Obama - no to Keystone pipeline

[Darwin333]

It was included as a possible alternative but not studied. If it was then getting this whole thing back on track would be as simple as saying they want to use the alternative now then it could be signed off on in short order since it would have state support.

TransCanada assumed they could buy off the locals/state to make a cheaper routing work. When that failed industry pressed a Congress hungry for issues to feed to the presidential race to insert it into the payroll tax legislation.

sigh. Please actually read the report. You don't have to read the entire thing just the executive summary (short version) and if you had you would know that you are again wrong.

They did the exact same study on the alternate routs in order to base their very well defined and specific reason as to why they thought the original route was best.

This is an official environmental impact study, what do you think they said "yeah, we uh, we are pretty sure the original route is much better than the other proposed alternatives so that is what we are going to recommend"? The science is there in the long version on everything they recommend as far as I can tell but their reasoning behind suggesting the original route was very specific with impact studies done on all of them and weighed against each other.

 

[michal1980]

:hmm: What?

Funny that it likely really was not a "win" for the president. It seems like the only choice he could have made and it will make him look bad regardless if it was the "correct" one. That's the tactic of the right. Politics at the expense of the country. Unfortunately they have a very large, very loyal, base of idiots that will vote for anyone with an 'R' next to their name.... precisely because of these non-issue, completely emotional-based attacks. Turn the Glenn Beck back on bro. :thumbsup:

Obama played politics with the timing initally.

Are you libs this easly lied too?

 

[K1052]

sigh. Please actually read the report. You don't have to read the entire thing just the executive summary (short version) and if you had you would know that you are again wrong.

They did the exact same study on the alternate routs in order to base their very well defined and specific reason as to why they thought the original route was best.

This is an official environmental impact study, what do you think they said "yeah, we uh, we are pretty sure the original route is much better than the other proposed alternatives so that is what we are going to recommend"? The science is there in the long version on everything they recommend as far as I can tell but their reasoning behind suggesting the original route was very specific with impact studies done on all of them and weighed against each other.

Other alignments (including the existing Keystone alignment which will probably be used now) were eliminated in the alternatives analysis solely for cost reasons (pipeline length) and were not fully studied. Had that been the case the company could have just decided to use that alignment and eliminated any state resistance last year and they'd be building it now. Instead they have to start over. Trying to use the cheaper routing will cost them considerable time and money because Nebraska is never going to support it.

Obama already told the Canadians to reapply for the permit once they re-route around the area in question and do the requisite environmental study on that route. This will be built but it's going to take a couple extra years now.

 

[dmcowen674]

Other alignments (including the existing Keystone alignment which will probably be used now) were eliminated in the alternatives analysis solely for cost reasons (pipeline length) and were not fully studied. Had that been the case the company could have just decided to use that alignment and eliminated any state resistance last year and they'd be building it now. Instead they have to start over. Trying to use the cheaper routing will cost them considerable time and money because Nebraska is never going to support it.

Obama already told the Canadians to reapply for the permit once they re-route around the area in question and do the requisite environmental study on that route. This will be built but it's going to take a couple extra years now.

But will they still cut off the Illinois depot?

Even before this got voted down they said they were going to turn the Cushing Oklahoma to Illinois portion of the existing pipeline around and only send oil south to Cushing.

What people don't know is that they already are planning on taking the oil from the sand tars and shipping it to Illinois and then down to Cushing from here, Then from Cushing there is already existing lines to Houston.

The bottom line is that the Midwest gets cut off.

 

[umbrella39]

Only in your delusional dreams.

Been taking lessons from Spidey, or what?

Isn't it funny how the echo chamber works? Spidey seldom answers his own criticisms, that the sock puppets job.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally Posted by Jhhnn
Only in your delusional dreams.

Been taking lessons from Spidey, or what?

Isn't it funny how the echo chamber works? Spidey seldom answers his own criticisms, that the sock puppets job.

That's all the lot of them do. They attack the messenger not the message.

They are the original spam bots.

 

[Darwin333]

Other alignments (including the existing Keystone alignment which will probably be used now) were eliminated in the alternatives analysis solely for cost reasons (pipeline length) and were not fully studied. Had that been the case the company could have just decided to use that alignment and eliminated any state resistance last year and they'd be building it now. Instead they have to start over. Trying to use the cheaper routing will cost them considerable time and money because Nebraska is never going to support it.

Obama already told the Canadians to reapply for the permit once they re-route around the area in question and do the requisite environmental study on that route. This will be built but it's going to take a couple extra years now.

