Its Not The Keystone Pipeline, Its Now 'Obama's' Pipeline

Originally posted by butcherguy

Some people might wonder if he has a clue.

Sad thing is...what if he knows what he is doing?
This pipeline points to the future, a few conspiraices come to mind.

I hope I am wrong.

Originally posted by groingrinder
Why do they need to build a pipeline? Why can't they build a refinery where the oil is mined? No need to snake a pipeline through America. This is political BS. We do not need a pipeline. If they have to build something, I would rather see them build a refinery as it leaves us free of the pollution from a spill. It is Canadian oil. Let them refine it.

we up here in kanukistan would love to refine this oil ourselves
however there are oil company funded environmentalists who HATE 17 Cent a gallon gas like they have in countries that do refine there own oil..like venezuala...

and so we send our oil to the US to be refined
( I realy mean this )

reply to post by RooskiZombi


I am too, I am shocked. This is a no win situation for America.
Funny the timing of this release, I think they are counting on everyone
being sidelined by the "Sequestration".

reply to post by Kali74


You cant paint with a broad brush and get an accurate rendering.
Not all conservatives are for this.

Originally posted by Flatfish
It should be called "The Pipeline to China."

America's pipeline to China,
that I would say is accurate.

Originally posted by Ghost375
Obama doesn't do it, and Republicans will cry for years about how OBAMA should have done it.
Obama does it, and democrats cry about it.

It's pretty much like this for every issue. No matter what he does, half the country will moan about it. And they moan loudly.

Also, anything that happens under Obama gets his name added to it. Health care reform written by congress and the health insurance companies.....smack, let's call it "Obamacare."
Heck even that economic collapse that happened under Bush is Obama's fault.


I feel like everyone's lost their damned minds. He's just one man.

You don't make any sense. At least HIS party should be for him. Besides that, Obama is not the brightest buiopb inl theojl packklkjl.....

Yeah, that's what I meant.

Originally posted by works4dhs
The US desperately wants/needs more oil.

If that were true we wouldn't be exporting more oil than we import.

I can't wait for gas prices to fall to $1.00/gallon just like all the conservatives said would happen once the pipeline got built!

reply to post by links234


And no environmental impact either I'm guessing, right?

Obama's pipeline? Only as Canada holds the vault copies of his birth records; I know as on April 5th 2012 a FL judge acting as a federal judge in an original venue upheld the default judgment I secured against the US; you follow the trail of eyewitnesses aka life not paperwork as that's only evidence not proof. In America life is the proof and the absolute proof UNLESS you enter one of our original founding documents.

Now I'm attempting to collect but before I filed to do so I had to complain about Susan Rice who was then 'asked' to withdraw her name from consideration as our new Secretary of State; thank you Bengazi! Think - Petreaus rhymes with 'betray us' and Rice was lying for them. It's more like Susan Rice's pipeline:

Onearth, Susan Rice connection to the Keystone Pipeline:

www.onearth.org...

Don't forget: The Royal Bank of Canada was caught deliberately manipulating interest rates in the Libor scandal; RBC's actions lead to: Sussie Bank.

How conflicted are the interests of these criminally corrupted politicians for life?

Originally posted by RooskiZombi
I'm actually pretty shocked this passed. I saw so many protesters and people completely against this.. How can the people be left so powerless?

Poll after poll showed people backed this by wide margins. A couple of hundred people protesting, and getting media coverage, doesn't mean it has wide support.

reply to post by burntheships


From what I understand, Obama never fully opposed the keystone pipeline, he had always supported the construction of the southern portion of the keystone pipeline. The article you linked to us proving that he "now" supports the keystone pipeline is close to a year old now (dated March 22nd 2012):
www.nytimes.com...

Here's an article from Thinkprogress on his support for the southern portion of the keystone pipeline:
thinkprogress.org...

USAtoday article, dated March 2012:
content.usatoday.com...

The Hill, February 2012:
thehill.com...

CBS, November 2011 article, regarding Obama's support for other parts, alternative routes, of the keystone pipeline:
www.cbsnews.com...

So the fact that people like yourself here are acting all surprised only now that he actually supports part of the keystone project demonstrates that you need to do alittle more research on his true positions on the issues.

Frankly I think the entire keystone project is a joke, it's not going to do anything for America aside from fattening the pockets of corporate executives and CEO's. We'll continue to live under the illusion of energy independence.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Thanks for your comments. Are you saying that Obama has retracted his
support, as there is no mention of that anywhere?

In fact, everything points to his secrecy in backing it.

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Thanks for your comments. Are you saying that Obama has retracted his
support, as there is no mention of that anywhere?

In fact, everything points to his secrecy in backing it.

Retracted what support? The articles are about the "southern portion" of the keystone pipeline, and alternative keystone pipeline routes. There are different plans for the keystone pipeline, Obama opposed the initial plan but did not oppose the entire project outright. It was never a secret that Obama supported the southern portion of the keystone pipeline and other alternatives, his administration has been public about it for over a year now (as evidenced by the articles I kindly linked to you) People like Van Jones complaining about Obama's support have themselves to blame, they should pay attention during campaign season.

It is possible Obama has not voiced objections to the pipeline because he still needs to work with the GOP. If he flat out said "no way" that would stop any and all progress he hopes to make in other areas and with his own proposals.

reply to post by burntheships


S & F. I agree this is a bad ideal all around. I read the same story and I think some environmental group said the statement and assessment put out by the State Department was nothing short of "malpractice."

I shudder to think of the damage this could cause and the loss of life along the route. The reason anyone is for it is because it promises jobs and makes oil companies rich, in GOP jargon, a two-fer.

reply to post by links234


I am still waiting for the gas prices to drop like the libs said they would once you got the oil man out of the white house.

If the U.S. congress would have planned and came up with a energy policy during the first oil shortages back in the 70's, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The U.S. should have devoted a percentage of tax revenue toward research and development for future energy resources to ween us off of oil. Instead they would rather invest a large percentage towards military machines that can be used to invade countries who have oil. Unfortunately, big oil has a lot of our legislatures in their pockets, so congress tabled an energy policy and never looked back.

Here we are in the 21st century and congress still has their heads in the sand (excuse the pun).

I worked as a pipeline surveyor on the southern portion for the KXL project for almost 3 years. Obama deciding to postpone indefinately caused me to get laid off back in 2011 but there is one thing I would like to add to this thread. These pipeline companies are not in business so that the average American joe-schmoe can pay 10 or 15 cents less at the pump. They are in it to make money for themselves. At whatever cost to anyone else.

I remember one time we were surveying a route on this guys property that was following an already existing pipeline in the ground. There was a small creek that needed to be profiled. The already existing pipeline was a natural gas pipeline that was bored under the creek. The pipeline was leaking a steady stream of natural gas bubbling into the creek. There was nothing alive in the creek that I saw. Not even pond skimmers. So we let our supervisor know and he contacted the owners of the pipeline and let them know they had a leaky pipe. 3 weeks later we had to go to the same tract of land for something else and the pipe was still bubbling away in the bottom of the creek. We told another survey crew about it and they said that they had reported it several WEEKS before we even went there the first time. This is just one instance of something like this happening. I personally can attest to several more.

So lets say that the KXL pipeline is completed all the way to Texas. Is anyone really naive enough to think that 1700 miles of pipe is never going to leak? Many sections of that pipe go through swamps, wetlands, farmland, under creeks, canals, rivers and not to mention the Ogalla aguifer. And when it does, nobody will care as long as it is still pumping filthy bitumen oil so we can save a buck 50 when we fill up our cars. Its really a sad situation.

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Thanks for your comments. Are you saying that Obama has retracted his
support, as there is no mention of that anywhere?

In fact, everything points to his secrecy in backing it.

Actions, not words.

According to Obama's actions, he supports failed energy. To the point of giving millions to nearly bankrupt solar companies (SOLYNDRA) and shortly after they received the money, they went bankrupt.

Nothing secret about that.