Keystone Pipeline - a red line?

#152
#152
Abe Hoffman said:
The price of crude oil was $12 per barrel at one point during the Clinton administration. Did you give Bill credit for this?
Click to expand...

no i didnt, should I? Was Billy-Boy out there pushing pipe down holes and drinking everyones milkshake?

Whats funny is that Clinton admin approved the $90 Billion merger of Exxon and Mobile while attacking Microsoft on a daily basis. Good times
 
Last edited:
#154
#154
Another example of how we treat our allies?

How Obama Shocked Harper as Keystone's Frustrator-in-Chief - Bloomberg

Some see a larger issue for Canada beyond pipelines and oil. “With Obama saying no to Canada or what amounts to a no, the lesson is that we cannot rely anymore on the United States for our economic well-being,” said Allan Gotlieb, former deputy minister of foreign affairs and Ambassador to Washington during the free trade talks. “Not getting the oil sands out will cost many billions of dollars of lost economic opportunity for Canada. We are at an historic turning point in this special relationship.”
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#157
#157
VolsNSkinsFan said:
no i didnt, should I? Was Billy-Boy out there pushing pipe down holes and drinking everyones milkshake?

Whats funny is that Clinton admin approved the $90 Billion merger of Exxon and Mobile while attacking Microsoft on a daily basis. Good times
Click to expand...

I agree that the Exxon Mobile merger was a mistake.

Another example of big bucks trumping common sense.
 
#158
#158
Abe Hoffman said:
July 2008, the average price of gasoline was $4.42 per gallon. Note that was during the Bush administration.

I did not blame Bush for this high price then nor do I blame Obama for the current price of gas. The President does not control the price of gasoline.
Click to expand...

Keep telling yourself whatever makes you feel better. Blindly support Obama all you want. Nice straw man by the way.
 
#159
#159
Abe Hoffman said:
Obviously he has not "interfered, gotten in the way or caused delay" of private production.

Crude oil and natural gas production are up substantially during the Obama administration.
Click to expand...

What about his policy promotes or encourages increased production.

Please tell us all.

Show me one of his campaign speeches where he professes his desire to increase usage of fossil fuels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#161
#161
allvol123 said:
What about his policy promotes or encourages increased production.

Please tell us all.

Show me one of his campaign speeches where he professes his desire to increase usage of fossil fuels.
Click to expand...


It's somewhere between I'm gonna bankrupt the coal industry and here's another 500 million for bs solyndra projects.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    51.5 KB · Views: 78
#163
#163
lawgator1 said:
I think she is not beholden to the environmental types. In turn, I think she'd risk pissing the few of them off given the considerable number of votes she'd earn by at least saying she is willing to consider it. Its just that she'd always couch it in terms like hybrid cars and alternative sources, so as to link it to a larger strategy that keeps most Dems on board.

I am personally pretty ambivalent about it. While I don't feel strongly about its environmental impact, I'm also not sold on it having much effect as, by the time it comes on line, circumstances will hopefully have changed. I think we should be talking more about a) building more refineries with better technology; b) viability of natural gas distribution for cars running on that; and c) rapid advancements in battery technology that make hybrids even more convenient and efficient than they already are. Focusing on a project that, in the end, just perpetuates an outdated approach to energy policy is, in my view, not where the action is.
Click to expand...

From the other thread so we don't drag it off course.

I don't necessarily disagree that it might not have the effect on our specific energy policy. But since the refined product is going to be sold on the world market (as proposed) it's kind of a moot point. We can't force other countries to accept hybrid vehicles or electric cars. Many of the nations that will probably import said refined products probably don't and wouldn't convert that easily anyway. So it may be an outdated or waning energy policy to the US, but not to the many nations that can't or won't convert to alternate fuels.

I think you are spot on in the fact Hillary won't placate the environmentalist crowd. She'll need the unions in 2016 and they support the Keystone as well. And while they would probably vote for her anyway, something like this would at least give them a good enough reason to point to. And could sway some centrist independents as well.
 
Last edited:
#164
#164
Grand Vol said:
From the other thread so we don't drag it off course.

I don't necessarily disagree that it might not have the effect on our specific energy policy. But since the refined product is going to be sold on the world market (as proposed) it's kind of a moot point. We can't force other countries to accept hybrid vehicles or electric cars. Many of the nations that will probably import said refined products probably don't and wouldn't convert that easily anyway. So it may be an outdated or waning energy policy to the US, but not to the many nations that can't or won't convert to alternate fuels.

