Obama Throws America Under The Bus: Kills Pipeline

[ASUG8]

Great move for the country - anyone that thinks otherwise is a moron

The Conks tried to cram this down Obama's throat - he called their bluff.

There are serious issues with the pipeline, and tar sands in general. Think beyond the next 5 years.

It is funny - I care more about the world YOUR kids/grandkids are going to grow up in than you do. Sad, really.

Bingo. Conks are greedy, short-sighted, toxic fucks who think god is gonna bail em out.

I seek solace in the fact that their children will suffer immeasurably in the wreck of a world their parents left to em.

Hippies were right.

I'll agree with you when I see fewer hippies driving their SUV's and Subaru's listing every cause they support on the bumper stickers in their back windows. You want to make a difference? Put a solar panel on your roof; buy a hybrid, ride a bike - don't be a hippocrite. Take the time you spend occupying your city and do something that makes a tangible difference in your community.

[kalm]

Bingo. Conks are greedy, short-sighted, toxic fucks who think god is gonna bail em out.

I seek solace in the fact that their children will suffer immeasurably in the wreck of a world their parents left to em.

Hippies were right.

I'll agree with you when I see fewer hippies driving their SUV's and Subaru's listing every cause they support on the bumper stickers in their back windows. You want to make a difference? Put a solar panel on your roof; buy a hybrid, ride a bike - don't be a hippocrite. Take the time you spend occupying your city and do something that makes a tangible difference in your community.

Those aren't hippies. There are many that walk the walk and some of them aren't even all that dirty anymore.

[GannonFan]

Wishing oil away hasn't made us any less reliant on oil and other fossil fuels in the last 30-40 years, despite a real strong desire to be able to break away from their use. The "pot of gold" that is there for the taking for the person(s) or company(s) or governments to find the ability to completely turn away from oil has been there for even longer, and yet, in a world where people would enthusiasitcally jump on that chance, no one has successfully done it. I would love to live in a world where we didn't have to rely on oil, but I also recognize that that world isn't going to magically appear and it's also not going to appear by throwing money at other options and just hoping and wishing that something better comes along. It's a shame that both Obama and the Republicans again played politics with something that really deserved better. Oil's going to be with us for the next half a century, if not even longer. Pretending that saying no to this project now will speed that up significantly hurts us in the short term and does absolutely nothing to help the situation in the long term. Where's an Independent to turn when both established parties have completely flubbed this issue and energy policy in general?

[kalm]

Wishing oil away hasn't made us any less reliant on oil and other fossil fuels in the last 30-40 years, despite a real strong desire to be able to break away from their use. The "pot of gold" that is there for the taking for the person(s) or company(s) or governments to find the ability to completely turn away from oil has been there for even longer, and yet, in a world where people would enthusiasitcally jump on that chance, no one has successfully done it. I would love to live in a world where we didn't have to rely on oil, but I also recognize that that world isn't going to magically appear and it's also not going to appear by throwing money at other options and just hoping and wishing that something better comes along. It's a shame that both Obama and the Republicans again played politics with something that really deserved better. Oil's going to be with us for the next half a century, if not even longer. Pretending that saying no to this project now will speed that up significantly hurts us in the short term and does absolutely nothing to help the situation in the long term. Where's an Independent to turn when both established parties have completely flubbed this issue and energy policy in general?

Ron Paul. He's the reset button.

[bluehenbillk]

Not to change the subject but -

Maybe you're saying people from other countries come here for schooling and then take that info to other countries? But the education system in the US is and has been failing for some time. It's astonishing that almost a third of kids today will not even graduate high school. Our universities may in fact be better than ever but with the costs associated with attending them - more kids (the two-thirds that actually graduate HS) are getting shut out from attending them. It's an accelerating problem too - one that needs tons more attention than it gets. If you don't think that education has an effect on the economy, well, you're probably one of the previously mentioned one-third.

My point was that the best and brightest from around the world flock to US universities, get their degrees, then repatriate to their home countries. One of our largest exports is college, graduate, and doctoral educations to those around the world that are able to afford it.
No question that we have problems in our education system getting them out of high school, but that's not the point I was making.

I gotcha & I agree.

[GannonFan]

Wishing oil away hasn't made us any less reliant on oil and other fossil fuels in the last 30-40 years, despite a real strong desire to be able to break away from their use. The "pot of gold" that is there for the taking for the person(s) or company(s) or governments to find the ability to completely turn away from oil has been there for even longer, and yet, in a world where people would enthusiasitcally jump on that chance, no one has successfully done it. I would love to live in a world where we didn't have to rely on oil, but I also recognize that that world isn't going to magically appear and it's also not going to appear by throwing money at other options and just hoping and wishing that something better comes along. It's a shame that both Obama and the Republicans again played politics with something that really deserved better. Oil's going to be with us for the next half a century, if not even longer. Pretending that saying no to this project now will speed that up significantly hurts us in the short term and does absolutely nothing to help the situation in the long term. Where's an Independent to turn when both established parties have completely flubbed this issue and energy policy in general?

