which is: "yes, you didn't cause this, but you are failing to pull us out of it"

2) The economy is improving. Not very quickly, but it is. It remains to be seen whether this recovery will be too slow to save his presidency, or if he'll just manage to pull out of the stall before his plane hits the earth. I also think it would be fair to try to make the argument of: "well hell, the economy was never going to continue to fall for this long no matter what he did, it was going to recover at least a little bit at SOME point, its doing so now, weakly, IN SPITE of Obama, not because of him", but to say the economy is not recovering at all is simply incorrect.

:BS:

HonestChieffan
01-18-2012, 10:19 AM
If the economy continues to improve, Obama promises to get out of Afghanistan ASAP, and Romney pounds the drums of war vs Iran (or 2 out of 3), this issue is not going to matter.

Yea, and unicorns wii shit Popsicles in August in your world.

$5 diesel will send inflation soaring and vacation will be out.and low and moderate income families will be hardest hit by this bullshit move.

alnorth
01-18-2012, 10:20 AM
:BS:

Uhhh...

The only people who blame Obama for the crash is that cross-eyed drooling retard Limbaugh and his army of dittoheads.

thecoffeeguy
01-18-2012, 10:21 AM
Uhhh...

The only people who blame Obama for the crash is that cross-eyed drooling retard Limbaugh and his army of dittoheads.

:BS:

alnorth
01-18-2012, 10:21 AM
Yea, and unicorns wii shit Popsicles in August in your world.

$5 diesel will send inflation soaring and vacation will be out.and low and moderate income families will be hardest hit by this bullshit move.

I think Clinton has proven that the economy trumps everything. Doesn't matter if Obama (or Clinton) deserves any credit for it whatsoever, if the economy is doing well enough, this pipeline issue won't save Romney.

thecoffeeguy
01-18-2012, 10:22 AM
I think Clinton has proven that the economy trumps everything. Doesn't matter if Obama (or Clinton) deserves any credit for it whatsoever, if the economy is doing well enough, this pipeline issue won't save Romney.

The economy is not doing well. Period.

alnorth
01-18-2012, 10:23 AM
:BS:

Then Romney's not your guy. I presume you'll stay home next November, because he's not blaming Obama for the crash.

thecoffeeguy
01-18-2012, 10:24 AM
Then Romney's not your guy. I presume you'll stay home next November, because he's not blaming Obama for the crash.

I never mentioned "who my guy" is.

HonestChieffan
01-18-2012, 10:24 AM
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/01/poll-majority-says-obama-has-accomplished-little-111257.html

The Obama train is running out of track

thecoffeeguy
01-18-2012, 10:26 AM
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/01/poll-majority-says-obama-has-accomplished-little-111257.html

The Obama train is running out of track

O, he has accomplished a lot in regards to damaging this country across the board. Thats something. :#

mlyonsd
01-18-2012, 10:27 AM
Then Romney's not your guy. I presume you'll stay home next November, because he's not blaming Obama for the crash.You guys better start to figure out pretty quick it isn't about who is blamed for the crash, it's who has nothing but excuses as to why it isn't fixed.

The crash is old news that doesn't matter. It's now all about who's able to fix it. And your guy is rapidly proving to everyone he's not smarter than a 5th grader.

HonestChieffan
01-18-2012, 10:29 AM
You guys better start to figure out pretty quick it isn't about who is blamed for the crash, it's who has nothing but excuses as to why it isn't fixed.

The crash is old news that doesn't matter. It's now all about who's able to fix it. And your guy is rapidly proving to everyone he's not smarter than a 5th grader.

That's a grade above most of his fans

petegz28
01-18-2012, 10:55 AM
Railroads, including Burlington Northern, a unit of Berkshire Hathaway [BRK.A 117600.00 650.00 (+0.56%) ], Canadian National [CNI 77.44 0.77 (+1%) ] and Union Pacific [UNP 110.89 1.39 (+1.27%) ], are expected to benefit because they will be hauling more of the oil not flowing through the pipeline.

slight kickback to his boy Warren

patteeu
01-18-2012, 10:59 AM
1) People do not blame him for the crash in the first place. This is Bush's wreckage. To the extent that Obama should have any blame, the only valid argument is the one Romney's attempting, which is: "yes, you didn't cause this, but you are failing to pull us out of it"

2) The economy is improving. Not very quickly, but it is. It remains to be seen whether this recovery will be too slow to save his presidency, or if he'll just manage to pull out of the stall before his plane hits the earth. I also think it would be fair to try to make the argument of: "well hell, the economy was never going to continue to fall for this long no matter what he did, it was going to recover at least a little bit at SOME point, its doing so now, weakly, IN SPITE of Obama, not because of him", but to say the economy is not recovering at all is simply incorrect.

He may not have been the Skipper when our boat ran aground on this deserted island of an economy, but it was still a huge mistake to elect Gilligan to get us off.

J Diddy
01-18-2012, 11:16 AM
He may not have been the Skipper when our boat ran aground on this deserted island of an economy, but it was still a huge mistake to elect Gilligan to get us off.


I think you got your Gilligans mixed up.

KILLER_CLOWN
01-18-2012, 11:19 AM
I think you got your Gilligans mixed up.

Can we have a Mulligan instead?

bevischief
01-18-2012, 11:22 AM
1) People do not blame him for the crash in the first place. This is Bush's wreckage. To the extent that Obama should have any blame, the only valid argument is the one Romney's attempting, which is: "yes, you didn't cause this, but you are failing to pull us out of it"

2) The economy is improving. Not very quickly, but it is. It remains to be seen whether this recovery will be too slow to save his presidency, or if he'll just manage to pull out of the stall before his plane hits the earth. I also think it would be fair to try to make the argument of: "well hell, the economy was never going to continue to fall for this long no matter what he did, it was going to recover at least a little bit at SOME point, its doing so now, weakly, IN SPITE of Obama, not because of him", but to say the economy is not recovering at all is simply incorrect.

But Clinton also had a hand in this as well.

oldandslow
01-18-2012, 11:50 AM
Keystone pipeline to be killed today, China will be thrilled, gas will be over $4 by summer. Way to go Obama.

Do you have a link to the Pipeline being killed?

petegz28
01-18-2012, 12:02 PM
Do you have a link to the Pipeline being killed?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46041908

go bowe
01-18-2012, 12:24 PM
If the electorate are somehow stupid enough to put obama in office for a 2nd term they deserve everything they get. hussein obama is making President Bush look good.

and that ain't easy...

Cave Johnson
01-18-2012, 01:02 PM
My buddy is fairly high up at Quanta Services in Houston, the folks that have kinda bankrolled and pushed this project. He's been central to the development of it. Obama's quasi-killed this thing a couple of times but the hope was that he'd eventually come around on it w/ the election cycle approaching.

Needless to say, he has countless man-hours and career capital in this thing.

I....uh....think I'll leave him alone today.

I'm very surprised he didn't. The environmental vote's not going anywhere and Nebraska's a solid & small R state. The political calculus doesn't make sense.

