Obama vetoes keystone XML

[FireChan]

 

The pipeline doesn't help the US with its oil dependency because the US doesn't own the oil going through those pipes -- Saudi Arabia and Canada do. So, you see, the pipeline is helping the Saudis keep their stranglehold on the oil monopoly. It's not deterring them or fostering American independence at all. The construction of the pipeline, which could be a boon for jobs, won't be because the supplies and contractors are going to be Indian, Chinese and Canadian largely -- not American workers.

 

The entire project is designed to help the Saudis, Canadians, Chinese and to a lesser extent India. The US is on the bottom of the list in terms of nations that will benefit from this.

Until we seize it.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just a aside. Is the flooding of oil by the Saudis hurting our domestic producers as well. Seems like it's a effort to put all competition out of business so they can do the cartel thing again. I totally agree on the russian thing as well.

 

The Saudis are helping the US and the west currently with their OPEC prices and production. The normally would have lowered production of oil to combat the price drop in crude we've seen, but instead they've increased production. This is entirely designed to put the screws to Russia, and it's working. But the fracking boom as well as the drilling done over the last 8 years has really helped American oil independence in the way 3rd and others have been clamoring for here for years.

 

It is hurting American domestic producers as well, absolutely. The ND wells that were operating as recently as last year are all shut down now because it's costing more to produce than they can make selling it. This is all tied to the problems with Russia, the question will be what happens next. If Russia backs down (they won't) or the Saudis decide to stop playing ball, things could get interesting.

 

Either way, the Keystone pipeline won't help.

Until we seize it.

The last thing we want to do is start a war with Canada and lose. Can you imagine how much **** we'll eat getting our ass kicked by mounties armed with maple syrup?!

[FireChan]

 

The Saudis are helping the US and the west currently with their OPEC prices and production. The normally would have lowered production of oil to combat the price drop in crude we've seen, but instead they've increased production. This is entirely designed to put the screws to Russia, and it's working. But the fracking boom as well as the drilling done over the last 8 years has really helped American oil independence in the way 3rd and others have been clamoring for here for years.

 

It is hurting American domestic producers as well, absolutely. The ND wells that were operating as recently as last year are all shut down now because it's costing more to produce than they can make selling it. This is all tied to the problems with Russia, the question will be what happens next. If Russia backs down (they won't) or the Saudis decide to stop playing ball, things could get interesting.

 

Either way, the Keystone pipeline won't help.

 

The last thing we want to do is start a war with Canada and lose. Can you imagine how much **** we'll eat getting our ass kicked by mounties armed with maple syrup?!

Yeah but how sweet would another battle of the Hudson be?

[IDBillzFan]

Can you imagine how much **** we'll eat getting our ass kicked by mounties armed with maple syrup?!

 

Although I do love maple syrup.

[B-Man]

You could have expected Republicans to work with the President to find areas of common ground, and to come to reasonable compromises, with both parties giving in on some issues in order to forge working agreement, the way that Bill Clinton worked with an opposition congress.

 

Instead, President Obama literally told Republicans that they "could sit in the back"; and rammed through legislation which had bipartisain opposition, in violation of Constitutional law-making processes. He then instructed Harry Reid to to advance any bills through the Senate solely because he was not interested in working with Republican lawmakers, and did not wish to give them the opportunity to offer amendments to any bills that may make it to the floor.

 

The honest truth is, you'll never get to know if this Republican Congress would have worked with the sitting Democratic President, as they did with President Clinton, because the President never gave them the chance.

 

I was going to respond with the Citizen Kane "clapping" gif............................but that might have been too much....

 

 

.

[GG]

The entire project is designed to help the Saudis, Canadians, Chinese and to a lesser extent India. The US is on the bottom of the list in terms of nations that will benefit from this.

 

No matter how many times you repeat it will not make it any more correct.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

No matter how many times you repeat it will not make it any more correct.

 

And until you show me otherwise, I'll continue to believe what I read from TransCanada itself. It's been months on this topic and I'm the only one who's posted any primary sources on the actual project. I'm more than willing to be educated and learn, but so far there's been nothing from the other side of this issue other than fantasy (it's going to help the economy, oil dependency, jobs, it's safer than transporting on rails).

[3rdnlng]

 

The pipeline doesn't help the US with its oil dependency because the US doesn't own the oil going through those pipes -- Saudi Arabia and Canada do. So, you see, the pipeline is helping the Saudis keep their stranglehold on the oil monopoly. It's not deterring them or fostering American independence at all. The construction of the pipeline, which could be a boon for jobs, won't be because the supplies and contractors are going to be Indian, Chinese and Canadian largely -- not American workers.

 

The entire project is designed to help the Saudis, Canadians, Chinese and to a lesser extent India. The US is on the bottom of the list in terms of nations that will benefit from this.

OK, where is the oil that is transported through the pipeline going to be refined?