Ron Paul. He's the reset button.

Is he? How? He can't make Congress do whatever he'd want - heck, Obama had a super majority of his own party in Congress and he couldn't make them toe the line. How will an outsider, with little to no power, be able to do anything effectively? Ron Paul is kinda a kookier, more conservative Jimmy Carter (well, kookier than Carter was when Carter was President - post Presidency Carter has upped the kookieness rating quite a bit). Paul's got some good ideas, and he has some bad ideas, and he would have little effective power to do much of any of it. And four years from now he'd be on his way out because of that. You have to be able to fix this from within - just way too many barriers stopping someone like Paul from being able to come in from outside and meaningfully shaking things up.

[GannonFan]

Not to change the subject but -

Maybe you're saying people from other countries come here for schooling and then take that info to other countries? But the education system in the US is and has been failing for some time. It's astonishing that almost a third of kids today will not even graduate high school. Our universities may in fact be better than ever but with the costs associated with attending them - more kids (the two-thirds that actually graduate HS) are getting shut out from attending them. It's an accelerating problem too - one that needs tons more attention than it gets. If you don't think that education has an effect on the economy, well, you're probably one of the previously mentioned one-third.

My point was that the best and brightest from around the world flock to US universities, get their degrees, then repatriate to their home countries. One of our largest exports is college, graduate, and doctoral educations to those around the world that are able to afford it.
No question that we have problems in our education system getting them out of high school, but that's not the point I was making.

Well, to touch on that, a lot of them do repatriate because we have so limited the number of visas into this country, especially for highly educated, bright, young, professionals, that they can't stay in the country upon graduating. It's part of our weird, confused, xenophobic immigration system where we are unable to effectively filter the immigration we do want (these people) versus the ones that we don't want (for this argument, the less educated). We should open the doors wide for these college grads but instead we educate them and then send them on their way to help other countries.

[∞∞∞]

I like Ron Paul and do agree with some of his fundemental messages, but I feel like he'd be the type of president that would veto everything. Not necessarily a bad thing per se considering some of the garbage that Congress attempts, but I doubt anything would get done...even more so than today (although I guess you can argue the Constitution is working as it's supposed to when we have a lot of gridlock. It's not exactly written in a way to make it easier for things to become law).

[Wedgebuster]

Oh and they been doing a real bang up job installing the pipeline up there in Montana.

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-a ... 05e55.html

If they can't excavate, install, back fill and compact properly, I would wonder about the quality of the pipe and it's connectors, wouldn't you??

Oh and these Montana ranchers are as avid and devout Republicans as any of our Wyoming oil ministers could ever be.

[EWURanger]

Here's my take:

In terms of $4 gas this summer or the Strait of Hormuz being threatened - that's a non-factor with the pipeline status as even if Obama and everyone involved said go it wouldn't actually be flowing oil until 2014 I believe when the project was complete.

On the other hand, don't confuse me with an environmentalist - I wouldn't say no to this deal based on concerns groups have over lands in western Nebraska or South Dakota where nobody lives or ever visits.

I do have to compliment Obama on bucking the trend that Washington has long been under the control of Big Oil. It's actually refreshing to me for once seeing ANYONE in D.C. stand up to Big Oil. Moving further, we've wasted 3-4 decades during Big Oil's reign and have got deeper & deeper into the oil problem. America needs to lead the way towards seriously & furiously trying to find alternatives to oil. I don't care if they are Canadians, if they're Arabs, South Americans, Asians, whoever - we need to become more energy self-sufficient & with all apologies to Sarah Palin & the conservative GOP it makes my stomach turn when I hear the phrase "drill baby drill". If/when we do have $4 gas have your lawamakers over the last 30-40 years look themselves in the mirror - that's who is to blame. Whether it's natural gas, electric, wind, solar, something else, we should never have got into the mess that we're in today & frankly I'm glad that yesterday we decided NOT to step in deeper.

I agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Ron Paul. He's the reset button.

