[NEWARKCATHOLICFAN]

ARE YOU FOR OR AGAINST THIS?

If he rejects the pipeline, Obama risks losing support from organized labor, a key part of the Democratic base, for thwarting thousands of jobs.

The pipeline would carry oil from tar sands in western Canada to refineries in Texas, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma. The project's developer, Calgary-based TransCanada, says the pipeline could create as many as 20,000 jobs, a figure opponents say is inflated. A State Department report last summer said the pipeline would create up to 6,000 jobs during construction.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-be ... 54646.html

[nky]

Sounds like a great idea- jobs and oil. Nice.

[Wildcatk23]

Lets do It,

[nky]

[Image: http://www.aopl.org/images/cms/usMap.jpg]

http://www.aopl.org/

FYI
Map of the current oil pipelines criss crossing the US right now

[ekff]

Sounds like a good thing to me.

[MustangSally]

It creates jobs

[mrsportsfan]

An analyst asked a Republican Congressman would they be exporting that oil? He would not answer. It is so stupid that all the refineries lead to the gulf waters so that during hurricane season, they can be shut down. This past December oil started going up because our gasoline reserves were low. One oil company said they do that to cut down on inventory like most companies due to tax reasons. Doesn't matter if it effects people's food and medicine. I am so sick of Repulicans, and the nit picking on the hill. I haven't even heard about the budget being discussed. They will be under the gun again. I think people camped out on the wrong street. It should be where Capital Hill is.

[nky]

This is not a Democrat or Republican thing (although bot sides want you to believe it is) . It's a Washington thing.
For Half of his Presidency Obama had a Democratic controlled Congress. Did they solve the issues facing America? or just add more to the debt?

The Exporting of oil products is the free market at it's best. That's what we're all about right? Capitalism? or do we want the government to tell business who to sell to and how much to sell it?

More refineries in the Midwest would be a great idea but good luck getting the EPA to approve them.

[RunItUpTheGut]

^
Fuel is one of the very few things the goverment should regulate to keep as much as possible here and cost's as low as they can possibly be.

[mrsportsfan]

We have realized from this last fiasco before Christmas, it isn't the Democrat controlled Senate, it is the unrealistic House of Representatives. The whole purpose of the pipeline was to be independent of other countries of oil. If they are going to sell it, why bother? McConnell needs to show his financial records. I believe every person in a political office does.

[mrsportsfan]

Bush while in office kept confidential the richest 400 people in America. Obama when he became President released those tax papers. The owners of the LA Dodgers, have not paid taxes in over at least ten years or more. The article on the internet says on paper, they are paupers. Same for Donald Trump, with everything he has, he doesn't pay taxes. Personally at least. Find the article that talks about Obama releasing the tax return of the 400 richest americans, and you will find out why Republicans want to keep the tax cuts for the wealthy.

[nky]

Bush while in office kept confidential the richest 400 people in America. Obama when he became President released those tax papers. The owners of the LA Dodgers, have not paid taxes in over at least ten years or more. The article on the internet says on paper, they are paupers. Same for Donald Trump, with everything he has, he doesn't pay taxes. Personally at least. Find the article that talks about Obama releasing the tax return of the 400 richest americans, and you will find out why Republicans want to keep the tax cuts for the wealthy.

The President can not release private citizens tax returns unless we are living in a communist country now?:biggrin:

[Hoot Gibson]

An analyst asked a Republican Congressman would they be exporting that oil? He would not answer. It is so stupid that all the refineries lead to the gulf waters so that during hurricane season, they can be shut down. This past December oil started going up because our gasoline reserves were low. One oil company said they do that to cut down on inventory like most companies due to tax reasons. Doesn't matter if it effects people's food and medicine. I am so sick of Repulicans, and the nit picking on the hill. I haven't even heard about the budget being discussed. They will be under the gun again. I think people camped out on the wrong street. It should be where Capital Hill is.

The Senate has not passed a budget in more than 1,000 days and Democrats control the Senate. The Republican House has passed budgets - yet you blame then for not hearing the budget being discussed? Your anger is misplaced. Of the $14 trillion national debt, $5 trillion has been added in a period of just over 3 years by Obama and Congressional Democrats. Obama is preparing to ask Congress to raise the debt limit by another $1.2 trillion.

Refineries are located close to the coast to reduce transportation costs from the ships carrying imported oil. If they were located in the nation's heartland, then the cost of gasoline would be higher, not lower. Besides, no oil company is dumb enough to try to obtain permits for new refineries from the EPA, so we are stuck with the ones that we have along the coasts.

[TheRealVille]

ARE YOU FOR OR AGAINST THIS?