Cave Johnson
01-18-2012, 01:03 PM
Keystone pipeline to be killed today, China will be thrilled, gas will be over $4 by summer. Way to go Obama.

Pretty sure the impending European recession will kill demand for oil. ;)

vailpass
01-18-2012, 01:06 PM
and that ain't easy...

100% agree

DJ's left nut
01-18-2012, 01:34 PM
I'm very surprised he didn't. The environmental vote's not going anywhere and Nebraska's a solid & small R state. The political calculus doesn't make sense.

To be honest with you, the more I read about this, the more I realize that it's no more dead today than it was 3 months ago.

This is really an announcement without much teeth. The Nebraska marsh issue stalled this thing way back in November and the money folks all assumed that this was going to be a stall that took until well into 2013 to truly fix (or at least those were the plans they were making).

This announcement seems to really just be formalizing what most people already knew. And to support that, look what Quanta's stock did today. When TransCanada selected Quanta to build the pipeline, their stock skyrocketed up 11% in the span of a day. On this 'announcement'? It's gone down less than 1% today, not even a full point. In fact, w/ a late rally it could actually go up today. Stock movement tells you whether or not this is legitimate news to the people that know anything. The lack of movement here suggests that this was no breaking news to them.

I'm not entirely certain that this isn't the Washington Post repeating what the people that actually matter already knew.

I don't think Keystone is as 'dead' as is being portrayed here. It's just being delayed the same as it ever was.

big nasty kcnut
01-18-2012, 01:36 PM
this loser need to go. Also guess what libs you say we were in iraq for oil where the fuck is it? Fuck libs.

petegz28
01-18-2012, 01:39 PM
To be honest with you, the more I read about this, the more I realize that it's no more dead today than it was 3 months ago.

This is really an announcement without much teeth. The Nebraska marsh issue stalled this thing way back in November and the money folks all assumed that this was going to be a stall that took until well into 2013 to truly fix (or at least those were the plans they were making).

This announcement seems to really just be formalizing what most people already knew. And to support that, look what Quanta's stock did today. When TransCanada selected Quanta to build the pipeline, their stock skyrocketed up 11% in the span of a day. On this 'announcement'? It's gone down less than 1% today, not even a full point. In fact, w/ a late rally it could actually go up today. Stock movement tells you whether or not this is legitimate news to the people that know anything. The lack of movement here suggests that this was no breaking news to them.

I'm not entirely certain that this isn't the Washington Post repeating what the people that actually matter already knew.

I don't think Keystone is as 'dead' as is being portrayed here. It's just being delayed the same as it ever was.

Ok, let's assume it is just being delayed...again.

You're the President...you're up for re-election... the economy is in the pot.... you have a chance to approve a project to provide 20,000 jobs, temporary or otherwise....and you say no (delay it..again)

Not to cool. Considering all the people Obama put out of work in the Gulf over the oil spill I'd say this guy is about dumb.

DJ's left nut
01-18-2012, 01:47 PM
Ok, let's assume it is just being delayed...again.

You're the President...you're up for re-election... the economy is in the pot.... you have a chance to approve a project to provide 20,000 jobs, temporary or otherwise....and you say no (delay it..again)

Not to cool. Considering all the people Obama put out of work in the Gulf over the oil spill I'd say this guy is about dumb.

But like I said - it looks for all the world like this was going to get stalled on a re-route through miscellaneous committees anyway. I don't think anyone truly believed that there was going to be a rapid resolution to this or that jobs were going to be immediately created. Everyone appears to have already accepted the fact that we weren't going to have an answer until after the election cycle anyway.

The initial delay was substantively idiotic. That truly did immediately stall job creation and economic development. However, this is nothing more than perhaps politically tone-deaf. And lets face it, Obama's been politically tone-deaf for quite some time.

Chocolate Hog
01-18-2012, 04:45 PM
How many jobs was this going to create?

penchief
01-18-2012, 04:58 PM
Keystone pipeline to be killed today, China will be thrilled, gas will be over $4 by summer. Way to go Obama.

6500 temporary jobs. Whoopeee!

The potential damage to the environment requires that we don't rush into something that has not been studied thoroughly enough. Caution is alway better than haste when it comes to something so important.

Same old shit, different day...

mlyonsd
01-18-2012, 05:44 PM
6500 temporary jobs. Whoopeee!

The potential damage to the environment requires that we don't rush into something that has not been studied thoroughly enough. Caution is alway better than haste when it comes to something so important.

Same old shit, different day...The project has been studied to death. This is nothing but political BS.

ThatRaceCardGuy
01-18-2012, 05:58 PM
I see the repukes are circle jerking again...

BigMeatballDave
01-18-2012, 06:13 PM
Wow. Killing a project that can create thousands of jobs?

What an assbag. I voted for him. I'll never vote Democrat ever again.

BigMeatballDave
01-18-2012, 06:14 PM
6500 temporary jobs. Whoopeee!

The potential damage to the environment requires that we don't rush into something that has not been studied thoroughly enough. Caution is alway better than haste when it comes to something so important.

Same old shit, different day...

Kill Yourself

CoMoChief
01-18-2012, 07:03 PM
you guys...... we all know high gas prices are Bush's fault.

HonestChieffan
01-18-2012, 07:17 PM
Delay my ass. Canada wants to sell oil. They give one damn what Obama wants. It's gone. American jobs to make pipe, transport pipe, install and maintain pipe are gone. Forever. And these were zero cost to taxpayer jobs. Zero cost.

Anyone who supports this decision is a complete and total dumbass

RaiderH8r
01-18-2012, 08:15 PM
6500 temporary jobs. Whoopeee!

The potential damage to the environment requires that we don't rush into something that has not been studied thoroughly enough. Caution is alway better than haste when it comes to something so important.

Same old shit, different day...

Unlike those permanent green jobs at Solyndra. At least these weren't coming at the expense of the taxpayer. Jackasses.

HonestChieffan
01-18-2012, 08:48 PM
Where are the resident Obots ?

Saul Good
01-18-2012, 09:24 PM
I'm not sure that Obama wants to be reelected.

KC Dan
01-18-2012, 09:33 PM
Delay my ass. Canada wants to sell oil. They give one damn what Obama wants. It's gone. American jobs to make pipe, transport pipe, install and maintain pipe are gone. Forever. And these were zero cost to taxpayer jobs. Zero cost.

Anyone who supports this decision is a complete and total dumbassbut, but, but they temporary jobs....idiots

go bowe
01-18-2012, 10:49 PM
from a purely economic view, if we're going to use the oil from the pipeline the project makes a lot of sense...

if we're going to just see it sold on the world market, it will make canadians rich but won't help our economy all that much...

either way it seems that they can find a better route that addresses environmental concerns...

after all once this thing is in the ground it ain't gonna be moved..

RINGLEADER
01-18-2012, 11:09 PM
Uhhh...

The only people who blame Obama for the crash is that cross-eyed drooling retard Limbaugh and his army of dittoheads.

