Obama rejects Keystone XL

[Glen]

Huh. Brandon is a lib.

[Rico]

I don't believe this. Source?

Here is three.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-would-the-keystone-pipeline-affect-oil-and-gas-prices/

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/11/17/the-keystone-xl-pipeline-isnt-about-lowering-your-gas-prices/

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/consumer-watchdog-report-shows-keystone-xl-will-raise-american-gas-prices-2015-01-09

 

From the CBS link.

 

Some critics contend that the pipeline could cause gas prices to rise, especially in the Midwest.That's because the oil that would be transported is not intended for American consumers. Rather, the Canadian oil currently sent to refineries in Illinois, Ohio and elsewhere in the Midwest would end up being diverted to Keystone, chiefly for export to markets overseas.

 

"Midwest drivers would be hardest hit because the region currently imports more than half of its oil for refining from Canada," according to Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit public interest group. "Increases at the pump could range from 25 cents to 40 cents a gallon, depending on how regional refineries respond to paying $20 to $30 more per 42-gallon barrel for Canadian crude oil."

[Brandon]

Huh. Brandon is a lib.

 

Probably more righty back in the day, but always the norm of socially liberal/fiscally conservative. Generally more data and stats driven.

 

I think I'm more surprised more people aren't pragmatic.

[Rico]

Basically the oil is already being shipped to Midwest refineries and they are getting it at a discount because they don't have to compete with the international market.  If the pipeline were ever built this means the Canadian company could raise their price and this would hurt the Midwest the most.

[juansavage1]

Is there something wrong with an environmentalist happening to be a billionaire?

No. My point in bringing it up is to dispense with all of the phony arguments. Were liberals worried about imminent domain with the bullet train or any rail project? When do liberals worry about high has prices? You know that liberals want high gas prices on purpose. I've talked about how the energy on the left is with sex and trees.

This is a religious dispute.

Now, if the pipeline were transporting KY jelly to middle schools, they'd ask for three of them.

Edited November 7, 2015 by Juan Savage

[Adam]

Probably more righty back in the day, but always the norm of socially liberal/fiscally conservative. Generally more data and stats driven.

I think I'm more surprised more people aren't pragmatic.

I think most people are pragmatic in how they live and make decisions.

[Brandon]

I meant more about how people make decisions for others.

I was for this idea initially, then data came out that made it not prudent and I changed my stance. A lot of people don't have that capability once they've decided their view or stance and then it becomes an agenda.

People are too worried about the red and blue lines and whether their side won or the other side lost to he pragmatic.

[Rico]

Were liberals worried about imminent domain with the bullet train or any rail project? When do liberals worry about high has prices? You know that liberals want high gas prices on purpose. I've talked about how the energy on the left is with sex and trees.

 

I've never seen a liberal on this board say anything positive about the bullet train.  I'm certainly not for it and voted against the whole damn project.  As for liberals worrying about high gas prices.... wasn't I just doing that just a few posts ago?  You think we like paying high gas prices?

[juansavage1]

I think most people are pragmatic in how they live and make decisions.

People are pragmatic when they have to be. People with leisure can afford to be ideological.

[Glen]

I've never seen a liberal on this board say anything positive about the bullet train. I'm certainly not for it and voted against the whole damn project. As for liberals worrying about high gas prices.... wasn't I just doing that just a few posts ago? You think we like paying high gas prices?

I also don't recall any libs celebrating eminent domain. Juan has a field full of liberal strawmen.

[Jay]

Just in case anyone wants to read the history

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Keystone_XL

[Glen]

Modern day warrior, mean mean stride...

[juansavage1]

I also don't recall any libs celebrating eminent domain. Juan has a field full of liberal strawmen.

It's a non issue when they want something.

[juansavage1]

I've never seen a liberal on this board say anything positive about the bullet train. I'm certainly not for it and voted against the whole damn project. As for liberals worrying about high gas prices.... wasn't I just doing that just a few posts ago? You think we like paying high gas prices?

I'm not talking about you personally. I'm talking about how CA pays a dollar more for gas for no reason and how some libs have quietly commented how high gas prices are a good thing because it will force us to use alternative means.

[fan_since79]

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.

 

The left would dearly love it if all our energy came from windmills and the like.

 

Not possible.

[Adam]

Maybe the people. The dem pols pander to the nut bags on the left just like the rep pols pander to the Christian Right. Repdempols only care about power. Oil is power. Obama can't be pro oil publicly because that's a rep pol concession. Just like rep pols can't be pro gay stuff. That's a dem pol concession

[juansavage1]

Maybe the people. The dem pols pander to the nut bags on the left just like the rep pols pander to the Christian Right. Repdempols only care about power. Oil is power. Obama can't be pro oil publicly because that's a rep pol concession. Just like rep pols can't be pro gay stuff. That's a dem pol concession

I think Obama believes this is the right thing to do.

[Spirit]

Though his mind is not for rent, don't put him down as arrogant.

 

 

Bulls**t.  He's an arrogant douche. 

[Guest]

People are pragmatic when they have to be. People with leisure can afford to be ideological.

I actually agree with this. It's usually why younger people are very liberal and why older people tend to be more conservative.

[juansavage1]

People are pragmatic when they have to be. People with leisure can afford to be ideological.

Let me amend. Everybody has an ideology. People who live in precarious circumstances can't afford a bad one.

[Tank]

Maybe the people. The dem pols pander to the nut bags on the left just like the rep pols pander to the Christian Right. Repdempols only care about power. Oil is power. Obama can't be pro oil publicly because that's a rep pol concession. Just like rep pols can't be pro gay stuff. That's a dem pol concession

Yep. Everybody has to stick to the script. They also have to say things like they'll reach across the aisle because it plays well in the nightly sound bites.

[nate]

After what happened with deepwater horizon, I am totally fine with this never happening.  The coast of LA has been totally destroyed and nobody even talks about it.  Oil pipelines are not necessary in this day and the risks are not worth it.

[juansavage1]

After what happened with deepwater horizon, I am totally fine with this never happening. The coast of LA has been totally destroyed and nobody even talks about it. Oil pipelines are not necessary in this day and the risks are not worth it.

If they're not necessary, why do they want to build it? Should we get rid of the pipelines we have now?

[nate]

We should be doing what we can to minimize our oil usage shouldn't we?  The Canadian pipeline was only going to do a tiny part to stop us from using middle eastern oil.

 

What does it have to do with existing pipelines?

[juansavage1]

We should be doing what we can to minimize our oil usage shouldn't we?  The Canadian pipeline was only going to do a tiny part to stop us from using middle eastern oil.

 

What does it have to do with existing pipelines?

Sometimes doing "what we can" hurts people. In this case, the people who pay for petroleum products and those who work in that industry. But, everybody has their priorities and values and if that's what you value, then there's no arguing about it. Just be honest about it. 

 

I asked about other pipelines because if "they're not necessary" then they shouldn't exist. It would also make your goal of making oil more expensive so that people minimize their use closer to accomplishment. 

Edited November 9, 2015 by Juan Savage