Sigh..... READ THE DAMNED REPORT!!!! I enjoy the debate but come on, I have given you all of the information to make an informed rebuttal if you so choose.

I will say this again, slowly.

The alternate routes were studies using all of the EXACT SAME PARAMETERS that the original route used. Not some, not a few, not most, not almost all but ALL! Yes, cost was one of those parameters but the state departments study found the original route to be the best for environmental reasons as well.

 

[Darwin333]

:hmm: What?

Funny that it likely really was not a "win" for the president. It seems like the only choice he could have made and it will make him look bad regardless if it was the "correct" one. That's the tactic of the right. Politics at the expense of the country. Unfortunately they have a very large, very loyal, base of idiots that will vote for anyone with an 'R' next to their name.... precisely because of these non-issue, completely emotional-based attacks. Turn the Glenn Beck back on bro. :thumbsup:

It was the only political choice he could make not the only "correct" choice he could make. If the Sand Hills region is truly the only issue at play I am sure he could have issued the permit based on one of the already studied and fully vetted alternative routes or something of the sort.

The decision he made is based solely on appeasing his base which includes a bunch of environmentalists whose sole objection to this project is that it the oil is even "dirtier" than normal oil. I believe that I have presented adequate evidence in this thread as to how a person could reasonably come to that conclusion.

 

[Darwin333]

But will they still cut off the Illinois depot?

Even before this got voted down they said they were going to turn the Cushing Oklahoma to Illinois portion of the existing pipeline around and only send oil south to Cushing.

What people don't know is that they already are planning on taking the oil from the sand tars and shipping it to Illinois and then down to Cushing from here, Then from Cushing there is already existing lines to Houston.

The bottom line is that the Midwest gets cut off.

And when they build a pipeline to their own west coast instead of through the US that pipeline will tie into the one that supplies the midwest who is currently getting the oil at a discount. They will still divert that oil to their west coast where they will make more money exporting it to Asia.

The Midwest is going to either pay going rates or get cut off regardless.

 

[Jhhnn]

Sigh..... READ THE DAMNED REPORT!!!! I enjoy the debate but come on, I have given you all of the information to make an informed rebuttal if you so choose.

I will say this again, slowly.

The alternate routes were studies using all of the EXACT SAME PARAMETERS that the original route used. Not some, not a few, not most, not almost all but ALL! Yes, cost was one of those parameters but the state departments study found the original route to be the best for environmental reasons as well.

None of which matters at all, because Nebraskans, including the Governor, were opposed to the routing through the sand hills. Therefore, an alternate route would likely allow the pipeline to be completed sooner. Repubs knew all this going in, chose instead to make a grandstand play, a contrived issue about "Jobs", as if they gave a damn about jobs at all. They've delayed construction in a truly cynical fashion.

 

[dmcowen674]

The Midwest is going to either pay going rates or get cut off regardless.

Then why do you care either way?

 

[Darwin333]

Then why do you care either way?

The Midwest continuing to get discounted oil has absolutely no impact one way or the other to my opinion on the pipeline since it is, as I pointed out, irrelevant.

 

[K1052]

Sigh..... READ THE DAMNED REPORT!!!! I enjoy the debate but come on, I have given you all of the information to make an informed rebuttal if you so choose.

I will say this again, slowly.

The alternate routes were studies using all of the EXACT SAME PARAMETERS that the original route used. Not some, not a few, not most, not almost all but ALL! Yes, cost was one of those parameters but the state departments study found the original route to be the best for environmental reasons as well.

I have. Cost was the primary driver for elimination. Current routing was justified as environmentally preferable/viable due to less length and other reasons, discounting state level concerns about the Sand Hill area. The EPA has also issued their own comments about the EIS and they weren't too flattering particularly when it comes to the alternatives analysis.

 

[K1052]

It was the only political choice he could make not the only "correct" choice he could make. If the Sand Hills region is truly the only issue at play I am sure he could have issued the permit based on one of the already studied and fully vetted alternative routes or something of the sort.

The decision he made is based solely on appeasing his base which includes a bunch of environmentalists whose sole objection to this project is that it the oil is even "dirtier" than normal oil. I believe that I have presented adequate evidence in this thread as to how a person could reasonably come to that conclusion.

He was required to approve or reject the project as is, including the problematic Nebraska routing. No alternate had been so designated as a build option verses the original routing to the DOS. TransCanada gambled and lost that he would be under enough pressure to approve it regardless.

 

[Jhhnn]

He was required to approve or reject the project as is, including the problematic Nebraska routing. No alternate had been so designated as a build option verses the original routing to the DOS. TransCanada gambled and lost that he would be under enough pressure to approve it regardless.