Obama is not responsible for the crash. And the majority of the job losses were baked in before anything he could do (positive or negative) could happen. The economy isn't growing fast enough to have real employment growth, however, and it is growing no where near fast enough to overcome the deficit number that Obama IS responsible for contributing to thanks to his pro-government, pro-welfare policies.

penchief
01-19-2012, 07:11 AM
Obama is not responsible for the crash. And the majority of the job losses were baked in before anything he could do (positive or negative) could happen. The economy isn't growing fast enough to have real employment growth, however, and it is growing no where near fast enough to overcome the deficit number that Obama IS responsible for contributing to thanks to his pro-government, pro-welfare policies.

As long as its corporate welfare its okay, though. This whole notion of Obama being a welfare president is bullshit. The standards for qualifying for food stamps weren't created by Obama. And Obama didn't put those people out of work. Thank the crash for higher levels of unemployment.

And thank a republican ideology that has done the corporate establishment's bidding for over three decades. An ideology that has driven down wages and has replaced "good paying" jobs with low wage jobs. Wages that often leave working families below the poverty line. It's all been part of the plan. Cheap labor, eliminate benefits, and bam! Now you have an investor nation, baby.

I'm not happy with the way Obama has caved to corporate interests too many times. It would help if he had a little help from repbulicans in congress, though. Something more than a 100% effort to obstruct anything he does. But the fact that our economy didn't collapse when it easily could have is noteworthy, IMO. I didn't necessarily like all the remedies and wish that some of those crooks had been allowed to fail. But the fact that the economy didn't collapse, but instead stabilized, deserves some credit.

Like everyone, I would have wanted the economy to rebound faster but the fact that it is inching its way back is also worthy of some credit. But this Keystone Pipline isn't going to help unemployment or gas prices. It's all about getting that sludge to the world market. Just like the gas under the Marcellus Shale. Straight to the world market where those who manipulate the market benefit instead of us common folk. It's all political rhetoric and deception. Inflated estimates about jobs and lower gas prices is all part of the scam.

Regarding the pipeline, I believe there are legitimate environmental reasons to hold off until a proper environmental impact study is completed. Temporary wealth for a few is not worth the cost of totally ****ing up our way of life, IMO.

HonestChieffan
01-19-2012, 07:17 AM
As long as its corporate welfare its okay, though. This whole notion of Obama being a welfare president is bullshit. The standards for qualifying for food stamps weren't created by Obama. And Obama didn't put those people out of work. Thank the crash for higher levels of unemployment.

And thank a republican ideology that has done the corporate establishment's bidding for over three decades. An ideology that has driven down wages and has replaced "good paying" jobs with low wage jobs. It's all been part of the plan. Cheap labor, eliminate benefits, and bam! Now you have an investor nation, baby.

I'm not happy with the way Obama has caved to corporate interests too many times. It would help if he had a little help from repbulicans in congress, though. Something more than a 100% effort to obstruct anything he does. But the fact that our economy didn't collapse when it easily could have is noteworthy, IMO. I didn't necessarily like all the remedies and wish that some of those crooks had been allowed to fail. But the fact that the economy didn't collapse, but instead stabilized, deserves some credit.

Like everyone, I would have wanted the economy to rebound faster but the fact that it is inching its way back is also worthy of some credit. But this Keystone Pipline isn't going to help unemployment or gas prices. It's all about getting that sludge to the world market. Just like the gas under the Marcellus Shale. Straight to the world market where those who manipulate the market benefit instead of us common folk. It's all political rhetoric and deception. Inflated estimates about jobs and lower gas prices is all part of the scam.

Regarding the pipeline, I believe there are legitimate environmental reasons to hold off until a proper environmental impact study is completed. Temporary wealth for a few is not worth the cost of totally ****ing up our way of life, IMO.

Crock of shit

dirk digler
01-19-2012, 07:32 AM
To be honest with you, the more I read about this, the more I realize that it's no more dead today than it was 3 months ago.

This is really an announcement without much teeth. The Nebraska marsh issue stalled this thing way back in November and the money folks all assumed that this was going to be a stall that took until well into 2013 to truly fix (or at least those were the plans they were making).

This announcement seems to really just be formalizing what most people already knew. And to support that, look what Quanta's stock did today. When TransCanada selected Quanta to build the pipeline, their stock skyrocketed up 11% in the span of a day. On this 'announcement'? It's gone down less than 1% today, not even a full point. In fact, w/ a late rally it could actually go up today. Stock movement tells you whether or not this is legitimate news to the people that know anything. The lack of movement here suggests that this was no breaking news to them.

I'm not entirely certain that this isn't the Washington Post repeating what the people that actually matter already knew.

I don't think Keystone is as 'dead' as is being portrayed here. It's just being delayed the same as it ever was.

Yep and as usual hcf is wrong again.

Russ Girling, president of TransCanada, the pipeline's builder, said the company would reapply for permitting and asked for the application to be processed in time to get the pipeline online by 2014.

TransCanada told the State Department the pipeline would create just 4,650 temporary direct construction jobs.

In November, the State Department said it needed time to consider routes that avoided the Ogallala Aquifer, the giant underground body of water that provides Nebraska with much of its water. Elected officials from both parties in Nebraska had expressed concerns a leak in the pipeline could endanger the aquifer.

oldandslow
01-19-2012, 07:38 AM
First, I thought all you repubs were about property rights. Read the testimony of the REPUBLICAN farmers and ranchers in NE and SD and see how they feel about their land being ripped from them.

Second, the tar sand oil from Canada, pipeline or no, enters the world market. As long as demand remains high, keystone isn't going to impact the price of oil one way or another.

Third, believe it or not, the Oglala aquifer really does matter.

penchief
01-19-2012, 07:38 AM
Crock of shit

To you, it is. But just like other things that you have ranted about in the past, your'e just spewing talking points without really having a solid grasp on the facts. Not saying I do, but you don't even try to be objective. You are like a wind-up doll who says the same thing in response to every issue.

You and I both know that supply and demand no longer impacts gas prices downward. If it did, gas prices would have been much much lower over the past couple years. We know that market speculators set the price. While they may speculate on how supply might be affected, it has proven to be nothing more than a ruse to manipulate the world market for financial gain.

Where's the proof? The oil and gas industry has pretty much had carte blanche since most of Cheney's Energy Task Force policies have been adopted, including the exemptions for environmental regulations. And the promise has always been, "give us carte blanche and we'll give you lower gas prices." So where are the lower gas prices? The Keystone Pipeline is not miraculously going to change the way they do business.

The bottom line is that it is in the country's best interest to ensure that a proper environmental impact study is done before going in with guns blazing. We have all witnessed the kind of long-term negative impact that an arrogant and hasty action can yield. Caution is always the better option when considering long term environmental damage versus short-term riches for a few.

An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. A few people getting rich on the global market is not worth the risk. If it is proven safe and clean, let them build their pipeline then. But not before.

HonestChieffan
01-19-2012, 08:29 AM
The Thousands of miles of pipelines that are already in place criscrossing the aquifer must be ignored.