I think you are spot on in the fact Hillary won't placate the environmentalist crowd. She'll need the unions in 2016 and they support the Keystone as well. And while they would probably vote for her anyway, something like this would at least give them a good enough reason to point to. And could sway some centrist independents as well.
Click to expand...

Re the electoral politics, that's my read, as well. You know, she's polling so high right now against GOP contenders that she would certainly be able to hang on to all Dem votes and reach out to the independent voters on issues like this. She really is in the cat bird's seat at the moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#165
#165
Dave1967 said:
The USA definitely needs it!
Click to expand...

That is just not true, Dave. The capacity of existing pipeline from Canada is more than enough to supply middle American imports from Canada, well into the future. We do not need Keystone XL Pipeline.
 
#166
#166
lawgator1 said:
Re the electoral politics, that's my read, as well. You know, she's polling so high right now against GOP contenders that she would certainly be able to hang on to all Dem votes and reach out to the independent voters on issues like this. She really is in the cat bird's seat at the moment.
Click to expand...

I just happened to notice she's not really taken a public stand on it. On one hand, the State Department recommended denial of the project while she was at the helm. This was in response to the 60 day legislation put forward by Congress and not for the overall situation from my understanding. On the other she made some comments before about it and leaned towards approval.

Honestly, she needs to come clean on it. Two years is an eternity in politics and most voters would have forgotten about it by then even if they disagreed with her decision.
 
#167
#167
Grand Vol said:
It's a pretty sad day in the geopolitical realm when your inaction actually pisses off the Canadians.

Keep up the good work Mister President!
Click to expand...

It is a far sadder day when American politicians ignore the interests of the American people, to take orders from Canadian corporations. It is sad indeed that their treachery is consumed by voters as patriotism. How dumb is that? It is about as dumb as dumb and dumber can get.
 
#168
#168
Vol Main said:
It is a far sadder day when American politicians ignore the interests of the American people, to take orders from Canadian corporations. It is sad indeed that their treachery is consumed by voters as patriotism. How dumb is that? It is about as dumb as dumb and dumber can get.
Click to expand...

Yep, you're right:

Americans Favor Keystone XL Pipeline

New High: 61% Favor Building the Keystone XL Pipeline - Rasmussen Reports™

There's probably a half dozen polls out there that say the same thing going back the past few years. And when you had an item that the majority of Americans think is a good idea time and time again, and that's across the political demographic, that says something.
 
#169
#169
Vol Main said:
It is a far sadder day when American politicians ignore the interests of the American people, to take orders from Canadian corporations. It is sad indeed that their treachery is consumed by voters as patriotism. How dumb is that? It is about as dumb as dumb and dumber can get.
Click to expand...

Way too much dumbassery. Can you give us the cliff notes version that will fit on a bumper sticker?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#171
#171
Grand Vol said:
Yep, you're right:

Americans Favor Keystone XL Pipeline

New High: 61% Favor Building the Keystone XL Pipeline - Rasmussen Reports™

There's probably a half dozen polls out there that say the same thing going back the past few years. And when you had an item that the majority of Americans think is a good idea time and time again, and that's across the political demographic, that says something.
Click to expand...

Yes, it does say something. It says that people believe the massive campaign of misinformation which TransCanada paid a consulting firm to fabricate and push on both our national political parties, up and down the halls of our Congress. Almost every point made in favor of Keystone is either just partially true or not true at all. In layman's language, the TransCanada lobbying was a pack of lies. Those lies were repeated by politicians and media talking heads, all over the country. Most folks have not heard the truth about the issue, because almost nobody is telling it.
 
Last edited:
#172
#172
Vol Main said:
Yes, it does say something. It says that people believe the massive campaign of misinformation which TransCanada paid a consulting firm to fabricate and push on both our national political parties, up and down the halls of our Congress. Almost every point made in favor of Keystone is either partially true or not true at all. In layman's language, the TransCanada lobbying was a pack of lies. Those lies were repeated by politicians and media talking heads, all over the country. Most folks have not heard the truth about the issue, because almost nobody is telling it.
Click to expand...

what's the truth?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#175
#175
MG1968 said:
what's the truth?
Click to expand...

That the pipeline will threaten 10% of the Western spotted jumping field mouse's habitat or something similar.

I have yet to hear a valid argument from the opposition besides "it's bad" or the normal drivel the eco-nazis put out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top