Sportello
Banned
So very kind of you to take time out of your busy day to post an insult directed towards me.
Now, can you give the forum any substantive reasons why the pipeline should be approved?
Thanks in advance,
Doc
XL Oil Pipeline
- Thread starter moreluck
- Start date
Now, can you give the forum any substantive reasons why the pipeline should be approved?
Thanks in advance,
Doc
moreluck
golden ticket member
Thanks!
Sportello
Banned
So I guess that you really have nothing of substance to offer, just insults and name calling?
Why am I not surprised?
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
She doesn't care about content, just the number of posts she can make in a day. Most of us have learned to just let her babble incoherently.
LOL,
true, but the mods "protect" her by removing the tools of posters ( like me ) to be able to "rate" her posts.
Heck, its their playground, allthough all the "libs" are given troll designations, it wont stop the message from getting out.
TOS.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
When did this thread turn into a TROLL PATROL cryfest?
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
As soon as you made your first post.
oldngray
nowhere special
Better luck next time conservitards.
It was the Demturds that were trying to get it passed now to save Landrieu. Republicans can easily pass it next year but it wasn't them in a hurry to vote on it.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Excuses, excuses. You sound like a 15 year old trying to explain why he didn't do his homework. A majority in both houses and still can't do anything.
oldngray
nowhere special
Excuses, excuses. You sound like a 15 year old trying to explain why he didn't do his homework. A majority in both houses and still can't do anything.
You might want to check who has the majority in the Senate now. Unless you prefer your low information status.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Exactly why I said better luck next time. But the outcome will be the same.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
The outcome will be a bill passing both houses and sitting on the dummy's desk. What the dummy does with it is anybody's guess.Exactly why I said better luck next time. But the outcome will be the same.
He will veto it. It will pass both houses when the GOP has the majority (helped along by the fact that LA will now go Red), and Obama will veto it (he's already said he will)
Yet, he'll sign a bill granting amnesty to a bunch of illegals.
Do what the people DON'T want, and DON'T do what they Do want. Creating a great legacy, this
bag is
Last edited by a moderator:
BrownArmy
Well-Known Member
I guess I'm not sure what the fuss is, on both sides.
On the environmental side, these tar sands are being/ will continue to be developed, one way or another. Pipelines aren't fool-proof (plenty of evidence for that), but one could argue that it's a better method of transport than rail or by sea.
On the other side, even if the US approves the pipeline, that oil goes into the global market and will do absolutely nothing for the price at the pump at home. As well, while building the pipeline may create American jobs in the short term during its construction, the tally of permanent jobs seems awfully low. I suppose there may be a boost in profits for American refineries, but that doesn't help anyone you or I know.
I realize environmentalists want to make a stand about this particular pipeline, but again, those oil-fields will be developed one way or another. I think maybe the protest should move to Canada - it's their oil.
On the environmental side, these tar sands are being/ will continue to be developed, one way or another. Pipelines aren't fool-proof (plenty of evidence for that), but one could argue that it's a better method of transport than rail or by sea.
On the other side, even if the US approves the pipeline, that oil goes into the global market and will do absolutely nothing for the price at the pump at home. As well, while building the pipeline may create American jobs in the short term during its construction, the tally of permanent jobs seems awfully low. I suppose there may be a boost in profits for American refineries, but that doesn't help anyone you or I know.
I realize environmentalists want to make a stand about this particular pipeline, but again, those oil-fields will be developed one way or another. I think maybe the protest should move to Canada - it's their oil.
moreluck
golden ticket member
Building it will provide tons of jobs.....temporary, but full time.
I think it will be a safer way of transport than the train.
Sportello
Banned
http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/18/news/economy/keystone-jobs/index.html?iid=SF_E_River
Supporters of the Keystone XL Pipeline herald it as a job-creating machine, producing as many as 119,000 jobs.
But only 3,900 workers will actually be required to build the pipeline to carry oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, according to the U.S. State Department, and those jobs will only last for a year. There will be 35 permanent positions created.
TransCanada (TRP), the company seeking permission to build the pipeline, claims the effort will create 13,000 construction jobs.
But even TransCanada only expects that building the pipeline will take about 7 million hours of labor. That works out to about a year's worth of work for 3,400 workers. If the work were spread evenly across 13,000 workers, it would only mean three months of work for each.
Sportello
Banned
Also (well worth reading):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-bill-it-gives-one-company-special-treatment/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-bill-it-gives-one-company-special-treatment/
Similar threads
