• 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!

Obama Administration Approves Key Portion of The Keystone Pipeline

AClockworkGrape

AClockworkGrape

Active member
Joined
Jan 21, 2012
Messages
307
Reaction score
159
Location
San Antonio, Texas.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Rather than rush the pipeline without environmental considerations and concerns from residents where the pipeline will pass, Obama does the right thing. Can't wait for the Republican spin.
 
Hikertrash said:
Rather than rush the pipeline without environmental considerations and concerns from residents where the pipeline will pass, Obama does the right thing. Can't wait for the Republican spin.
Click to expand...

Wow, what a trash post. Apt username.

Obama made a big show of rejecting the Keystone Pipeline to pander to his loser base, and is now attempting to get the substance of it approved through more discreet means.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Wow, what a trash post. Apt username.

Obama made a big show of rejecting the Keystone Pipeline to pander to his loser base, and is now attempting to get the substance of it approved through more discreet means.
Click to expand...

his "loser" base? What about trash posts now?
 
SypherAL said:
his "loser" base? What about trash posts now?
Click to expand...

Obama supporters have to be the most spineless hypocritical losers to walk the face of the planet. These are self-proclaimed liberals basically voting for and justifying the extension of Bush-era policies. How much dumber and more of a subservient political hack can one get?
 
Lucky us, more foriegn oil. Since our #1 export is our oil perhaps we should demand more from our politicians and the oil companies. Obviously since oil is the #1 export there is no oil shortage in America and since we give billions to our oil companies in tax breaks and subsidies on top of their record profits every year in the billions. We should demand lower prices for our tax dollars we give them or stop giving them our tax dollars. They make billions and can afford to pay their share in taxes and since small business in this country doesn't get subsidies to run their business's why should they. Small business employs more people than big business yet we sink or swim. Plus it has become pretty obvious that since oil is the #1 export that our politcians have been lying to us for a very long time since every year the prices go up and up and they scream shortage and drill on one side and to bad on the other. Hmmmmm
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Wow, what a trash post. Apt username.

Obama made a big show of rejecting the Keystone Pipeline to pander to his loser base, and is now attempting to get the substance of it approved through more discreet means.
Click to expand...

LOL... Obama's loser base won him the election last time and is more than likely to help him win it again.

The citizen's of Nebraska are concerned about the pipeline crossing their state through fragile areas, who do you think you are living in another state to disagree?

Anyway, I knew the right would find some meaningless reason to object. Thanks for proving me correct.
 
LOL... Obama's loser base won him the election last time and is more than likely to help him win it again.
Click to expand...

captain-obvious.jpg

Anyway, I knew the right would find some meaningless reason to object.
Click to expand...

Does anyone else on this forum find this as funny as me? :lol:
 
Hikertrash said:
Khayembii Communiqute said:
At least conservatives are consistent in their support of corporate pillaging and endless warfare.
Click to expand...

Yeah, until it's a Democrat doing it, then you somehow find a way to object.
Click to expand...

What is this I don't even
 
Obama said, originally, he needed more time to study the Keystone Pipeline, and that's just what he did. If I lived in those states close to the sandhills, I'd be very concerned about a pipeline going through a hugely important aquafier.

The oil will be going to the world market and likely won't effect our prices at all. As someone said in another thread, the only sure way of managing American oil for Americans, would be to nationalize our public land oil resources. Companies would go nuts if the government tried to do that, and the conservatives would be screaming socialism.
 
Poor Obama...

First, he puts off his decision on the pipeline with his "environmental" excuses...when what he really wanted was to put off the decision until after the election. That way he could cater to his environmentalist liberal base.

Then, he gets smacked around by the Republicans and has to make a stand...and gets more flak for not allowing the creation of jobs.

Then, gas and oil prices skyrocket and he's seen as not doing anything about it...in fact, he's seen as part of the problem.

So, to salvage some campaign capital, he throws his environmentalist base under the bus and approves the pipeline.


It's a wonder he doesn't get neck strains from all the pretzel-like twisting and turning he's doing. I can't help but wonder if his loss of credibility from these flip-flops is worth it to him. Is getting re-elected REALLY worth it?
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Wow, what a trash post. Apt username.

Obama supporters have to be the most spineless hypocritical losers to walk the face of the planet. These are self-proclaimed liberals basically voting for and justifying the extension of Bush-era policies. How much dumber and more of a subservient political hack can one get?
Click to expand...

Lets please stay on topic. This post has absolutely nothing to do with the keystone pipeline. I am sorry you feel that way about the majority of Americans. Lets grow up a little bit and talk like an adult. If name calling is all you have on the current incumbent and his supporters..... I would strongly consider educating yourself before making elementary level posts.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
Poor Obama...

