Obama rejects Keystone XL

[Angelsjunky]

Good news, I'd say.

[Spirit]

Woohoo!  Now we can transport the oil via trucks and rail.  Way safer for the environment.

 

 

 

What a dick wad. 

[mtangelsfan]

Jobs?

 

Crap, who needs jobs.  

[Adam]

Well hopefully a republican wins the white house and gets this thing going

[Glen]

Temporary jobs building a pipeline to transport a product from Canada to Texas where it would be shipped overseas.

Sounds like a good call from the president.

[mtangelsfan]

Right, who needs temporary jobs.  Might as well stay on welfare/unemployment.

 

Not a good call at all.  This is the mentality I just don't get, (we will cut down on oil production and then come up with a suitable replacement to power our nation).

 

The logic is disturbing.  Wouldn't it be prudent to come up with the solution first and then cut down on oil production?  In the mean time we purchase our oil from those bastions of civil rights, the middle east, so they can use the money we give them to make their leadership rich and sponsor some terrorism on the side.

Edited November 6, 2015 by mtangelsfan

[Glen]

How much of that pipeline product was gonna go to the US?

[mtangelsfan]

Don't know, but Obama is rejecting the pipeline because it is "oil" which has become a dirty word for a lot of folks on the left.  There really is no other reason to reject it.  Trucks and trains are just as bad, if not worse than a pipeline.

[Jay]

Obama casting his lot with the climate wingnuts.

 

Whatever.

[Glen]

Don't know, but Obama is rejecting the pipeline because it is "oil" which has become a dirty word for a lot of folks on the left. There really is no other reason to reject it. Trucks and trains are just as bad, if not worse than a pipeline.

Sure, that's it. There could be no other reason at all to reject it.

[red321]

Obama casting his lot with the climate wingnuts.

 

Whatever.

 

And the 90% of climate scientists and peer reviewed published work...

[Glen]

Wingnuts!

Can't wait to hear what Trump has to say about this.

[mtangelsfan]

Sure, that's it. There could be no other reason at all to reject it.

 

Let's hear it then.  

[TobiasFunke]

Who would have thought so many people cared about Canadian oil

[Adam]

And the 90% of climate scientists and peer reviewed published work...

 

Seems down from the 99% that used to be thrown around here

[Jay]

Seems down from the 99% that used to be thrown around here

 

some of them were cooked by global warming

[Spirit]

Temporary jobs building a pipeline to transport a product from Canada to Texas where it would be shipped overseas.

 

 

 

 

This oil is going to be transported from Canada to TX anyway.  Now it's just going to continue going via truck and rail.  

[Adam]

Truckers on Meth, booze and hooker is our best bet to transport oil efficiently. 

[Angelsjunky]

Let's hear it then.  

 

Typical mtangelsfan ploy - put the burden of proof on everyone else. Why don't you tell us why the pipeline is such a good idea? Why the president is wrong when he says it "would not have a meaningful long-term contribution to our economy"?

[Spirit]

Truckers on Meth, booze and hooker is our best bet to transport oil efficiently. 

 

 

Good luck environment. 

[Adam]

You know what has a meaningful long-term contribution to our economy?

 

War

[Angelsjunky]

Obama casting his lot with the climate wingnuts.

 

Whatever.

 

LOL at Wingnuts. Is this real or not?

 

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

[red321]

Seems down from the 99% that used to be thrown around here

 

number has always been between 90-95%, but if that makes you feel better good for ya

[Adam]

It does. Thanks

[Jay]

LOL at Wingnuts. Is this real or not?

 

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

 

so the pipeline adds carbon dioxide?