True, and Repub raving about "Jerbs! Thousands of Jerbs!" is just transparent concern trolling. They knew Obama would have to kill it all along.

 

[tweaker2]

True, and Repub raving about "Jerbs! Thousands of Jerbs!" is just transparent concern trolling. They knew Obama would have to kill it all along.

Yep, this lame act of being concerned with creating jobs by the Repubs when in fact it is anathema to them in reality is comical if it weren't so destructive to the classes of people they find equally anathematic.

"Let them (peasants) eat cake".

 

[michal1980]

True, and Repub raving about "Jerbs! Thousands of Jerbs!" is just transparent concern trolling. They knew Obama would have to kill it all along.

when is your head going to leave Obama's ass?

They didn't know he was this must of a liberal wack job.

 

[Jhhnn]

when is your head going to leave Obama's ass?

They didn't know he was this must of a liberal wack job.

Funny you'd put it in those terms, given that Obama publically warned Repubs that he'd reject tying the pipeline to the payroll tax measure-

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/president-obama-threatens-veto-over-keyston

Your assertion isn't just unfounded, but rather flies in the face of information that was available to Repub lawmakers all along. They understood the consequences of their actions, and did it anyway, sacrificing the pipeline for cheap political points, another faux outrage opportunity.

Late last year, the Repub governor of Nebraska signed a bill demanding a new route for the pipeline, anyway, so had Obama acceded to Repub demands the whole thing would be tied up in litigation-

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/22/us-oil-pipeline-nebraska-idUSTRE7AL1M120111122

It's unfortunate that rank & file Repub opinion, such as it is, is based on faith rather than facts which have been available to all of us for some time. Repub leaders depend on that faith, exploit it ruthlessly in pursuit of an agenda not in the interests of the vast majority of their constituencies at all. This is just one example among many, and yet their flock remain steadfast believers.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

On the contrary, Jhhnn's post hits exactly the substance of the issue. Congressional Republicans have acted hypocritically, inflating the urgency and significance of this one project to create bogus ammunition to attack Obama. Meanwhile, they glibly ignore the far greater negative impact of their own party's actions and obstructionism, including 30+ years of a corrupt, destructive economics policy.

Just which policies are those? NAFTA? GATT? Free Trade agreements with China, South Korea, Colombia, and Panama? Repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act? Sub-Prime mortgages? Blocking Fannie and Freddie reform efforts?Porkulus? Unparalleled deficit spending?

Meanwhile...the misery index is at a 28 year high.

 

[michal1980]

Funny you'd put it in those terms, given that Obama publically warned Repubs that he'd reject tying the pipeline to the payroll tax measure-

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/president-obama-threatens-veto-over-keyston

Your assertion isn't just unfounded, but rather flies in the face of information that was available to Repub lawmakers all along. They understood the consequences of their actions, and did it anyway, sacrificing the pipeline for cheap political points, another faux outrage opportunity.

Late last year, the Repub governor of Nebraska signed a bill demanding a new route for the pipeline, anyway, so had Obama acceded to Repub demands the whole thing would be tied up in litigation-

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/22/us-oil-pipeline-nebraska-idUSTRE7AL1M120111122

It's unfortunate that rank & file Repub opinion, such as it is, is based on faith rather than facts which have been available to all of us for some time. Repub leaders depend on that faith, exploit it ruthlessly in pursuit of an agenda not in the interests of the vast majority of their constituencies at all. This is just one example among many, and yet their flock remain steadfast believers.

If you want to talk about steadfast believers, take a look in the mirror.


The fact is, Obama was delaying saying yes, or no to the pipeline for political gain.

The republicans pushed the issue for political gain.

Yet people like you, somehow ignore the fact that Obama was playing politics and just want to blame republicans.

P.S. How childish of Obama to say he was going to reject the pipeline if he was 'pushed' to make up his mind. Who does that? 2 year olds?

 

[Darwin333]

None of which matters at all, because Nebraskans, including the Governor, were opposed to the routing through the sand hills. Therefore, an alternate route would likely allow the pipeline to be completed sooner. Repubs knew all this going in, chose instead to make a grandstand play, a contrived issue about "Jobs", as if they gave a damn about jobs at all. They've delayed construction in a truly cynical fashion.

I would bet that the President has the power to issue some sort of temporary permit or something on the basis that one of the alternative routes that have already been studied were used in lieu of the existing route. If he does not have that power than I would bet he could get Congress to pass something that did the above.