The routing can avoid the aquifer completely

It's costs the taxpayers zero

Landowners have always negotiated for best deal on every pipeline that has been done and will be compensated as they always have

When you are working it beats hell out of not working regardless of what some political hack says. Handwringing over some worst case scenario by a fully employed shill does not say much for the presidents desire to create jobs

Having the crude available means a lot more than being dependent on other sources

Refining it here creates opportunit here. Refining in China does not

This project is pure win if approved and we ca n only hope the Canadians don't cut the deal with China before Obama is defeated and this mistake can be fixed

Royal Fanatic
01-19-2012, 10:35 AM
I'm not happy with the way Obama has caved to corporate interests too many times. It would help if he had a little help from repbulicans in congress, though. Something more than a 100% effort to obstruct anything he does. But the fact that our economy didn't collapse when it easily could have is noteworthy, IMO. I didn't necessarily like all the remedies and wish that some of those crooks had been allowed to fail. But the fact that the economy didn't collapse, but instead stabilized, deserves some credit.


So you're impressed with Obama because the economy didn't collapse after he became President?

Way to set the bar HIGH.

patteeu
01-19-2012, 10:54 AM
So you're impressed with Obama because the economy didn't collapse after he became President?

Way to set the bar HIGH.

Yes, but he's a little disappointed that Obama hasn't completely stripped the bourgeoisie of their wealth and turned it all over to the proletariat yet, so it's not like he's a yes man or anything.

vailpass
01-19-2012, 11:55 AM
6500 temporary jobs. Whoopeee!

The potential damage to the environment requires that we don't rush into something that has not been studied thoroughly enough. Caution is alway better than haste when it comes to something so important.

Same old shit, different day...

You are part of the problem. We have a solution for you.

go bowe
01-19-2012, 11:58 AM
You are part of the problem. We have a solution for you.

you have a plan?

you should run for president... :) :) :)

vailpass
01-19-2012, 12:01 PM
you have a plan?

you should run for president... :) :) :)

Actually I can't take credit, the plan for people like Penchief was laid out by
Dave:

Kill Yourself

RaiderH8r
01-19-2012, 12:51 PM
It slays me that Obammy waxes on, at great length, about the need for federal funding for construction jobs to stimulate the economy and here you have a project that creates construction jobs that doesn't cost the treasury anything and he sneezes at it. And for those poo pooing thousands of new jobs I ask you, are we really in a position to pick and choose which opportunities for the unemployed millions to go after? I'm pretty sure if you're on your ass broke and you land one of the thousands of new "temporary" construction jobs (they're all "temporary" FFS. You build it, it gets finished, you move on. Jackasses) wouldn't you want to have one of those jobs, be happy to have one of those jobs that....wait for it....wait for it.....pays a MIDDLE CLASS F'ING WAGE that Obammy, again...waxes on about, at great length but yet again does not a damn thing to create opportunity. Instead he squelches opportunity because people who work jobs in the oil and gas industry, those people's jobs aren't as important or worthwhile to create as construction jobs laying asphalt. Which...wait for it....comes from petroleum you f'ing troglodyte, knuckle dragging ass clown retards. At its core this is Obama and his environmental special interests telling his union working class and the rest of America that their jobs are not nearly as important as the Sierra Club's interests. Anybody who thinks different is delusional.

Bottom line: every job counts. Every effort to create employment opportunities should be, by moral obligation, made to nurture business, cultivate production, and give people a choice in their own economic future. This President has not only neglected his duty in this regard, he has actively and as a matter of public policy sought to squelch it.

vailpass
01-19-2012, 02:11 PM
It slays me that Obammy waxes on, at great length, about the need for federal funding for construction jobs to stimulate the economy and here you have a project that creates construction jobs that doesn't cost the treasury anything and he sneezes at it. And for those poo pooing thousands of new jobs I ask you, are we really in a position to pick and choose which opportunities for the unemployed millions to go after? I'm pretty sure if you're on your ass broke and you land one of the thousands of new "temporary" construction jobs (they're all "temporary" FFS. You build it, it gets finished, you move on. Jackasses) wouldn't you want to have one of those jobs, be happy to have one of those jobs that....wait for it....wait for it.....pays a MIDDLE CLASS F'ING WAGE that Obammy, again...waxes on about, at great length but yet again does not a damn thing to create opportunity. Instead he squelches opportunity because people who work jobs in the oil and gas industry, those people's jobs aren't as important or worthwhile to create as construction jobs laying asphalt. Which...wait for it....comes from petroleum you f'ing troglodyte, knuckle dragging ass clown retards. At its core this is Obama and his environmental special interests telling his union working class and the rest of America that their jobs are not nearly as important as the Sierra Club's interests. Anybody who thinks different is delusional.

Bottom line: every job counts. Every effort to create employment opportunities should be, by moral obligation, made to nurture business, cultivate production, and give people a choice in their own economic future. This President has not only neglected his duty in this regard, he has actively and as a matter of public policy sought to squelch it.

rep

mlyonsd
01-19-2012, 02:17 PM
Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman expects to seek Obama decision on Keystone before election


Published January 19, 2012
| FoxNews.com

President Obama (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/obama-administration/barack-obama.htm#r_src=ramp) might be compelled to make a decision on the Keystone pipeline (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/energy/transcanada-pipeline.htm#r_src=ramp) before the election after all.

Though the president just rejected a permit for the controversial project, Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/dave-heineman.htm#r_src=ramp) told Fox News that he expects to send the Obama administration a new proposed route for the pipeline well before Election Day.

"I fully expect we could get it done certainly in the early September, August time frame," the governor told Fox News on Thursday. "I would send the letter back to the president of the United States (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/u.s.htm#r_src=ramp) saying we approve it and if he were decisive, he could turn around and approve it shortly thereafter, well before the November election."

The White House (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/white-house.htm#r_src=ramp), in justifying its decision to turn down the permit, blamed Republicans for forcing a decision in a tightened time frame. Congressional Republicans had attached a provision to last year's short-term payroll tax cut extension requiring a presidential decision on Keystone in 60 days, a time frame administration officials warned would not be sufficient.

But all along, administration officials have also invoked the concerns over the pipeline of Nebraska officials, including Heineman, in justifying their handling of the issue.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/obama-administration/jay-carney.htm#r_src=ramp), in reviewing the history of the dispute Wednesday, said "concerns were raised about the environmental impacts on the air and water quality in Nebraska."

Yet while those concerns contributed to the State Department (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/state-department.htm#r_src=ramp) decision late last year to delay the federal review process, top Nebraska officials were not on board with the president's decision Wednesday to reject the permit.

"Right now, I think they're looking for a convenient excuse to get it beyond the election. Let's do what's right for the country. Let's put America back to work," Heineman said.

Nebraska lawmakers had earlier raised concern about the impact the initial pipeline route, which runs from Canada (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/canada.htm#r_src=ramp) to Texas, would have on an important and vast underground water source in Nebraska. In November, the governor signed a bill that would pay for a new state-run environmental study of a new route that TransCanada agreed to pursue.

