Keystone fact check from think progress

25 Dec 2011 11:01 #21 by znovkovic


By forcing a decision in just 2 months.....the question I asked was does the federal government have the right or the authority to force it through a state that doesn't want it?????


eminent domain can be invoked. although unpopular if forced the federales can and will if it is in the best interest of the nation.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Dec 2011 13:19 #22 by Soulshiner
After all, a slightly smaller pipeline, the 30-inch Keystone, was built across eastern Nebraska in 2009 by the same company, TransCanada, with barely a ripple of opposition. Most news stories raved about the financial windfall to main street motels and cafes from hundreds of pipeline construction workers.

But when the Deepwater Horizon oil platform blew up off the Gulf Coast in April 2010, suddenly the nation, including Nebraskans, was focused on the impact of oil spills on water.

Then in July 2010, a crude-oil pipeline break in Michigan leaked 800,000 gallons of oil that threatened to flow down the Kalamazoo River into the Great Lakes.

That set off further questions. Obviously pipelines, and not just oil wells deep in the Gulf, can spill.

Concerns again arose in May 2011, when a North Dakota farmer watched as a 60-foot geyser of oil shot from a nearby pumping station on the brand-new Keystone pipeline — one of more than a dozen leaks in the pipeline's first year of operation.

By then, TransCanada had stirred up more bad publicity by sending letters threatening rural landowners with eminent domain if they resisted allowing the company right of way on property along its chosen route.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20111227/N ... ted-detour

When you plant ice you're going to harvest wind. - Robert Hunter

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jan 2012 14:00 #23 by lionshead2010
Well it appears there will be a moratorium on the Keystone Pipeline. I will be curious to see how the press spins this so it doesn't harm the President's already dismal track record on producing jobs...especially in the private sector. I understand the environmental concerns associated with the project, but I'm not sure that will appease all the union types who won't be gaining work anytime soon as a result of this decision. Let the spinning begin.

Obama: No on oil pipeline, more review needed

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_19766965

President Barack Obama says he's denying an application for a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline because a GOP-mandated deadline didn't allow time for a full review. Obama says his decision isn't a judgment on the merits of the proposed $7 billion pipeline. Rather, he's citing the "arbitrary nature" of the Feb. 21 deadline that was set by a GOP-written provision in a recent tax bill that Obama signed.

I understand that Mr. Romney may have put some people out of work in his previous endeavors so I hope the Adminstration is prepared to defend it's record on jobs. It seems they have made every effort to kill jobs. I wonder what the unions will have to say about this? The good thing is, the President can depend on much of the press to carry his water. It must be nice to use this double standard and get away with it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jan 2012 14:15 #24 by Rick
"More review needed" my ass....more like more liberal votes needed.

“We can’t afford four more years of this”

Tim Walz

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jan 2012 15:17 #25 by Martin Ent Inc
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.


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

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jan 2012 15:27 #26 by LadyJazzer
The GOP painted themselves into this corner...on purpose...so they could howl when it happened. <ZZZZzzzzzz.....>

The environmental reviews were already underway. The GOP demanded an answer in 60 days and were TOLD in advance that it was an 18-24 month job to finish the evaluations; and that if they demanded an answer right away the answer would be "NO." Duh... So, to create a "howling point"--(similar to a talking-point, but designed for the usual GOP outrage-of-the-day)--they went ahead with their idiotic demands, knowing in advance what the outcome would be.

Please do wake me up when something newsworthy happens...

Yeah, bILL, it most likely IS your "ass" speaking. Not too many things make such an empty whistling sound.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jan 2012 17:39 #27 by Blazer Bob
LJ, you are such a tool.

LB, not so much votes as money.

LadyJazzer wrote: The GOP painted themselves into this corner...on purpose...so they could howl when it happened. <ZZZZzzzzzz.....>

The environmental reviews were already underway. The GOP demanded an answer in 60 days and were TOLD in advance that it was an 18-24 month job to finish the evaluations; and that if they demanded an answer right away the answer would be "NO." Duh... So, to create a "howling point"--(similar to a talking-point, but designed for the usual GOP outrage-of-the-day)--they went ahead with their idiotic demands, knowing in advance what the outcome would be.

Please do wake me up when something newsworthy happens...

Yeah, bILL, it most likely IS your "ass" speaking. Not too many things make such an empty whistling sound.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jan 2012 17:44 #28 by Reverend Revelant

neptunechimney wrote: LJ, you are such a tool.

LB, not so much votes as money.

LadyJazzer wrote: The GOP painted themselves into this corner...on purpose...so they could howl when it happened. <ZZZZzzzzzz.....>

The environmental reviews were already underway. The GOP demanded an answer in 60 days and were TOLD in advance that it was an 18-24 month job to finish the evaluations; and that if they demanded an answer right away the answer would be "NO." Duh... So, to create a "howling point"--(similar to a talking-point, but designed for the usual GOP outrage-of-the-day)--they went ahead with their idiotic demands, knowing in advance what the outcome would be.

Please do wake me up when something newsworthy happens...

Yeah, bILL, it most likely IS your "ass" speaking. Not too many things make such an empty whistling sound.


You're wrong. Lady Jazzer is not a tool.. she's an ass.

Waiting for Armageddon since 33 AD

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jan 2012 18:13 #29 by plaidvillain
This pipeline is a complete sham. It will not create jobs, but will create a NET LOSS of jobs (those midwest refineries employees will be SOL...not to mention the transport industry employees currently moving this "crude"), it will have ZERO impact on our dependancy to mid-east oil, as it will be refined by non-American multi national corps for EXPORT. With pipelines, its not a matter of if there will be a spill...only a question of when and how devastating.

How do the conservatives here feel about the hundreds of eminent domain cases already filed in TX and NE? You guys ok with a foreign corp taking Americans' lands against their wishes?

This (snake)oil pipeline has many negative impacts, with almost no real positives. We're being sold a scam - do your research and don't buy into this lie.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jan 2012 18:23 #30 by Reverend Revelant

lionshead2010 wrote: Well it appears there will be a moratorium on the Keystone Pipeline. I will be curious to see how the press spins this so it doesn't harm the President's already dismal track record on producing jobs...especially in the private sector. I understand the environmental concerns associated with the project, but I'm not sure that will appease all the union types who won't be gaining work anytime soon as a result of this decision. Let the spinning begin.

Obama: No on oil pipeline, more review needed

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_19766965

President Barack Obama says he's denying an application for a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline because a GOP-mandated deadline didn't allow time for a full review. Obama says his decision isn't a judgment on the merits of the proposed $7 billion pipeline. Rather, he's citing the "arbitrary nature" of the Feb. 21 deadline that was set by a GOP-written provision in a recent tax bill that Obama signed.

I understand that Mr. Romney may have put some people out of work in his previous endeavors so I hope the Adminstration is prepared to defend it's record on jobs. It seems they have made every effort to kill jobs. I wonder what the unions will have to say about this? The good thing is, the President can depend on much of the press to carry his water. It must be nice to use this double standard and get away with it.


Of course leave it to Obama to sign something that he had no intent of upholding. Since his signature means so little, maybe we can just get rid of Obamacare on the premise that his signature on government documents are worthless... as he has so well proven just now.

Waiting for Armageddon since 33 AD

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.174 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+