If he rejects the pipeline, Obama risks losing support from organized labor, a key part of the Democratic base, for thwarting thousands of jobs.

The pipeline would carry oil from tar sands in western Canada to refineries in Texas, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma. The project's developer, Calgary-based TransCanada, says the pipeline could create as many as 20,000 jobs, a figure opponents say is inflated. A State Department report last summer said the pipeline would create up to 6,000 jobs during construction.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-beg...54646.html

One thing you've got to consider is that, if you were one of the landowners from the Canadian border to wherever it ends up in Texas, would you like you land confiscated to run this line through it?

[NEWARKCATHOLICFAN]

He said no to this.

[LWC]

^Oh my!

[TheRealVille]

He said no to this.

He said no to the deadline that Congress put on him to approve it. He didn't want to "fast track" it, the way Congress wanted him to. They insisted that it be approved sometime in February. Personally, I'm for the pipeline, but Republicans in Congress want it at any cost, without considering the effect it has on the land. The current proposed route of the pipeline goes through land that supplies 30% of our nation's food sources. I think further study needs to be done before it is ran where it is proposed, or at least consider new routes. This isn't something that can be "fast tracked". Another thing that isn't being consider on here, is that the oil will go from Canada to the Gulf, just to get on a ship and head to China. Don't think for a minute that the oil is going to the refineries in texas to be made into gas, we have tons of surplus gas.

President Obama has rejected fast-tracking approval of the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline, turning aside Republican demands that he sign off on the deal they claim will create 20,000 new jobs and strengthen American energy security.

In a statement Wednesday afternoon, Obama said that he received a recommendation from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton earlier today recommending that the application be denied.

"This announcement is 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," Obama said. "I'm disappointed that Republicans in Congress forced this decision, but it does not change my administration's commitment to American-made energy that creates jobs and reduces our dependence on oil."

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...csp=34news

[Hoot Gibson]

This action is vintage Obama. He is trying to kill the pipeline project to please the environmental wackos in his liberal base while simultaneously blaming Republicans.

Our biggest supplier of imported oil, Canada, wants to send its oil to American refineries where it would be refined into gasoline and other products but Obama effectively tells them to sell their oil to the Chinese instead.

Maybe we can begin importing gasoline and fuel oil from China in a few years.

[TheRealVille]

This action is vintage Obama. He is trying to kill the pipeline project to please the environmental wackos in his liberal base while simultaneously blaming Republicans.

Our biggest supplier of imported oil, Canada, wants to send its oil to American refineries where it would be refined into gasoline and other products but Obama effectively tells them to sell their oil to the Chinese instead.

Maybe we can begin importing gasoline and fuel oil from China in a few years.

I thought you agreed that our refineries were at capacity, and that we have a surplus of gas?

Oil reserves and refined gasoline are two separate issues. We have a surplus of gasoline because our economy is in the toilet, so demand is down. About 70 percent of the cost of a gallon of gasoline is the cost of the crude oil consumed during the refining process. If our refineries produce a surplus of gasoline during slow economic times, would you rather they not export the surplus and lay off workers, or keep pumping gasoline to the highest bidder?

http://www.politicususa.com/en/gop-gasoline-export
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45826765/

[TheRealVille]

Does anybody worry about if the pipeline bursts and spills oil on crucial food lands? I'm all for the pipeline, but do the permits have to be issued by February, like Congress wants? Can't it be studied a little, and come up with the best possible option for American lands? Like I said, the oil will most likely go from Canada, through America, onto a ship in the gulf, and head straight to China.

[Hoot Gibson]

I thought you agreed that our refineries were at capacity, and that we have a surplus of gas?


http://www.politicususa.com/en/gop-gasoline-export

Hopefully, the economy will not be a wreck forever. As it strengthens, American's ability to fill their cars with gas will improve. You can't wait until you have an energy crisis to figure out how to increase the supply to meet the new demand.

Besides, as long as our refineries are producing more gasoline than they can sell here, what is wrong with putting Americans to work and exporting gasoline? Would you rather Canada tie up its oil in contracts with China and improve its energy security at our expense?

[TheRealVille]

Hopefully, the economy will not be a wreck forever. As it strengthens, American's ability to fill their cars with gas will improve. You can't wait until you have an energy crisis to figure out how to increase the supply to meet the new demand.

Besides, as long as our refineries are producing more gasoline than they can sell here, what is wrong with putting Americans to work and exporting gasoline? Would you rather Canada tie up its oil in contracts with China and improve its energy security at our expense?

At the most(Canada's amount) there will be 20,000 jobs during construction. According to other surveys, there will be around 4500 construction jobs(union, BTW, under any Administration). On a nationwide job scale, even the high figure isn't much. When built, the pumping stations along the way will be unmanned. Like I say, I'm for it, but I think another route would be better. Look at the map at the link, they already have a pipeline going through the US, and this one will go through the largest source of freshwater in the US. Why can't they just tie onto the old line in IL., and then go south from there? It was just put into production in 2010.

[Image: http://dingo.care2.com/pictures/causes/u...ED-630.jpg]

[TheRealVille]

Obama said that a Feb. 21 deadline set by Congress as part of the two-month payroll tax cut extension had made it impossible to do an adequate review of the pipeline project proposed by TransCanada.

“This announcement is 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,” the president said in a statement.

The decision and the language that accompanied it made clear that the White House, far from deflecting a political issue until after the election, was fully engaged in a battle with pipeline proponents. Obama said that his administration had worked to improve energy security through higher fuel-efficiency standards, and that it would explore ways to relieve the pipeline bottleneck slowing oil shipments between a major terminal in Cushing, Okla., and the nation’s gulf coast refineries.

The administration will allow TransCanada to reapply for a permit after it develops an alternate route around the sensitive habitat of Nebraska’s Sandhills. The administration’s decision includes language making it clear that TransCanada can reapply, stating, “The determination does not preclude any subsequent permit application or applications for subsequent projects.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/k...litics_pop

The main worry is that freshwater aquifer in Nebraska.

[nky]

[Image: http://www.aopl.org/images/cms/usMap.jpg]

http://www.aopl.org/

FYI
Map of the current oil pipelines criss crossing the US right now

Does anybody worry about if the pipeline bursts and spills oil on crucial food lands? I'm all for the pipeline, but do the permits have to be issued by February, like Congress wants? Can't it be studied a little, and come up with the best possible option for American lands? Like I said, the oil will most likely go from Canada, through America, onto a ship in the gulf, and head straight to China.

Not really. Since oil is a natural product it's all over the ground to begin with. Oil pipelines already criss cross this country. This one will bring more jobs and help get people working.

Besides if an accident happens guess what? More jobs will be needed for the cleanup:pondering:

[TheRealVille]

Not really. Since oil is a natural product it's all over the ground to begin with. Oil pipelines already criss cross this country. This one will bring more jobs and help get people working.

Besides if an accident happens guess what? More jobs will be needed for the cleanup:pondering:

What would be wrong with tying into their other line that they already have? Like I have said, I am for this pipeline, just not across that Nebraska aquifer. Tie in somewhere in Kansas, or Missouri, then head south. TransCanada already has a brand new line that went into operation in 2010(Purple line in the map).

Your last line is a typical response from the right.

[nky]

What would be wrong with tying into their other line that they already have?
Your last line is a typical response from the right.

It might have to do with pipe line capacity, flow rates, and terminus points

Hey I'm always right, even when I'm wronginglepar

[Hoot Gibson]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/k...litics_pop

The main worry is that freshwater aquifer in Nebraska.

The main worry is maintaining the political support of environmental activists. Obama needs every vote he can get. He is trying to fire up his base by kicking the oil industry in the groin, while at the same time telling his big labor supporters that the Republicans made him do it. He really does have a very low opinion of the intellect of Democratic voters. So do I but I am not try to convince them to vote for me. nicker:

What does it take for Obama's supporters to realize that they are being insulted?

[nky]

^Sheep never learn that they are being herded by the shepherd or community organizer if you would

[nky]

When in doubt follow the money:eyeroll:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-23...eline.html

Buffett’s Burlington Northern Among Winners From Keystone Denial

Warren Buffett’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration’s decision to reject TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.
With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.
“Whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul,” Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A), said in an interview. If Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.”
The State Department denied TransCanada a permit on Jan. 18, saying there was not enough time to study the proposal by Feb. 21, a deadline Congress imposed on President Barack Obama. Calgary-based TransCanada has said it intends to re-apply with a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region of Nebraska, something the Obama administration encouraged.
The rail option, though costlier, would lessen the environmental impact, such as a loss of wetlands and agricultural productivity, compared to the pipeline, according to the State Department analysis. Greenhouse gas emmissions, however, would be worse.

[TheRealVille]

The main worry is maintaining the political support of environmental activists. Obama needs every vote he can get. He is trying to fire up his base by kicking the oil industry in the groin, while at the same time telling his big labor supporters that the Republicans made him do it. He really does have a very low opinion of the intellect of Democratic voters. So do I but I am not try to convince them to vote for me. nicker:

What does it take for Obama's supporters to realize that they are being insulted?

I'd say the majority of people worry about the environment. Not like the "hillbilly right", that just want to rape the Earth for the now, and let the future take care of itself.