First, he puts off his decision on the pipeline with his "environmental" excuses...when what he really wanted was to put off the decision until after the election. That way he could cater to his environmentalist liberal base.

Then, he gets smacked around by the Republicans and has to make a stand...and gets more flak for not allowing the creation of jobs.

Then, gas and oil prices skyrocket and he's seen as not doing anything about it...in fact, he's seen as part of the problem.

So, to salvage some campaign capital, he throws his environmentalist base under the bus and approves the pipeline.


It's a wonder he doesn't get neck strains from all the pretzel-like twisting and turning he's doing. I can't help but wonder if his loss of credibility from these flip-flops is worth it to him. Is getting re-elected REALLY worth it?
Click to expand...

If its all about the election and he disapproved the pipeline to pander to environmentalists, then we must assume that the environmentalist liberal base are a strong group for support than conservatives. Again, if its all about the election then the message of the group doesnt matter only who can get him elected, so I assume he picked the strongest group to pander to first. But if he picked the strongest group first, then why would he reverse part of his decision, if it only weakened his appeal to the strongest electoral group?

You're logic doesn't make sense. I'm not saying Obama did this for any reason, but clearly he didn't do it for the reason you've stated because it would help him accomplish none of the goals you says he has. Why would he trade the strong base for salvage?
 
Mycroft said:
Poor Obama...

First, he puts off his decision on the pipeline with his "environmental" excuses...when what he really wanted was to put off the decision until after the election. That way he could cater to his environmentalist liberal base.

Then, he gets smacked around by the Republicans and has to make a stand...and gets more flak for not allowing the creation of jobs.

Then, gas and oil prices skyrocket and he's seen as not doing anything about it...in fact, he's seen as part of the problem.

So, to salvage some campaign capital, he throws his environmentalist base under the bus and approves the pipeline.


It's a wonder he doesn't get neck strains from all the pretzel-like twisting and turning he's doing. I can't help but wonder if his loss of credibility from these flip-flops is worth it to him. Is getting re-elected REALLY worth it?
Click to expand...


Uh...do you even bother to research before you voice opinion?

""The Gulf Coast project will transport growing supplies of U.S. crude oil to meet refinery demand in Texas," TransCanada said in a statement. "Gulf Coast refineries can then access lower cost domestic production and avoid paying a premium to foreign oil producers. This would reduce the United States' dependence on foreign crude and allow Americans to use more of the crude oil produced in their own country."

Last month, Obama rejected TransCanada's permit for the northern leg after a multiyear federal review process. Many environmentalists and Nebraska state leaders had joined forces to oppose the XL's planned route through the Sand Hills and over the enormous Ogallala Aquifer in the region.

Congressional Republicans, as part of an unrelated tax deal, had required Obama to make a decision on the northern pipeline by Feb. 21.

Obama has supported the stand-alone southern leg for the Keystone and has not ruled out future consideration of the northern section.

"As the president made clear in January, we support the company's interest in proceeding with this project, which will help address the bottleneck of oil in Cushing that has resulted in large part from increased domestic oil production, currently at an eight year high," a White House statement said Monday. "Moving oil from the Midwest to the world-class, state-of-the-art refineries on the Gulf Coast will modernize our infrastructure, create jobs, and encourage American energy production."

Portion of Keystone pipeline to be built | Tulsa World

This pipeline, though indeed a part of the Keystone system, is meant to solve an issue with Domestic Supplies rather than Canadian. I has been not only supported, but fast tracked by the White House the whole time.

Your silly spinning is of epic failure...If you are going to try to debase your President, at least know what you are typing about.
 
Hikertrash said:
Yeah, until it's a Democrat doing it, then you somehow find a way to object.
Click to expand...

Since no one told you, I will: Khayembii is left leaning on most issues. You accusing him of being a rightist partisan is high irony. Might want to walk back those posts or get a better clue about posters before you toss those labels around. Or you might want to refute him instead of tossing labels around at ALL.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Wow, what a trash post. Apt username.

Obama made a big show of rejecting the Keystone Pipeline to pander to his loser base, and is now attempting to get the substance of it approved through more discreet means.
Click to expand...

Cleaning up a pipeline spill crossing a turbulent, fast moving river is a competely different ballgame and quite nearly inpossible.

Ted Turner has a huge Buffalo ranch in Montana.. He doesn't want the pipeline to cross the "Bad River".. For one thing as the river rises out of its banks it coats the grassland on each side with this toxic sludge.

