Obama emphasizes Keystone climate implications in meeting with Democrats

Aug 1, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Nanaimo Daily News

U.S. President Barack Obama pointed to the global climate implications of approving TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline during a wide-ranging Capitol Hill meeting on Wednesday with Democratic lawmakers.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of21
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Aug 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

obama is so stupid, it's unbelievable.

there are many benefits to having the keystone pipeline.

one that he fails to grasp is - in the next war, we won't lose because of a lack of fuel.

the price of oil will decrease because of added competition.

and best of all.. the usa will dictate it's own destiny without unwanted foreign influences.

BUILD THE PIPELINE ALREADY!!!

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Aug 1, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

harvesting resources makes a country stronger.

look at what it is doing for australia? better yet, see what it has done for saudi arabia?

what is wrong with having more money? consider this, we can pay off the national debt.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Asian Guy wrote:
obama is so stupid, it's unbelievable.
there are many benefits to having the keystone pipeline.
one that he fails to grasp is - in the next war, we won't lose because of a lack of fuel.
the price of oil will decrease because of added competition.
and best of all.. the usa will dictate it's own destiny without unwanted foreign influences.
BUILD THE PIPELINE ALREADY!!!
What benefit is there for Americans? A Canadian company wants to build a pipeline across the US to a port city on the Gulf. None of this oil is intended for the US market. It is all going overseas.

As a matter of fact it will bypass refineries in 13 different states. The price of fuel in those states may actually go up.
i see oj

Virginia Beach, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
What benefit is there for Americans? A Canadian company wants to build a pipeline across the US to a port city on the Gulf. None of this oil is intended for the US market. It is all going overseas.
As a matter of fact it will bypass refineries in 13 different states. The price of fuel in those states may actually go up.
And those are all good reasons to be against the pipeline, the problem is Obama is not saying that......he would rather throw out the red herring of climate change, guess it's time to shore up the environmental base.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

i see oj wrote:
<quoted text>
And those are all good reasons to be against the pipeline, the problem is Obama is not saying that......he would rather throw out the red herring of climate change, guess it's time to shore up the environmental base.
I don't understand that either. It is true that there are many environmental issues involved, but all you have to do is look at a map of the pipeline route to see there is nothing in it for us. That seems like a simpler argument to make.
Dee Dee Dee

Emmaus, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Imagine if Obama announced he was opposed to the Keystone pipeline because his backers will not profit from it.
It is no different than claiming to support amnesty and open borders because of your human rights and compassion based ideology when in fact the real reason for your support is for political and financial gain. The ends justifies the means.
If a politician were to come out and say they support amnesty and an increase in work visas because their financial backers will profit and they will also gain political power because of the strong support for amnesty from Hispanic leaders it would not sell with the bleeding hearts, especially if their hearts started to bleed for the victims of illegal immigration. When a Democrat from Illinois opposes something it is a sure bet they oppose it because they will get nothing out of it.

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
What benefit is there for Americans? A Canadian company wants to build a pipeline across the US to a port city on the Gulf. None of this oil is intended for the US market. It is all going overseas.
As a matter of fact it will bypass refineries in 13 different states. The price of fuel in those states may actually go up.
you need to go back to school to learn economics.

don't you know about "supply and demand", genius?

obviously NOT.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Asian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
you need to go back to school to learn economics.
don't you know about "supply and demand", genius?
obviously NOT.
All you need to know in this case is geography.

You had no clue that the whole point of the Canadian project was to bypass the US did you? You did not even know where the pipeline was going.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Aug 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Memo From Turner wrote:
What benefit is there for Americans? A Canadian company wants to build a pipeline across the US to a port city on the Gulf. None of this oil is intended for the US market. It is all going overseas. As a matter of fact it will bypass refineries in 13 different states. The price of fuel in those states may actually go up.
What benefit is there for Americans?

Construction jobs, maintenance jobs and lease fees, port fees on every ship that loads the oil and increased oil supply to drive down fuel prices.

FACT CHECK: Obama understates Keystone XL jobs

OBAMA: "Republicans have said that this would be a big jobs generator. There is no evidence that that's true," he said in The New York Times interview. "And my hope would be that any reporter who is looking at the facts would take the time to confirm that the most realistic estimates are this might create maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline which might take a year or two and then after that we're talking about somewhere between 50 and 100 (chuckles) jobs in an economy of 150 million working people.... That is a blip relative to the need."