But Heineman disputes any suggestion that the federal government needs lots of time to review his state's new study. He said the project already received initial approval from the State Department for the earlier route, before the department backed off upon objections from environmentalists.

As Obama rejected the permit for Keystone saying there wasn't enough time to review at the federal level, Heineman questioned why -- since the state and the company have already agreed to reroute the pipeline through a less sensitive area.

"So again, the State Department had already approved the route that was much more environmentally sensitive, and so in my view, he should have said 'yes' to allow this to move forward. There's so much at stake for this country," he said.

Heineman said his state will have completed the new study by about August, and sees no reason for further delay.

"I would send a letter to the Department of State saying in Nebraska, we approve," he said. "At that stage, all they've got to then say it's in the national interest. And again, I think you could say that today. They've been at this for three years."

Nebraska Republican Sen. Mike Johanns (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/mike-johanns.htm#r_src=ramp) echoed Heineman's concerns in a statement Wednesday. He said Obama's decision was a sign he "lacks faith" in Nebraska's ability to choose a new route.

"By arguing that the Nebraska route could force them to deny the permit, he's implying Nebraska can't get it right. There is no legitimate justification for the delay. To suggest a few dozen miles of the route in Nebraska -- which will be identified by the governor, consistent with the law -- affects the overall public interest for more than 1,600 miles of pipeline is laughable and reeks of political gamesmanship," he said.

But Obama and his team said Republicans forced his hand. Obama said in a statement Wednesday that his call was "not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people."

Carney said Thursday it is a fallacy to suggest that anything other than the insistence by House Republicans to impose the 60-day deadline is responsible for the decision.

TransCanada has already announced that it will seek a new permit at the federal level.

Republicans in Congress also said they would not throw in the towel on the issue. Some called for Obama to reverse his decision.

Yet the debate is steeped in election-year politics. Obama is caught between two factions of his base on the decision over Keystone, a reality that critics claimed contributed to the decision to delay the project in the first place. Unions are clamoring for the pipeline, saying thousands of jobs are at stake, while environmentalists are vehemently opposed to it.

The environmentalists applauded Obama for his announcement Wednesday.

"President Obama has shown bold leadership in standing up to Big Oil and rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline," Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, said in a statement.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/19/nebraska-gov-heineman-expects-to-ask-obama-for-keystone-decision-before/

petegz28
01-19-2012, 02:40 PM
Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman expects to seek Obama decision on Keystone before election


Published January 19, 2012
| FoxNews.com

President Obama (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/obama-administration/barack-obama.htm#r_src=ramp) might be compelled to make a decision on the Keystone pipeline (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/energy/transcanada-pipeline.htm#r_src=ramp) before the election after all.

Though the president just rejected a permit for the controversial project, Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/dave-heineman.htm#r_src=ramp) told Fox News that he expects to send the Obama administration a new proposed route for the pipeline well before Election Day.

"I fully expect we could get it done certainly in the early September, August time frame," the governor told Fox News on Thursday. "I would send the letter back to the president of the United States (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/u.s.htm#r_src=ramp) saying we approve it and if he were decisive, he could turn around and approve it shortly thereafter, well before the November election."

The White House (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/white-house.htm#r_src=ramp), in justifying its decision to turn down the permit, blamed Republicans for forcing a decision in a tightened time frame. Congressional Republicans had attached a provision to last year's short-term payroll tax cut extension requiring a presidential decision on Keystone in 60 days, a time frame administration officials warned would not be sufficient.

But all along, administration officials have also invoked the concerns over the pipeline of Nebraska officials, including Heineman, in justifying their handling of the issue.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/obama-administration/jay-carney.htm#r_src=ramp), in reviewing the history of the dispute Wednesday, said "concerns were raised about the environmental impacts on the air and water quality in Nebraska."

Yet while those concerns contributed to the State Department (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/state-department.htm#r_src=ramp) decision late last year to delay the federal review process, top Nebraska officials were not on board with the president's decision Wednesday to reject the permit.

"Right now, I think they're looking for a convenient excuse to get it beyond the election. Let's do what's right for the country. Let's put America back to work," Heineman said.

Nebraska lawmakers had earlier raised concern about the impact the initial pipeline route, which runs from Canada (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/canada.htm#r_src=ramp) to Texas, would have on an important and vast underground water source in Nebraska. In November, the governor signed a bill that would pay for a new state-run environmental study of a new route that TransCanada agreed to pursue.

But Heineman disputes any suggestion that the federal government needs lots of time to review his state's new study. He said the project already received initial approval from the State Department for the earlier route, before the department backed off upon objections from environmentalists.

As Obama rejected the permit for Keystone saying there wasn't enough time to review at the federal level, Heineman questioned why -- since the state and the company have already agreed to reroute the pipeline through a less sensitive area.

"So again, the State Department had already approved the route that was much more environmentally sensitive, and so in my view, he should have said 'yes' to allow this to move forward. There's so much at stake for this country," he said.

Heineman said his state will have completed the new study by about August, and sees no reason for further delay.

"I would send a letter to the Department of State saying in Nebraska, we approve," he said. "At that stage, all they've got to then say it's in the national interest. And again, I think you could say that today. They've been at this for three years."

Nebraska Republican Sen. Mike Johanns (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/mike-johanns.htm#r_src=ramp) echoed Heineman's concerns in a statement Wednesday. He said Obama's decision was a sign he "lacks faith" in Nebraska's ability to choose a new route.

"By arguing that the Nebraska route could force them to deny the permit, he's implying Nebraska can't get it right. There is no legitimate justification for the delay. To suggest a few dozen miles of the route in Nebraska -- which will be identified by the governor, consistent with the law -- affects the overall public interest for more than 1,600 miles of pipeline is laughable and reeks of political gamesmanship," he said.

But Obama and his team said Republicans forced his hand. Obama said in a statement Wednesday that his call was "not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people."

Carney said Thursday it is a fallacy to suggest that anything other than the insistence by House Republicans to impose the 60-day deadline is responsible for the decision.

TransCanada has already announced that it will seek a new permit at the federal level.

Republicans in Congress also said they would not throw in the towel on the issue. Some called for Obama to reverse his decision.

Yet the debate is steeped in election-year politics. Obama is caught between two factions of his base on the decision over Keystone, a reality that critics claimed contributed to the decision to delay the project in the first place. Unions are clamoring for the pipeline, saying thousands of jobs are at stake, while environmentalists are vehemently opposed to it.

The environmentalists applauded Obama for his announcement Wednesday.

"President Obama has shown bold leadership in standing up to Big Oil and rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline," Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, said in a statement.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/19/nebraska-gov-heineman-expects-to-ask-obama-for-keystone-decision-before/

Of course, it's all the Repubs fault. Meanwhile we wasted how much $ on companies like Solydra?

Aries Walker
01-19-2012, 02:57 PM
I predict that it will be revised, resubmitted and approved long before Election Day.

penchief
01-19-2012, 11:49 PM
So you're impressed with Obama because the economy didn't collapse after he became President?

