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.
The Canadians have their own ports, and I'm not interested in their oil crossing over our territory.
To boot, they attempted to strongarm the project through using eminent domain. I find that to be especially offensive seeing as how they aren't an American company. And I don't want them to get what they want as a punishment for the attempt.
The Canadians have their own ports, and I'm not interested in their oil crossing over our territory.
To boot, they attempted to strongarm the project through using eminent domain. I find that to be especially offensive seeing as how they aren't an American company. And I don't want them to get what they want as a punishment for the attempt.
Besides, we don't need it.
You are deliberately being disingenuous.
American companies wanted the pipeline...
They want the added business. The oil wasn't being shipped here merely to export by boat -- that is a MSNBC lie, because they are losing the debate on facts. The oil was going to Texas to be refined by American companies.
American Unions wanted this. American Companies wanted this. Obama's own State Department Report said this would create thousands of other jobs indirectly (like with oil refineries and those that build pumping stations along the pipeline).
The Canadians have their own ports, and I'm not interested in their oil crossing over our territory.
To boot, they attempted to strongarm the project through using eminent domain. I find that to be especially offensive seeing as how they aren't an American company. And I don't want them to get what they want as a punishment for the attempt.
Besides, we don't need it.
Lol, ok...
I guess we don't "need" 42,000 more high paying jobs here in America. We should just raise the minimum wage to $15 instead of actually creating over 40k jobs that pay probably at least $30 an hour each.
I guess we don't "need" 42,000 more high paying jobs here in America. We should just raise the minimum wage to $15 instead of actually creating over 40k jobs that pay probably at least $30 an hour each.
Pfffffft...what proof do you have of 42k jobs? Their say so?
And again...if this is so lucrative, why wouldn't the Canadians be doing everything in their power to keep the pipeline in their own country and keep those jobs?
And again...if this is so lucrative, why wouldn't the Canadians be doing everything in their power to keep the pipeline in their own country and keep those jobs?
Huh? They want to pipe the oil to refineries in the USA!
Pfffffft...what proof do you have of 42k jobs? Their say so?
And again...if this is so lucrative, why wouldn't the Canadians be doing everything in their power to keep the pipeline in their own country and keep those jobs?
I believe them more than I believe obama's "50" jobs numbers.
The US refines almost 3 times as much oil than the second largest nation. Canada wanted to tap into US refineries (which creates the jobs) to turn the oil into fuel to be exported.
Pfffffft...what proof do you have of 42k jobs? Their say so?
Why don't you read the article? Don't be afraid to read an article that isn't full of tingles running up the author's legs for the great one.
The 42K number is from Obama's State Department for temporary jobs, with thousands of permanent jobs and spin off jobs.
If Obama believes in his constantly descending number that is now down to 50 jobs....50 jobs created by the pipeline...then he is unintelligent when it comes to business and his new faulty logic flies in the face of all of his previous stimulus arguments.
Either Obama is unintelligent or a liar. Take your pick, either way, the man is coming off as an inept leader.
Are you being deliberately misleading or just ignorantly obtuse on purpose?
Your first link is crap because it refers to a 65 year old Exxon Mobile line leaking. NOT the Keystone.
Your last link is crap as those pipelines were also American pipelines with no affiliation to Keystone XL whatsoever and they may very well be over 40 year old pipelines your country has not been maintaining. The third spill mentioned was a freight train in Northern Ontario and what does rail transport within Canada have to do with pipelines in general and the Keystone in particular?
It makes sense to you that you would continue (and it will continue as long as you keep buying the stuff) the practice of shipping this type of crude either through older worn out lines or by rail car above ground rather than through a new pipeline built to the latest standards? Really?
Point is, it's all the same **** or should I use your word of choice...Crap!
Many critics of the Keystone XL pipeline say that corrosion risks are greater in pipelines carrying low-quality bitumen-laden crude from the oil sands. They have urged President Obama to reject the Keystone XL permit application.
“This latest pipeline incident is a troubling reminder that oil companies still have not proven that they can safely transport Canadian tar sands oil across the United States without creating risks to our citizens and our environment,” said Rep. Edward J. Markey (Mass.), the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee.
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.