THE FACTS: It's not clear where Obama came up with the 2,000-jobs figure.

The project's developer, Calgary-based TransCanada, has said the pipeline could create as many as 13,000 construction jobs 6,500 a year over two years.

In its March report, the State Department put the number of construction jobs at 3,900 on an annual basis. That figure doesn't include an estimated 4,000 workers that TransCanada says it has hired for a 485-mile southern segment of the pipeline that already is under construction and nearing completion.

Nor do the figures include the peripheral jobs that would be created as a result of a major infrastructure project.

TransCanada says about 7,000 manufacturing jobs will be needed to support the overall project, which will stretch from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.

The State Department report goes further. It estimates that the project could help create directly and indirectly as many as 42,000 jobs, including jobs for suppliers and subcontractors that provide equipment and materials, as well as lodging, food services and other jobs related to construction. The figure includes part-time jobs.

The report said these jobs would amount to 0.02 percent of total U.S employment, a figure that is consistent with Obama's characterization that the project would have minimal impact on the overall U.S. jobs picture.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/01/3535420...
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Aug 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>What benefit is there for Americans?
Construction jobs, maintenance jobs and lease fees, port fees on every ship that loads the oil and increased oil supply to drive down fuel prices.
FACT CHECK: Obama understates Keystone XL jobs
OBAMA: "Republicans have said that this would be a big jobs generator. There is no evidence that that's true," he said in The New York Times interview. "And my hope would be that any reporter who is looking at the facts would take the time to confirm that the most realistic estimates are this might create maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline which might take a year or two and then after that we're talking about somewhere between 50 and 100 (chuckles) jobs in an economy of 150 million working people.... That is a blip relative to the need."
THE FACTS: It's not clear where Obama came up with the 2,000-jobs figure.
The project's developer, Calgary-based TransCanada, has said the pipeline could create as many as 13,000 construction jobs 6,500 a year over two years.
In its March report, the State Department put the number of construction jobs at 3,900 on an annual basis. That figure doesn't include an estimated 4,000 workers that TransCanada says it has hired for a 485-mile southern segment of the pipeline that already is under construction and nearing completion.
Nor do the figures include the peripheral jobs that would be created as a result of a major infrastructure project.
TransCanada says about 7,000 manufacturing jobs will be needed to support the overall project, which will stretch from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.
The State Department report goes further. It estimates that the project could help create directly and indirectly as many as 42,000 jobs, including jobs for suppliers and subcontractors that provide equipment and materials, as well as lodging, food services and other jobs related to construction. The figure includes part-time jobs.
The report said these jobs would amount to 0.02 percent of total U.S employment, a figure that is consistent with Obama's characterization that the project would have minimal impact on the overall U.S. jobs picture.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/01/3535420...
Of course the Canadian company company behind the pipeline paints a rosy picture. I am surprised they did not include the jobs created by cleaning up the oil spills. I am not surprised that they did not mention all of the jobs that will be lost at refineries all along the Mississippi. The bottom line is that none of the oil is going to the US and the cost of fuel will go up in many states as a result. Let the Canadians build their pipeline on their own land.

I could not imagine the outrage on these boards if Mexico decided to build a pipeline to Canada that bypassed the US.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Aug 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Oil pipelines are safer than the alternatives; not building the pipeline means trains will move that oil instead. Of course, Jimmy Buffet owns some of those trains and track so he's lobbied his crony pal in the White House to stop the pipe.

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Aug 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
All you need to know in this case is geography.
You had no clue that the whole point of the Canadian project was to bypass the US did you? You did not even know where the pipeline was going.
what a load of crap.

if anybody doesn't know anything, it's YOU.

the keystone pipeline would be the start of a crushing blow to the Mideast oil domination in the world for the last hundred years.

it would vaporize the funds that the Mideast terrorist have at their disposal.

how would the keystone pipeline do this?

simple, it would not only allow us to work with our Canadian neighbors to the north to harness their oil reserves, it would also allow us in the usa to harness ours.

and according to online sources that I've read, between the usa and Canada, we currently have the largest oil reserves in the world. bar none. we even have more then Saudi Arabia.

imagine what would happen if we were able to harness that oil?

look at what happened to Australia.. our brother to the south when they went full blast into harnessing their mineral resources? did you know the minimum wage in Australia is 17 dollars an hour?

think about it some, idiot. they are selling minerals that they dig out of the ground. PURE PROFIT. and this money is bankrolling their economy to highs that they never experienced in all their history.

we can have the same scenario in the usa.

starts with the keystone pipeline. and pushing the stupid POS liberals away.