Way to set the bar HIGH.

Stablizing an economy that was handed to him on the verge of collapse is not something to be demonized for. If you hate Obama for salvaging a catastrophic situation with one hand tied behind his back you must really hate Bush for creating the economic calamity in the first place.

patteeu
01-20-2012, 12:14 AM
Stablizing an economy that was handed to him on the verge of collapse is not something to be demonized for. If you hate Obama for salvaging a catastrophic situation with one hand tied behind his back you must really hate Bush for creating the economic calamity in the first place.

Obama told us that if he didn't have the economy turned around (and no, I'm not talking about what you call "stabilizing") within 3 years that he'd be a one term president. Let's help make an honest man out of him.

Chief Henry
01-20-2012, 07:51 AM
The Thousands of miles of pipelines that are already in place criscrossing the aquifer must be ignored.

The routing can avoid the aquifer completely

It's costs the taxpayers zero

Landowners have always negotiated for best deal on every pipeline that has been done and will be compensated as they always have

When you are working it beats hell out of not working regardless of what some political hack says. Handwringing over some worst case scenario by a fully employed shill does not say much for the presidents desire to create jobs

Having the crude available means a lot more than being dependent on other sources

Refining it here creates opportunit here. Refining in China does not

This project is pure win if approved and we ca n only hope the Canadians don't cut the deal with China before Obama is defeated and this mistake can be fixed

Seems like i read about a month ago that their is already 40 plus pipes going over the same area as this Keystone Pipeline would.

RaiderH8r
01-20-2012, 07:52 AM
Stablizing an economy that was handed to him on the verge of collapse is not something to be demonized for. If you hate Obama for salvaging a catastrophic situation with one hand tied behind his back you must really hate Bush for creating the economic calamity in the first place.

Obammy owns this thing by now. The Blame Bush thing just won't wash. Obammy has time and again lacked the courage to make tough political choices. To those of us that paid attention this comes as no surprise. He is truly fulfilling his role as a guy who votes "present" and punts it until later. He will navel gaze, pontificate, obfuscate, avoid, circumvent and use any other means at his disposal to weasel out from under making a difficult decision. And this fundamental fact is the reason Obammy is not, nor should he ever be considered, a true leader. He has no vision, he has no plan, he has no courage, he has no voice. His world truly is a stage and he's making speeches but action? He don't do no stinkin action.

HonestChieffan
01-20-2012, 08:02 AM
Seems like i read about a month ago that their is already 40 plus pipes going over the same area as this Keystone Pipeline would.


Easily and thousands over the entire area overlaying the Ogalala Aquifer

mlyonsd
01-20-2012, 08:15 AM
Obammy owns this thing by now. The Blame Bush thing just won't wash. Obammy has time and again lacked the courage to make tough political choices. To those of us that paid attention this comes as no surprise. He is truly fulfilling his role as a guy who votes "present" and punts it until later. He will navel gaze, pontificate, obfuscate, avoid, circumvent and use any other means at his disposal to weasel out from under making a difficult decision. And this fundamental fact is the reason Obammy is not, nor should he ever be considered, a true leader. He has no vision, he has no plan, he has no courage, he has no voice. His world truly is a stage and he's making speeches but action? He don't do no stinkin action.

You don't think choosing between doing what is right for the country (Keystone) and the far left wing of his party in an election year is a tough political choice? No wonder he's turning grey so fast.

HonestChieffan
01-20-2012, 08:22 AM
You don't think choosing between doing what is right for the country (Keystone) and the far left wing of his party in an election year is a tough political choice? No wonder he's turning grey so fast.


Racist

petegz28
01-20-2012, 08:37 AM
All I know is that if I'm Romney or Gingrich I'm pounding Obama with this like crazy

dirk digler
01-20-2012, 09:00 AM
After reading this I don't know how you don't second guess why it should go there. This aquifer feeds about 30% of the water for this country. Kind of scary what would happen if you had a major spill.



http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef015436ce158d970c-600wi (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef015436ce158d970c-pi)

The proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline was big news across the country this week, with the Obama administration announcing that it was delaying a decision (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-keystone-20111111,0,1732793.story) on the controversial project. But nowhere was the news bigger than in Nebraska.

The state has, in effect, turned into a massive prairie sand trap for the $7-billion project.

Make that sand hills.

The Nebraska Sand Hills are the rolling, grass-covered dunes that form a thin, porous layer atop the Ogallala aquifer in north-central Nebraska -- where a stubborn bunch of ranchers has vociferously insisted it would be foolhardy to build an oil pipeline.

Over the last year, the ranchers have signed petitions, testified at public hearings, and driven officials from the U.S. State Department, which will decide on a permit for the pipeline, out across the Sand Hills in their pickup trucks.

They've dug holes in the sandy prairie grass and pointed to the good, clean water flowing just inches below the surface. And they've held cups under burbling artesian wells on their cattle ranges and offered them to visiting reporters to drink.

Still, when the decision was announced in Washington, D.C., Thursday to hold off on permitting the pipeline until a route around the Sand Hills can be studied, the celebration was tinged first with a hearty dose of Nebraskan skepticism.

"Does it really talk about not going in the Sand Hills?" Atkinson, Neb., land owner Todd Cone asked cautiously when a reporter called.

Cone politely asked that the entire text of the State Department announcement (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2011/11/176964.htm) be read to him over the phone. Then he measured his words. "I guess there's justice in America," he said finally.

Cone said he and his neighbors have tried to make it clear that they aren't opposed to the pipeline; it would bring jobs and new oil supplies, and they wouldn't want to argue against either one. But they say it should go anywhere but where the highly permeable Sand Hills roll across the aquifer, a massive subterranean waterway that underlies 27% of the irrigated land in the U.S.

"I own a small water well service here, and I guess I know how valuable our water is," Cone said. "The only two natural resources we have in Nebraska is water and wind. And if we lose our water here, if we have a spill here, all the experts in the world can try to tell you there's never going to be a major plume of carcinogens in the water.

"But they vouched for the space shuttle, too. And every once in a while, one of them blows up."

RaiderH8r
01-20-2012, 09:01 AM
All I know is that if I'm Romney or Gingrich I'm pounding Obama with this like crazy

Just wait until gas hits $5/gal. It'll be torches and pitchforks time.

HonestChieffan
01-20-2012, 09:15 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MqfOAc8Oark/Txf03P2WBmI/AAAAAAAA_6E/TpV6LiD1OvU/s400/theo5.jpg

mlyonsd
01-20-2012, 09:24 AM
After reading this I don't know how you don't second guess why it should go there. This aquifer feeds about 30% of the water for this country. Kind of scary what would happen if you had a major spill.I guess my first advice would be to shut the valve off. But what do I know.

HonestChieffan
01-20-2012, 09:29 AM
I guess my first advice would be to shut the valve off. But what do I know.


