Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As a Democrat, I think Obama should support the Keystone oil pipeline. This is a hot issue with liberals and environmentalists. As long as it is done safely, I think it would be good for the US and Canadian economies. I would rather see the US getting oil from an ally and trading partner, Canada, than from the other countries we import oil from.
I think my liberal friends should realize that if we get oil closer to home, that means we will be using less oil in the long run just based on the fact that the oil will travel a lot less distance to get to the US.
I agree, but why is he voting "present"??
he really needs to come around and get with it on this!
His blathering about the repugs putting their agenda first before country falls flat
on this!
I would be so shocked if he put what is right over his agenda!!
He's merely pandering to the greenies insistance that this presents an envrironmental risk too great to ignore in Nebraska.
Ah yes; Nebraska that state that already has over 21,000 miles of pipleine running hither and yon through it with 3,000 miles of that being used to transport hazardous materials. An oil producing state in it's own right, producing over 6,000 barrels daily with neighbouring states producing in the 100's of thousands of barrels.
A state that has 17 of the 18 oil producing counties sitting on top of that very aquifer and drilling down THROUGH it to pump it.
A state with one of the worlds leading hydrogeologists from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln that has openly stated a leak from the Keystone XL would present no danger to that aquifer.
Could it be that the state itself would see very little revenue other than routine pipeline maintenance jobs created by this "foreign" Pipeline. Could it be that their slice of that pie is not big enough? Could it be that they object solely on the grounds that the oil would enter at the top of the sate and exit at the bottom without them getting enough of a "taste" of the proceeds.
This is just another example of a politician hiding behind a safety net while his team are out there trying to score goals and create jobs. He doesn't care about the jobs or the aquifer; it's merely his wishing to avoid the optics during an election campain of some hard choices that elected leaders are forced to make from time to time lest they be seen for what they are: political opportunists!
I think my liberal friends should realize that if we get oil closer to home, that means we will be using less oil in the long run just based on the fact that the oil will travel a lot less distance to get to the US.
But I thought when the oil gets to the gulf it will be refined into diesel and shipped to other countries. If that is true the point of the pipeline is to help meet the profit needs of some oil corporations, not the energy needs of the USA.
Pipelines are everywhere. An out of sight out of mind thing Iam not sure where NC gets most if its gas but i know it is a pipeline. I see trucks alot over in Selma loading in the middle of nowhere I dont think Gas magically appears out of the ground In Maine there are piplelines that run from down south to the former airforce base in the northern part of the state Another runs from Portland to Bangor tottally underground and is all gasoline Obama is digging himself a grave by not approving this. It is a no brainer He is commiting political suicide He wants jobs for his muni unions but to hell with a real union and real private sector jobs
There are several questions that Obama will ask himself.
1. Will it help America first?
a. yes- Oh thats bad. We owe the words to meet anyone and everyone elses needs first.
b.no- Oh ok then its cool.
2. Are there any campaign donars who will benefit?
a. Yes--- Its a go
b. No--- We can consider it after the elections.
3. Will it cost tax payers trillions in tax dollars?
a. Yes- Then it must be good.
b. No-- Then whats the point.
Do we have any assurances that the oil will be used here? Why wouldn't the oil companies just put it on a tanker in TX and ship it to China? Definitely not worth the potential environmental impact at home if we're not even going to see a benefit.
Well that is what they already doing! Alaskan crude goes to Japan first! Why? they pay more than Americans do since they have no oil. The whole notion that America needs to drill to drop Oil prices is a hoax.
Amazing that Venuzuela which is considered a Marxist/ Socialist government by US standards and has a state run Oil industry charges 78 cents for a gallon of gas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