[GG]

 

And until you show me otherwise, I'll continue to believe what I read from TransCanada itself. It's been months on this topic and I'm the only one who's posted any primary sources on the actual project. I'm more than willing to be educated and learn, but so far there's been nothing from the other side of this issue other than fantasy (it's going to help the economy, oil dependency, jobs, it's safer than transporting on rails).

 

I don't know why I need to keep repeating that an increased supply of a global commodity that is controlled by a close ally of the US is a good thing? How does it not lead to lower dependence on OPEC when US is now a net exporter of oil? It's not just the Marcellus or the Bakken shales. It's their addition to the GLOBAL supply that's affecting prices and the entire reason Saudis haven't cut the output.

 

It's insane to focus only on the permanent pipeline jobs, when you know there will be thousands of jobs created during the multi-year construction phase. I guess those workers never exist.

 

It's good for you to ignore that the pipeline will also carry US crude. It's good for you to ignore that the pipeline will feed Gulf refineries.

 

Bottom line - Canadians will extract the oil and they will ship it out. Nice to see progressives ignoring the firebombs that ride through the rails. Mighty green of you.

[TakeYouToTasker]

oh brother!

You take umbrage with my post?

 

What was incorrect?

Edited February 25, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker

[Deranged Rhino]

OK, where is the oil that is transported through the pipeline going to be refined?

 

In a joint owned Saudi national / American refining facility. Not even the processing of the stuff, nor the product, or the construction, will be owned by American interests fully or in part.

 

 

I don't know why I need to keep repeating that an increased supply of a global commodity that is controlled by a close ally of the US is a good thing? How does it not lead to lower dependence on OPEC when US is now a net exporter of oil? It's not just the Marcellus or the Bakken shales. It's their addition to the GLOBAL supply that's affecting prices and the entire reason Saudis haven't cut the output.

 

It's insane to focus only on the permanent pipeline jobs, when you know there will be thousands of jobs created during the multi-year construction phase. I guess those workers never exist.

 

It's good for you to ignore that the pipeline will also carry US crude. It's good for you to ignore that the pipeline will feed Gulf refineries.

 

Bottom line - Canadians will extract the oil and they will ship it out. Nice to see progressives ignoring the firebombs that ride through the rails. Mighty green of you.

 

I've never argued that point. More oil in the market has benefits -- but what are those benefits in the current world? The oil supply is through the roof, we're going to run out of fresh water on this planet before we run out of petrol. Over the past decade, US domestic production of oil has skyrocketed. We're no longer oil dependent -- will the Keystone help us become even less oil dependent? Nope. Will it help flood an already flooded market? Yup.

 

Now, if you want to break this down into how it'll help keep Russia in check, we can talk. But even then you're adding an unnecessary risk (the environmental risks) to the equation for very, very, very, very minimal impact on the production of oil or the US energy independence. Again, there's NO DIRECT OR IMMEDIATE BENEFIT to the pipeline for Americans. There is plenty of benefit to corporate and state interests in Saudi Arabia, Canada, China and India. Those are the facts, the rest are colored bubbles.

 

It's true the Canadians will still ship the oil with or without the pipeline. Doing it by rail or ship, the environmental impact is the same as a pipeline. The only difference is the profit margin for those corporate interests (China and TransCanada) who own the tar sands.

[GG]

 

In a joint owned Saudi national / American refining facility. Not even the processing of the stuff, nor the product, or the construction, will be owned by American interests fully or in part.

 

 

I've never argued that point. More oil in the market has benefits -- but what are those benefits in the current world? The oil supply is through the roof, we're going to run out of fresh water on this planet before we run out of petrol. Over the past decade, US domestic production of oil has skyrocketed. We're no longer oil dependent -- will the Keystone help us become even less oil dependent? Nope. Will it help flood an already flooded market? Yup.

 

Now, if you want to break this down into how it'll help keep Russia in check, we can talk. But even then you're adding an unnecessary risk (the environmental risks) to the equation for very, very, very, very minimal impact on the production of oil or the US energy independence. Again, there's NO DIRECT OR IMMEDIATE BENEFIT to the pipeline for Americans. There is plenty of benefit to corporate and state interests in Saudi Arabia, Canada, China and India. Those are the facts, the rest are colored bubbles.

 

It's true the Canadians will still ship the oil with or without the pipeline. Doing it by rail or ship, the environmental impact is the same as a pipeline. The only difference is the profit margin for those corporate interests (China and TransCanada) who own the tar sands.

 

So the argument is now over profit margins?

 

You agree that killing the pipeline won't stop Canadians from producing the oil, nor will it stop them from exporting the oil. In fact transporting that oil will be a magnitude more dangerous than over a pipeline.

 

Meanwhile, the US won't have a safer way to transport Bakken oil. US refineries won't get additional Canadian oil, unless it's delivered by dangerous rail. Thousands of US construction workers won't have a good paying two-year job.

 

And you win the battle because the Canadians & Saudis won't earn a better profit margin?

 

And then you wonder why progressive logic is a punch line?

Edited February 25, 2015 by GG

[Deranged Rhino]

So the argument is now over profit margins?