Is he? How? He can't make Congress do whatever he'd want - heck, Obama had a super majority of his own party in Congress and he couldn't make them toe the line. How will an outsider, with little to no power, be able to do anything effectively? Ron Paul is kinda a kookier, more conservative Jimmy Carter (well, kookier than Carter was when Carter was President - post Presidency Carter has upped the kookieness rating quite a bit). Paul's got some good ideas, and he has some bad ideas, and he would have little effective power to do much of any of it. And four years from now he'd be on his way out because of that. You have to be able to fix this from within - just way too many barriers stopping someone like Paul from being able to come in from outside and meaningfully shaking things up.

That's a fair point but given that, Obama doesn't deserve half of the "change" criticisms he has received.

[CID1990]

Ron Paul. He's the reset button.

Is he? How? He can't make Congress do whatever he'd want - heck, Obama had a super majority of his own party in Congress and he couldn't make them toe the line. How will an outsider, with little to no power, be able to do anything effectively? Ron Paul is kinda a kookier, more conservative Jimmy Carter (well, kookier than Carter was when Carter was President - post Presidency Carter has upped the kookieness rating quite a bit). Paul's got some good ideas, and he has some bad ideas, and he would have little effective power to do much of any of it. And four years from now he'd be on his way out because of that. You have to be able to fix this from within - just way too many barriers stopping someone like Paul from being able to come in from outside and meaningfully shaking things up.

Domestically, Ron Paul would not be able to accomplish much. Too much of Congress is beholden to private interests, and a libertarian domestic policy would run way afoul of the GOP establishment on the social side, an the Democratic establishment on the smaller government side.

If foreign policy was the number one issue for the next 4 years, then Ron Paul might be the answer, since most foreign policy issues that are not treaty-governed can be done by Presidential fiat. However, I don't think he could effectively reduce our overseas military footprint more than 20% without having to consult with Congress. Our associations with NATO, the UN, and our presences in Korea and the EU are all treaty driven and he would probably not be able to touch those.

Ron Paul would be largely ineffective because there would be too many bi-partisan cabals in Congress aligned against him. Plus, he would constantly be fending off the inevitable media attacks on his past.

[93henfan]

Bingo. Conks are greedy, short-sighted, toxic fucks who think god is gonna bail em out.

I seek solace in the fact that their children will suffer immeasurably in the wreck of a world their parents left to em.

Hippies were right.

I'll agree with you when I see fewer hippies driving their SUV's and Subaru's listing every cause they support on the bumper stickers in their back windows. You want to make a difference? Put a solar panel on your roof; buy a hybrid, ride a bike - don't be a hippocrite. Take the time you spend occupying your city and do something that makes a tangible difference in your community.

You forgot hypermiling.

[ASUG8]

I'll agree with you when I see fewer hippies driving their SUV's and Subaru's listing every cause they support on the bumper stickers in their back windows. You want to make a difference? Put a solar panel on your roof; buy a hybrid, ride a bike - don't be a hippocrite. Take the time you spend occupying your city and do something that makes a tangible difference in your community.

You forgot hypermiling.

Sorry.


And scrapple.

[UNI88]

My point was that the best and brightest from around the world flock to US universities, get their degrees, then repatriate to their home countries. One of our largest exports is college, graduate, and doctoral educations to those around the world that are able to afford it.
No question that we have problems in our education system getting them out of high school, but that's not the point I was making.

Well, to touch on that, a lot of them do repatriate because we have so limited the number of visas into this country, especially for highly educated, bright, young, professionals, that they can't stay in the country upon graduating. It's part of our weird, confused, xenophobic immigration system where we are unable to effectively filter the immigration we do want (these people) versus the ones that we don't want (for this argument, the less educated). We should open the doors wide for these college grads but instead we educate them and then send them on their way to help other countries.

+1

America has a better long-term future if we can keep more of the best & the brightest from the rest of the world here. It means more innovation and more jobs in the future.

We need disentangle H1B type visas from the whole illegal immigration debate.

[UNI88]

Is he? How? He can't make Congress do whatever he'd want - heck, Obama had a super majority of his own party in Congress and he couldn't make them toe the line. How will an outsider, with little to no power, be able to do anything effectively? Ron Paul is kinda a kookier, more conservative Jimmy Carter (well, kookier than Carter was when Carter was President - post Presidency Carter has upped the kookieness rating quite a bit). Paul's got some good ideas, and he has some bad ideas, and he would have little effective power to do much of any of it. And four years from now he'd be on his way out because of that. You have to be able to fix this from within - just way too many barriers stopping someone like Paul from being able to come in from outside and meaningfully shaking things up.

Domestically, Ron Paul would not be able to accomplish much. Too much of Congress is beholden to private interests, and a libertarian domestic policy would run way afoul of the GOP establishment on the social side, an the Democratic establishment on the smaller government side.

If foreign policy was the number one issue for the next 4 years, then Ron Paul might be the answer, since most foreign policy issues that are not treaty-governed can be done by Presidential fiat. However, I don't think he could effectively reduce our overseas military footprint more than 20% without having to consult with Congress. Our associations with NATO, the UN, and our presences in Korea and the EU are all treaty driven and he would probably not be able to touch those.

Ron Paul would be largely ineffective because there would be too many bi-partisan cabals in Congress aligned against him. Plus, he would constantly be fending off the inevitable media attacks on his past.

IMO, change won't come from a centrist 3rd party candidate winning the White House. It will come from a centrist 3rd party candidate garnering enough votes to cause the winner to adopt many aspects of the 3rd party platform.

It's happened before with T. Roosevelt (1912), G. Wallace (1968) and R. Perot (1996).

Now we just need a viable, centrist third party candidate.

[travelinman67]

Obamastructionist loses authority. Court dismisses lawsuit. State Dept. cowers when challenged about timeline.

Bottomline: Obstructionists to American prosperity lose battle over Keystone.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/after-co ... -stalling/

[Bronco]

Barbara Boxer adds health issues to saying no to the pipeline

Says Keystone would add pollutants to the air that will increase the likelihood of people getting cancer or heart disease.

Need to add her to this list
Sheila 'US flag on Mars' Jackson-Lee and Hank 'Guam is tipping over' Johnson

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Here is a little tip for you, oil is not going anywhere and we are not going to run out in the next 500 years.

So quit killing the economy and making shit up about the environment. You are clueless idiots that are in our way..........................the same tired arguments are stupid and lame as the leftys that utter them.


Just build it regardless of what that idiot in the white house thinks.....then pay a few fines later.

[CID1990]

This is just Obama red meat to the progressives.

Keystone will go forward in the next administration no matter who is President.

[SeattleGriz]

Barbara Boxer adds health issues to saying no to the pipeline

Says Keystone would add pollutants to the air that will increase the likelihood of people getting cancer or heart disease.

Need to add her to this list
Sheila 'US flag on Mars' Jackson-Lee and Hank 'Guam is tipping over' Johnson

Lol

[Wedgebuster]

Fuck Canada, let them keep their dirty tar up there and pollute themselves.

Obama didn't have to kill the stupid pipeline, anybody check oil prices lately?

JFC, this is a political argument right? So I guess the price, and the the pollution means nothing, you are either a Republican (mostly for the Canada pipeline) or a Democrat (mostly against their pipeline) and nothing else matters.

Check!

[kalm]

Fuck Canada, let them keep their dirty tar up there and pollute themselves.

Obama didn't have to kill the stupid pipeline, anybody check oil prices lately?

JFC, this is a political argument right? So I guess the price, and the the pollution means nothing, you are either a Republican (mostly for the Canada pipeline) or a Democrat (mostly against their pipeline) and nothing else matters.

Check!

How many jobs does this create again, how does it equate to energy independence, and what is the environmental danger?

[houndawg]

Not to change the subject but -

Maybe you're saying people from other countries come here for schooling and then take that info to other countries? But the education system in the US is and has been failing for some time. It's astonishing that almost a third of kids today will not even graduate high school. Our universities may in fact be better than ever but with the costs associated with attending them - more kids (the two-thirds that actually graduate HS) are getting shut out from attending them. It's an accelerating problem too - one that needs tons more attention than it gets. If you don't think that education has an effect on the economy, well, you're probably one of the previously mentioned one-third.

My point was that the best and brightest from around the world flock to US universities, get their degrees, then repatriate to their home countries. One of our largest exports is college, graduate, and doctoral educations to those around the world that are able to afford it.
No question that we have problems in our education system getting them out of high school, but that's not the point I was making.

Send the kids to Norway and Germany, they're a bit more clueful about the long term benefits of education.

[houndawg]

**** Canada, let them keep their dirty tar up there and pollute themselves.

Obama didn't have to kill the stupid pipeline, anybody check oil prices lately?

JFC, this is a political argument right? So I guess the price, and the the pollution means nothing, you are either a Republican (mostly for the Canada pipeline) or a Democrat (mostly against their pipeline) and nothing else matters.

Check!

How many jobs does this create again, how does it equate to energy independence, and what is the environmental danger?

About 35 permanent jobs after the temporary construction jobs leave. That's what we get for letting the Canadians ship their nasty shit across one of our nation's largest aquifers, where inevitably some of that nasty shit will end up, because all pipelines break. We're the largest producer of oil on the planet and I just filled my truck for less than $40, wtf is so important about this boondoggle? This pipeline does nothing for us and the reason the Canadians want to ship their filthy mess through our backyard is because they know exactly what they're dealing with.