READ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipelin...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Dakota_oil...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakken_Formation
Dee Dee Dee

Emmaus, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

It is o.k. to help Mexico by absorbing millions of unwanted criminals who burden our society but it is not o.k. to help Canada to create energy independence for North America and profit from helping them. Racism! LOL

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course the Canadian company company behind the pipeline paints a rosy picture. I am surprised they did not include the jobs created by cleaning up the oil spills. I am not surprised that they did not mention all of the jobs that will be lost at refineries all along the Mississippi. The bottom line is that none of the oil is going to the US and the cost of fuel will go up in many states as a result. Let the Canadians build their pipeline on their own land.
I could not imagine the outrage on these boards if Mexico decided to build a pipeline to Canada that bypassed the US.
didn't I tell you to get off the drugs already?
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Asian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
didn't I tell you to get off the drugs already?
You should probbaly be considering medication.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
What benefit is there for Americans? A Canadian company wants to build a pipeline across the US to a port city on the Gulf. None of this oil is intended for the US market. It is all going overseas.
As a matter of fact it will bypass refineries in 13 different states. The price of fuel in those states may actually go up.
Oil is sold on the world market. Is the US part of the world market?

Yup.
oh dee dee

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dee Dee Dee wrote:
It is o.k. to help Mexico by absorbing millions of unwanted criminals who burden our society but it is not o.k. to help Canada to create energy independence for North America and profit from helping them. Racism! LOL
oh my 'dee dee' that is way funny. energy independence in no way trumps illegal mexican 'campers' forcing themselves on our society. president trayvon knows what is best for us.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Oil is sold on the world market. Is the US part of the world market?
Yup.
I guess we think differently.I tend to think of America first. Most countries that have oil sell to their own people at reduced rates and then sell the rest on the world market.

In the US the oil companies don't do that. They charge Americans the same price as they charge everybody else. I am glad you are OK with that.

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Aug 5, 2013
 
Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess we think differently.I tend to think of America first. Most countries that have oil sell to their own people at reduced rates and then sell the rest on the world market.
In the US the oil companies don't do that. They charge Americans the same price as they charge everybody else. I am glad you are OK with that.
hey, idiot.

who gives a shit who buys the oil? it's money it the pocket. PURE PROFIT. it buys food. pays off the debt. the mortgage. etc.

go peddle your bullshit elsewhere. we don't need stupid people making decisions for us. we have enough as it is on capitol hill.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Aug 5, 2013
 
Asian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
hey, idiot.
who gives a shit who buys the oil? it's money it the pocket. PURE PROFIT. it buys food. pays off the debt. the mortgage. etc.
go peddle your bullshit elsewhere. we don't need stupid people making decisions for us. we have enough as it is on capitol hill.
Oh. Are you a Canadian now? It is so hard to keep up with your ever changing nationalities.

Yes. There is an immense amount of profit involved for a Canadian company. Good for them. PURE PROFIT.

Did you ever wonder why they did not build the pipeline across Canada so they could ship the oil overseas? Funny story. They had two different pipeline proposals and they both got shot down for environmental reasons. That's right. The Canadians know this is the dirtiest form of oil on earth and they did not want it piped across their beautiful country.

TransCanada then had the balls to suggest piping it across the US to spare damaging the Canadian environment. It works out nicely. They make all of the profits and the US takes all of the risk. The bonus is that the price of fuel will go up in the US because we will be getting less Canadian oil in the future. PURE PROFIT for somebody else.

So here you are happy as a pig in shit that Canadians will make a fortune taking oil that used to go to the US and selling it overseas. I would love to do business with you. You are as gullible as they come.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/keys...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of21
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

7 Users are viewing the North Dakota Forum right now

Search the North Dakota Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
north dakota well maps 5 hr Pat McBrady 2
Scranton,Pa Apr 12 William 1
Oil leasing and drilling activity around the Mc... (Jul '06) Apr 8 jim mccann 1,671
As Temperatures Reach -32A C, TransCanada Pipel... Apr 6 nuff sed 3
Does anyone ever refuse to lease their Oil/Mine... (Sep '08) Mar '14 kennedy 817 129
U.S. rail tank car safety standards due in week... Feb '14 Rudolph Caparros 5
Russia's Putin is much smarter than Obama...rea... Feb '14 my opinion 1
•••
•••
•••
•••