But the aquifer generally is hundreds to thousands of feet deep. I mean, what if the leak was like a lake and it sunk in . then what? and what if the valve was on the wrong side of the leak? then what?

dirk digler
01-20-2012, 09:34 AM
I guess my first advice would be to shut the valve off. But what do I know.

They would have to catch it first. Like I said it is something to think about especially since the water is so easily to reach.

I am sure these ranchers\farmers are like most other ranchers\farmers=dumb.

HonestChieffan
01-20-2012, 09:38 AM
Considering the entire area is full of oil and gas wells and has been for many many years, I bet they have figured some of this stuff out........

HonestChieffan
01-20-2012, 09:39 AM
They would have to catch it first. Like I said it is something to think about especially since the water is so easily to reach.

I am sure these ranchers\farmers are like most other ranchers\farmers=dumb.


You do know that pipelines currently have automatic shut offs....or maybe you think they have little pipe gnomes who look for leaks.

jiveturkey
01-20-2012, 09:42 AM
I believe that this thing is eventually going to get built. Go around the aquifer.

I also believe that Canada would be stupid not to find ways to sell oil to China. We export nearly as much oil as we import, which seems really weird. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203441704577068670488306242.html

I also don't see how not building it this weekend is going to affect world oil prices.

I remember a time when temporary infrastructure jobs didn't count.

Everyone stay calm. Your ass is not currently on fire.

HonestChieffan
01-20-2012, 09:46 AM
I believe that this thing is eventually going to get built. Go around the aquifer.

I also believe that Canada would be stupid not to find ways to sell oil to China. We export nearly as much oil as we import, which seems really weird. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203441704577068670488306242.html

I also don't see how not building it this weekend is going to affect world oil prices.

I remember a time when temporary infrastructure jobs didn't count.

Everyone stay calm. Your ass is not currently on fire.


Unless China cuts the deal first. Then Obama can blame greedy Canadians I guess.

jiveturkey
01-20-2012, 09:47 AM
Do you believe that it's an all or nothing deal? They either export to us or China?

HonestChieffan
01-20-2012, 09:48 AM
Do you believe that it's an all or nothing deal? They either export to us or China?

Yes

dirk digler
01-20-2012, 09:50 AM
You do know that pipelines currently have automatic shut offs....or maybe you think they have little pipe gnomes who look for leaks.

Another Canadian oil company didn't find their leak in their pipeline for months and it was eventually found by a hunter.

the gnomes must have took off or were lazy

Cave Johnson
01-20-2012, 09:53 AM
I also believe that Canada would be stupid not to find ways to sell oil to China. We export nearly as much oil as we import, which seems really weird. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203441704577068670488306242.html

I suspect it has to do with different types of, and uses for, oil.

jiveturkey
01-20-2012, 09:54 AM
YesI haven't read anything that would lead me to agree with you.

dirk digler
01-20-2012, 09:55 AM
Very reassuring. Gnomes were off this day too.

For a year now, Marshall, Michigan, has resembled a town under siege. Orange and yellow booms stretch across the Kalamazoo River, and warning signs tell swimmers and boaters to stay out of Morrow Lake, a popular fishing spot, “due to ongoing oil spill response." Residents have grown accustomed to the constant hum of helicopters and the sight of airboats roaring upriver. Burly cleanup workers frequent the Dark Horse brewery, and residents seek compensation for damages at a former cabinet store-turned-claims office amidst cheery photos of the 181-year-old town.

It’s been like this since last July 25, when more than 800,000 gallons of crude spilled from a pipeline into a creek that feeds the Kalamazoo River, about 100 miles upriver from Lake Michigan. The EPA ranks it as the largest spill in Midwestern history, but even so, officials say that oil from a typical disaster of that size would have been cleaned up long ago: skimmed, soaked, and vacuumed from the surface.

But this was no typical oil spill. The pipeline owned by the Canadian company Enbridge carried mostly heavy, viscous crude from tar sands fields in Alberta, Canada, bound for Midwestern refineries. Raw tar sands oil, or bitumen, is so thick that it has to be mixed with a thinning compound, or diluent -- a highly volatile derivative of natural gas that includes large amounts of benzene and other toxic chemicals -- in order to make it liquid enough to pump through pipelines.

When that combination, known as DilBit, spilled out of the ruptured pipeline, the benzene and other chemicals in the mixture went airborne, forcing mandatory evacuations of surrounding homes (many of which were later bought by Enbridge because their owners couldn’t safely return), while the thick, heavy bitumen sank into the water column and coated the river and lake bottom, mixing with sediment and suffocating bottom-dwelling plants, animals, and micro-organisms.

Surface skimmers and vacuums were no help, and a full year later, EPA officials and scientists are still working on a plan to remove submerged oil from about 200 acres of river and lake bottom. EPA officials had given Enbridge an August 31 deadline to get all the oil out, but they now say a full cleanup could take years. “Where we thought we might be winding down our piece of the response, we’re actually ramping back up,” said Mark Durno, one of EPA’s on-scene coordinators. “The submerged oil is a real story -- it’s a real eye-opener. … In larger spills we’ve dealt with before, we haven’t seen nearly this footprint of submerged oil, if we’ve seen any at all.”

Critics say that what happened in Marshall was a dramatic example of the potential environmental, economic, and public health risks of transporting tar sands oil long distances -- something that fossil fuel companies want to do in increasingly greater amounts as demand for their product grows in response to rising gasoline prices and concerns about U.S. reliance on oil from the Middle East. An Enbridge competitor, TransCanada, is pushing the Obama administration to approve a new 1,700-mile-long pipeline known as the Keystone XL (http://www.onearth.org/article/once-on-the-fast-track-tar-sands-pipeline-faces-tougher-scrutiny) in order to move tar sands oil from Alberta -- whose refineries can no longer handle all the bitumen being extracted from the ground -- to facilities in Texas.

But environmental watchdogs and concerned lawmakers (http://blog.nwf.org/wildlifepromise/files/2011/07/110715-Keystone-XL-Letter-to-State.pdf) say the Kalamazoo spill, and another one earlier this month from an ExxonMobil pipeline on the Yellowstone River in Montana (http://www.onearth.org/article/yellowstone-river-oil-spill), show that moving more raw tar sands oil is a bad idea, at least until tougher safety standards can be put in place to protect air quality, drinking water, and public health. Keystone XL would cross the Ogallala Aquifer, which supplies water to almost a third of the irrigated agriculture in the United States and provides drinking water to millions of Midwest residents. The new pipeline would connect with portions of another network known as Keystone, which has already sprung at least 12 leaks from pipelines and pumping stations since going online about a year ago -- a concern expressed in a recent letter (http://blog.nwf.org/wildlifepromise/files/2011/07/110715-Keystone-XL-Letter-to-State.pdf) from seven U.S. senators to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“The fact that we’re still cleaning up a major oil spill in the Kalamazoo River a year later is a good indication that we need to seriously think about tar sands safety before we build a new tar sands pipeline,” said Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, director of the international program at the Natural Resources Defense Council. She called the review of pipeline safety issues by the State Department, whose approval is needed for Keystone XL to move forward, “totally inadequate.”