For more information see the Yellowstone River spill which still has not been cleaned up after spending $115 million.
 
debpayne said:
Lucky us, more foriegn oil. Since our #1 export is our oil perhaps we should demand more from our politicians and the oil companies. Obviously since oil is the #1 export there is no oil shortage in America and since we give billions to our oil companies in tax breaks and subsidies on top of their record profits every year in the billions. We should demand lower prices for our tax dollars we give them or stop giving them our tax dollars. They make billions and can afford to pay their share in taxes and since small business in this country doesn't get subsidies to run their business's why should they. Small business employs more people than big business yet we sink or swim. Plus it has become pretty obvious that since oil is the #1 export that our politcians have been lying to us for a very long time since every year the prices go up and up and they scream shortage and drill on one side and to bad on the other. Hmmmmm
Click to expand...

Oil company profit margins remain steady at about 7%................ Who is screaming "shortage"? Oil is managed by "just in time inventories"... like most businesses.
 
tecoyah said:
Uh...do you even bother to research before you voice opinion?

""The Gulf Coast project will transport growing supplies of U.S. crude oil to meet refinery demand in Texas," TransCanada said in a statement. "Gulf Coast refineries can then access lower cost domestic production and avoid paying a premium to foreign oil producers. This would reduce the United States' dependence on foreign crude and allow Americans to use more of the crude oil produced in their own country."

Last month, Obama rejected TransCanada's permit for the northern leg after a multiyear federal review process. Many environmentalists and Nebraska state leaders had joined forces to oppose the XL's planned route through the Sand Hills and over the enormous Ogallala Aquifer in the region.

Congressional Republicans, as part of an unrelated tax deal, had required Obama to make a decision on the northern pipeline by Feb. 21.

Obama has supported the stand-alone southern leg for the Keystone and has not ruled out future consideration of the northern section.

"As the president made clear in January, we support the company's interest in proceeding with this project, which will help address the bottleneck of oil in Cushing that has resulted in large part from increased domestic oil production, currently at an eight year high," a White House statement said Monday. "Moving oil from the Midwest to the world-class, state-of-the-art refineries on the Gulf Coast will modernize our infrastructure, create jobs, and encourage American energy production."

Portion of Keystone pipeline to be built | Tulsa World

This pipeline, though indeed a part of the Keystone system, is meant to solve an issue with Domestic Supplies rather than Canadian. I has been not only supported, but fast tracked by the White House the whole time.

Your silly spinning is of epic failure...If you are going to try to debase your President, at least know what you are typing about.
Click to expand...

Oh, I know what I'm talking about...though you appear not to.

From your own link:

Cushing already is receiving some Canadian and North Dakota crude via a 300-mile Keystone XL leg from Nebraska, which became operational last year. TransCanada ships 100,000 barrels per day into Cushing from the portion, the company reported earlier this month.
Click to expand...

Combine this to the OP's article:

“TransCanada is hell bent on bringing tar sands, the world’s dirtiest oil, through America to reach foreign markets. They can’t wait for a fair, scientific environmental review they know their pipeline would fail. So we see dirty political tricks, dirty PR tricks, and, now, this dirty trick to build the pipeline piecemeal.”
Click to expand...

and

“Transcanada's decision to build its pipe from Oklahoma to Texas is a nifty excuse to steal some land by eminent domain. It doesn't increase tar sands mining because there's still no pipe across the Canadian border, but it's the usual ugly power grab and land grab by the fossil fuel industry—we'll do what we can to stand by our allies in that arid and beautiful land.”
Click to expand...

So, you see, that dreaded Canadian oil will be coming through...thanks to Obama and the environmentalists are none to happy about Obama's decision. But...do you think that'll stop them from voting for him? I don't and I'll bet Obama doesn't either. That's why he can safely tell them "F. U.".

But the Independents and the American Sheeple...they'll see this as Obama doing something about rising oil prices.

It's all political to him...not about the good of the country.
 
Mycroft said:
Oh, I know what I'm talking about...though you appear not to.

From your own link:



Combine this to the OP's article:



and



So, you see, that dreaded Canadian oil will be coming through...thanks to Obama and the environmentalists are none to happy about Obama's decision. But...do you think that'll stop them from voting for him? I don't and I'll bet Obama doesn't either. That's why he can safely tell them "F. U.".

But the Independents and the American Sheeple...they'll see this as Obama doing something about rising oil prices.

It's all political to him...not about the good of the country.
Click to expand...

Crossing the rivers seems to be the biggest concern of the environmentalists.. and with just cause. I explained it two posts above.
 
Rosie1 said:
[...] The oil will be going to the world market and likely won't effect our prices at all. [...]
Click to expand...
As noted in one or both of the previous mega-threads on this subject, the lower section of the pipeline will divert oil from the midwest to the Gulf Coast (to, I guess, overseas), causing gasoline prices to rise in the midwest.

TransCanada itself has admitted that (the midwest price rise).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom