• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

Last edited:
Right. They want more studies, despite this thing already being studied for years. If you don't mind spending the money you can study it for several generations.
Come on - it took the State of Nebraska the same amount of time to figure out the route itself was not good for them, and they STILL haven't made a final agreement (in writing) on what IS good for them. I mean, Really?, Nebraska couldn't look at a MAP and figure out rather quickly that there might be an issue with the route? :shrug:

And you do realize until Nebraska makes up it's mind that Uncle Sam is on hold? You can't study river crossings and other possible issues if you don't know where those are.


Edit:
At least someone is finally making some sense in this deal. I never could figure out with all the glut sitting in OK why they didn't start building there and go south instead of hanging everything on the northern leg. I mean, even if the rest of XL never gets built (doubtful) they'll still make money on the Cushing-to-Gulf section.
 
Last edited:

As has been quoted numerous times in this thread, Nebraska settled on a route after negotiations with TransCanada last November. Obama's state department is the only hold-up.

Obama will get hammered on this issue all summer as gas approaches $5 a gallon.
 

Do Americans still believe this will increase US supply?
 
Do Americans still believe this will increase US supply?

Doesn't matter. Perception is the only thing that matters during an election. Just as Obama hammered Bush for high gas prices in 2008, he will get the same this year. This pipeline issue will be like throwing gas on the fire (pun intended).
 
As has been quoted numerous times in this thread, Nebraska settled on a route after negotiations with TransCanada last November. Obama's state department is the only hold-up.
Erroneously quoted you mean? Quoted then spun, folded, & mutilated?

Let's look at the real facts from that time so we can get it all straight, without the GOP spin. I'll post up the Nov 2011 news which shows many times that there was no agreement on a final route between Nebraska and TransCanadian at that time:

Nebraska signs oil-pipeline bill (dated 23 Nov 2011)

His comments came after Nebraska state senators voted unanimously in favour of legislation requiring TransCanada to propose a new route for the 830,000 barrel per day pipeline that would run from Alberta to refineries on the Texas coast.
Let's recap that. In Nov 2011 Nebraska has finally approved legislation requiring TransCan to move Keystone XL. That isn't saying the new route has been proposed and approved, that is saying the old route is officially denied - you (TransCan) need to try again. Six to nine months dating from Nov 2011 puts us somewhere in the May-Aug 2012 time-frame for Nebraska to finish it's end of this deal. What you saw in Jan 2012 was the GOP pushing their Republican Governor into making nebulous statements about Nebraska's current status with XL. Many people were fooled by the retoric but the bottom line is, there is no final, signed agreement between Nebraska and TransCanadian on the Keystone XL pipeline route and there won't be for several more months.

The re-routing in Nebraska will affect the route in other states as well. Now, how exactly is Uncle Sam supposed to conduct studies on areas when it doesn't know where those areas are? It's kind of hard to do a plan review without the final plan.
 
Last edited:
Erroneously quoted you mean? Quoted then spun, folded, & mutilated?

Erroneous, spun, mutilated ???? So now you are accusing the Governor of Nebraska of lying ??? Talk about spinning...........

Gov. Heineman News: Gov. Heineman: Pipeline Re-Routing is Nebraska Common Sensen

And from your own link:

Read more: Nebraska signs oil-pipeline bill

The issue was routing of the pipeline through the sensitive Sand Hills area over the Ogallala aquifer. That issue has been resolved.

YOU are the one mutilating the truth with your lies.
 
I'm involved in the tourism business in Costa Rica and it seems the Chinese certainly have their fingers in a lot of pies.

A.M. Costa Rica: Third newspage

I was just in Costa Rica last week. Our driver pointed out a huge new soccer stadium in San Jose that he said was paid for by the Chinese. He said the locals had no idea why the Chinese would give them such a big gift, but they were sure there was a catch somewhere.
 
 

Did you visit Arenal Volcano?

China has a huge duty free zone here and an interest in all of Central America, But in truth they are thinking globally. Their interests in Africa, and their successes there, are well documented.
 
Erroneous, spun, mutilated ???? So now you are accusing the Governor of Nebraska of lying ??? Talk about spinning...........


Gov. Heineman News: Gov. Heineman: Pipeline Re-Routing is Nebraska Common Sensen
I didn't accuse the Governor of lying, I accused other people of misinterpreting exactly what he said. In case you haven't noticed, politicians are particularly good at making "Go to Hell" sound like an invite to an upper class dance.

This is the last sentence of the third paragraph of the link you provided:

Additionally, TransCanada has heard our concerns and has voluntarily agreed to change the route.
Yes, folks! We made a milestone today because TransCan agrees that their original routing is unacceptable to Nebraska and they will move it!!!

It doesn't say "They've moved it over here" just that, yes, they will move it somewhere else.
Now, where did they move it? They aren't going through the Sand Hills so where are they going?

And from your own link:


Read more: Nebraska signs oil-pipeline bill

The issue was routing of the pipeline through the sensitive Sand Hills area over the Ogallala aquifer. That issue has been resolved.
Yes, they resolved that the pipeline was no longer going to go through the Sand Hills area. They did NOT resolve where exactly it was going, just that it wasn't going THERE.

YOU are the one mutilating the truth with your lies.
What lie is that? That a final Keystone XL route has not yet been approved by anyone? (not Nebraska and as far as I know not TransCan) It's easy enough to prove me wrong - just show me the documentation because I haven't seen it yet.

- Where are they building it now? (not where aren't they building it, that's been answered.)
- Exactly what route will it take now? (What's the new plan/route?)
- What rivers and streams will be crossed?
- What flood plains will be affected?

Until those questions are answered Uncle Sam can't complete the review. You can't review a set of blueprints unless you have the blueprints. How hard is that to understand?

You want to call me a liar? Then provide the answers to those four questions.
 
Last edited:
 
I agree...this should not be a game. However, in this case it is quite obvious the Republicans WERE indeed playing, and fumbled.
 
I was about to reply to a comment to my post with the following...


...but I see others have responded in greater detail.



President Obama said, at that time:
“Because this permit decision could affect the health and safety of the American people as well as the environment, and because a number of concerns have been raised through a public process, we should take the time to ensure that all questions are properly addressed and all the potential impacts are properly understood.”

I have nothing against the pipeline being built and it may very well be built one day. Some may claim that it's nothing but politics, and I'm pretty sure there is some element of truth in that. It just so happens that that this particular bit of politics align with my politics more than the other politics.
 
I agree...this should not be a game. However, in this case it is quite obvious the Republicans WERE indeed playing, and fumbled.

Okay, so if they fumbled was that good for America or bad for America?
 
Okay, so if they fumbled was that good for America or bad for America?

I don't know...I suppose that is the point of the study. What research I have done thus far though, does seem to indicate a very small benefit (Couple thousand jobs, increased profits for a few American Corporations), and we may very well see these benefits once they are finished making sure the impact is worth the cost.
 
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…