BigChiefFan
01-20-2012, 10:01 AM
Oh no, the oil companies will have to spend some of their precious money re-routing the pipeline.

It must be the end of the world, if they have to re-route the pipeline.

Good grief.

patteeu
01-20-2012, 10:14 AM
I believe that this thing is eventually going to get built. Go around the aquifer.

I also believe that Canada would be stupid not to find ways to sell oil to China. We export nearly as much oil as we import, which seems really weird. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203441704577068670488306242.html

I also don't see how not building it this weekend is going to affect world oil prices.

I remember a time when temporary infrastructure jobs didn't count.

Everyone stay calm. Your ass is not currently on fire.

I really don't think you do. I think that what you remember is that temporary, make-work jobs paid for out of the taxpayers' pockets don't count as much as the jobs that arrise through the natural course of commerce due to supply and demand.

There's a huge difference between a temporary construction job that builds an expansion for a business that's growing or even a highway that is becoming more congested than for a construction job to build a golf course or a jogging trail funded by a federal (make-work) grant. And in the end, a large portion of the stimulus funds went to keep the government workforce employed instead of toward infrastructure anyway.

patteeu
01-20-2012, 10:16 AM
Do you believe that it's an all or nothing deal? They either export to us or China?

They only need one pipeline to get their oil to market. It's either one that comes down through the US or one that goes west toward the Pacific where China will help them out.

patteeu
01-20-2012, 10:21 AM
Who the end user of the oil is under normal conditions really doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if China uses it or if the US uses it. Either way, the global market will be set and both China and the US will be buying oil on the global market.

What matters is (A) whether the US is going to be a partner in this business by providing refining services and port facilities or whether someone else will be getting that piece of the action, and (B) how easy our access will be to that oil if unusual conditions occur (e.g. major global oil market disruptions, conflict with the Chinese, etc.). A is much more significant than B, but if B occurs it would be a huge security issue.

jiveturkey
01-20-2012, 10:22 AM
They only need one pipeline to get their oil to market. It's either one that comes down through the US or one that goes west toward the Pacific where China will help them out.
So you also believe that it's an all or nothing deal?

patteeu
01-20-2012, 10:23 AM
So you also believe that it's an all or nothing deal?

I think the deal is still playing out, but in the end it's all or nothing. If they build a pipeline to the Pacific, they're not going to build one to a US port too any time soon.

jiveturkey
01-20-2012, 10:24 AM
I think the deal is still playing out, but in the end it's all or nothing. If they build a pipeline to the Pacific, they're not going to build one to a US port too any time soon.
And if that is the case do you believe that they will send 100% of their oil down that one pipeline to the west coast?

patteeu
01-20-2012, 10:25 AM
And if that is the case do you believe that they will send 100% of their oil down that one pipeline to the west coast?

For practical purposes, yes.

patteeu
01-20-2012, 10:30 AM
For practical purposes, yes.

For clarification: I'm not saying that we couldn't buy any of the oil and have it shipped to us from that Pacific port. I'm just saying that we wouldn't be able to take advantage of the jobs that refining and port services would represent. That's really the big difference here as I mentioned (perhaps unclearly) in post 94.

jiveturkey
01-20-2012, 10:30 AM
Their Prime Minster has said that he wants to diversify their export options, which makes sense IMO.

How does that turn into flipping the switch from 90% being sent to the US to 100% being sent to China?

patteeu
01-20-2012, 10:31 AM
Their Prime Minster has said that he wants to diversify their export options, which makes sense IMO.

How does that turn into flipping the switch from 90% being sent to the US to 100% being sent to China?

See previous post.

Also we're talking about the oil that would flow through the pipeline, not necessarily all Canadian oil.

jiveturkey
01-20-2012, 10:32 AM
For clarification: I'm not saying that we couldn't buy any of the oil and have it shipped to us from that Pacific port. I'm just saying that we wouldn't be able to take advantage of the jobs that refining and port services would represent. That's really the big difference here as I mentioned (perhaps unclearly) in post 94.Thanks for the clarification.

And I agree with what you're saying here.

I still believe that we'll get it built and I believe that it should be built. I also think that going around the aquifer makes sense.

There's also a chance that even if we close or deal with them soon they'll still want to build a second pipeline to the west coast.

BucEyedPea
01-20-2012, 10:34 AM
That and demanding a war with Iran will put gas at $5-6/gal by the end of the year.

Yup!

Incidentally, I read an adjusted for inflation on oil prices. It's exactly the same price it was thirty years ago. But there's no inflation. The dollar has just continued to decline.

Lightrise
01-20-2012, 10:36 AM
Obama's decision on this was the right move. People supporting this project haven't really examined all the facts. I'm not sure if it will eventually be built on some other route, but I sure hope not. Even the Canadians would rather not build this across their country, they want to dump the filth on us. The right wing war mongers and corporate corruption goons will kick and scream while nobody listens, then they'll go off and talk about gay marriage...LOL

blaise
01-20-2012, 10:39 AM
Is there some rule where Obama supporters here feel compelled to include, "lol" in half their posts?

vailpass
01-20-2012, 11:00 AM
Obama's decision on this was the right move. People supporting this project haven't really examined all the facts. I'm not sure if it will eventually be built on some other route, but I sure hope not. Even the Canadians would rather not build this across their country, they want to dump the filth on us. The right wing war mongers and corporate corruption goons will kick and scream while nobody listens, then they'll go off and talk about gay marriage...LOL

Know how I know you are a worthless meme?

Donger
01-20-2012, 11:04 AM
Obama's decision on this was the right move. People supporting this project haven't really examined all the facts. I'm not sure if it will eventually be built on some other route, but I sure hope not. Even the Canadians would rather not build this across their country, they want to dump the filth on us. The right wing war mongers and corporate corruption goons will kick and scream while nobody listens, then they'll go off and talk about gay marriage...LOL

What facts are those?

vailpass
01-20-2012, 11:13 AM
What facts are those?

Patience, he's googling as fast as he can.

suzzer99
01-21-2012, 09:50 AM
Sorry BLIND RAGE republicans but swing voters (the only votes who really matter) can't hear your blathering about 5k or so temporary jobs lost over the sound of Auto industry goes on U.S. hiring binge (http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-auto-industry-hiring-20120112,0,7863302.story) and Spring cleaning spurs Home Depot to hire 70,000 (http://www.local10.com/news/money/Spring-cleaning-spurs-Home-Depot-to-hire-70-000/-/1717308/7884736/-/y0nrpz/-/). How about that auto-industry bailout huh? I'm sure you'd be singing praises on that one if it was GWB and not Obama.

At least admit this issue has nothing to do with jobs and everything to with hitting your republican hot buttons - love of all things fossil fuel and DEEP BLINDING FROTHY RAGE for all things green.

I am going to troll you all so freaking hard if Europe somehow doesn't collapse (which is really the only thing that could derail Obama at this point) and Obama wins in a landslide. Then you can crawl back under your rocks for 4 more years.