 

You agree that killing the pipeline won't stop Canadians from producing the oil, nor will it stop them from exporting the oil. In fact transporting that oil will be a magnitude more dangerous than over a pipeline.

 

Meanwhile, the US won't have a safer way to transport Bakken oil. US refineries won't get additional Canadian oil, unless it's delivered by dangerous rail. Thousands of US construction workers won't have a good paying two-year job.

 

And you win the battle because the Canadians & Saudis won't earn a better profit margin?

 

And then you wonder why progressive logic is a punch line?

My argument is over risk benefit analysis. I've always agreed that killing the pipeline won't stop the harvesting of the tar sands, killing the pipeline makes it more expensive for foreign interests to profit from it. Sending the crude by rail isn't the only means of getting it to refineries, it's simply the most expedient for TransCanada.

 

The construction jobs are a myth, like your belief that I'm a progressive. The biggest construction part of the pipeline is in the steel manufacturing element of the job, and that's already spoken for by Indian and Chinese steel workers, not American workers. Again, stop only looking at the myths being propagated by both sides of the issue and look at the actual reports and documents provided by TransCanada itself. It's all there.

[Keukasmallies]

 

its easy to curse the darkness but makes more sense to go to the trouble of lighting a candle.

 

Obviously, this is the premise that POTUS brings to all his Presidential endeavors. Or, wait a minute, isn't he the guy who is constantly blowing out the match before anyone actually sees the light...?

 

Hope and Change, Brah. We keep hoping', but he don't do no changin'.

[3rdnlng]

 

In a joint owned Saudi national / American refining facility. Not even the processing of the stuff, nor the product, or the construction, will be owned by American interests fully or in part.

 

 

I've never argued that point. More oil in the market has benefits -- but what are those benefits in the current world? The oil supply is through the roof, we're going to run out of fresh water on this planet before we run out of petrol. Over the past decade, US domestic production of oil has skyrocketed. We're no longer oil dependent -- will the Keystone help us become even less oil dependent? Nope. Will it help flood an already flooded market? Yup.

 

Now, if you want to break this down into how it'll help keep Russia in check, we can talk. But even then you're adding an unnecessary risk (the environmental risks) to the equation for very, very, very, very minimal impact on the production of oil or the US energy independence. Again, there's NO DIRECT OR IMMEDIATE BENEFIT to the pipeline for Americans. There is plenty of benefit to corporate and state interests in Saudi Arabia, Canada, China and India. Those are the facts, the rest are colored bubbles.

 

It's true the Canadians will still ship the oil with or without the pipeline. Doing it by rail or ship, the environmental impact is the same as a pipeline. The only difference is the profit margin for those corporate interests (China and TransCanada) who own the tar sands.

Can you reconcile the two sentences I bolded above? Once the oil is refined, where is it going, and in what form?

[Rob's House]

Whining about obstructionism is pathetic. Argue merits. If it's a good idea and he killed it because his kitty hurt then he's an incompetent POS. Are the Republicans being "obstructionist" (y'all weren't crying about it when the Dems were blocking Bush's judicial appointments) by blocking good legislation for political reasons or are they blocking legislation they disagree with? Because if it's the latter it's called doing their fu©king jobs.

[Keukasmallies]

do they really need another one?

 

and isn't the price of gas at $2.30 the lowest it's been in a decade or so? (yes I'm guessing so blast away if I am wrong )

 

It's amazing what one learns on the Daily Show

 

And what is the price of gas today? Notice the "direction" of the price changes being applied at the gas pump; they may be going down where you get your gas, but not around here.

[Jim in Anchorage]

My argument is over risk benefit analysis. I've always agreed that killing the pipeline won't stop the harvesting of the tar sands, killing the pipeline makes it more expensive for foreign interests to profit from it. Sending the crude by rail isn't the only means of getting it to refineries, it's simply the most expedient for TransCanada.

 

The construction jobs are a myth, like your belief that I'm a progressive. The biggest construction part of the pipeline is in the steel manufacturing element of the job, and that's already spoken for by Indian and Chinese steel workers, not American workers. Again, stop only looking at the myths being propagated by both sides of the issue and look at the actual reports and documents provided by TransCanada itself. It's all there.

So who's going to assemble these Chinese pipes?

[Gary M]

Not building the pipeline doesn't stop the crude from moving.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/17/us-usa-train-derailment-csx-idUSKBN0LK1ST20150217

[GG]

My argument is over risk benefit analysis. I've always agreed that killing the pipeline won't stop the harvesting of the tar sands, killing the pipeline makes it more expensive for foreign interests to profit from it. Sending the crude by rail isn't the only means of getting it to refineries, it's simply the most expedient for TransCanada.

 

The construction jobs are a myth, like your belief that I'm a progressive. The biggest construction part of the pipeline is in the steel manufacturing element of the job, and that's already spoken for by Indian and Chinese steel workers, not American workers. Again, stop only looking at the myths being propagated by both sides of the issue and look at the actual reports and documents provided by TransCanada itself. It's all there.

 

Goodie, instead of rail, the oil will be transported by trucks. That's much better.