If that was truly the only issue at hand that caused him to deny the permit than I guarantee that there was a way to work around it versus outright denying it. All the studying and legwork had already been done.

IMHO, it is very difficult for any person that takes an objective look at the situation to come up with any other reason for the denial of the permit other than politics. He did not want to upset his base, one that campaigned very heavily for him in the previous election, shortly before the upcoming election. Just read this thread for proof, the "reasons" for him denying it have changed throughout the entire thread as those reasons continue to be proven wrong.

It's unfortunate that rank & file Repub opinion, such as it is, is based on faith rather than facts which have been available to all of us for some time. Repub leaders depend on that faith, exploit it ruthlessly in pursuit of an agenda not in the interests of the vast majority of their constituencies at all. This is just one example among many, and yet their flock remain steadfast believers.

I am not a Republican but I presented a valid argument based on facts as stated by Obama's own administration. There is nothing faith based about my argument. This happens to be an issue that most people can find the actual facts, digest them, and make an informed argument one way or the other. After looking at those facts I find it very hard to come to any other conclusion that Obama denied it purely for political reasons (both the initial delay and the recent denial).

 

[Darwin333]

He was required to approve or reject the project as is, including the problematic Nebraska routing. No alternate had been so designated as a build option verses the original routing to the DOS. TransCanada gambled and lost that he would be under enough pressure to approve it regardless.

Gambled? Transcanada used the route that Obama's State Department suggested! Furthermore Tanscanada paid to have alternate routes studied, I guarantee that either Obama or Congress has the power to issue a permit or temporary permit based on Transcanada using one of the alternate routes that had already been studied. He chose not to do so because it would piss off his base. Pure and simple, I have actual factual data to support what I have been arguing in this thread. OTOH, you have been wrong time and time again. You are starting to make absolutely zero sense in your replies.

 

[Darwin333]

I have. Cost was the primary driver for elimination. Current routing was justified as environmentally preferable/viable due to less length and other reasons, discounting state level concerns about the Sand Hill area.

That is factually incorrect. They also addressed the local concern about the Sand Hills area with actual science even showing that a worst possible case spill in that area would not contaminate even a fraction of the drinking water that has been reported by those against it.

The EPA has also issued their own comments about the EIS and they weren't too flattering particularly when it comes to the alternatives analysis.

So now you are saying that Obama's state department is incompetent? Is that the only thing left for you to use in this debate? What part of the science did the EPA have a problem with and where is the backup to prove that the study was flawed?

 

[monovillage]

Gambled? Transcanada used the route that Obama's State Department suggested! Furthermore Tanscanada paid to have alternate routes studied, I guarantee that either Obama or Congress has the power to issue a permit or temporary permit based on Transcanada using one of the alternate routes that had already been studied. He chose not to do so because it would piss off his base. Pure and simple, I have actual factual data to support what I have been arguing in this thread. OTOH, you have been wrong time and time again. You are starting to make absolutely zero sense in your replies.

Everyone knows these facts if they've looked at the issue at all. There's just a couple of lying sacks of debris here that are pretending differently and are doing everything they can to lie their way into making this look more positive for Obama.

 

[Jhhnn]

I would bet that the President has the power to issue some sort of temporary permit or something on the basis that one of the alternative routes that have already been studied were used in lieu of the existing route. If he does not have that power than I would bet he could get Congress to pass something that did the above.

If that was truly the only issue at hand that caused him to deny the permit than I guarantee that there was a way to work around it versus outright denying it. All the studying and legwork had already been done.

IMHO, it is very difficult for any person that takes an objective look at the situation to come up with any other reason for the denial of the permit other than politics. He did not want to upset his base, one that campaigned very heavily for him in the previous election, shortly before the upcoming election. Just read this thread for proof, the "reasons" for him denying it have changed throughout the entire thread as those reasons continue to be proven wrong.



I am not a Republican but I presented a valid argument based on facts as stated by Obama's own administration. There is nothing faith based about my argument. This happens to be an issue that most people can find the actual facts, digest them, and make an informed argument one way or the other. After looking at those facts I find it very hard to come to any other conclusion that Obama denied it purely for political reasons (both the initial delay and the recent denial).

Lots of supposition in that. Transcanada actually offered to move the pipeline, and the overwhelmingly Republican Nebraska legislature voted 45-0 to have their own agency study alternate routes, a bill their governor signed.

Meanwhile, national repubs, seeking to embarrass Obama, seeking a faux issue, gave an ultimatum to Obama- All or nothing, as is, 60 days, that's it, take it or leave it. They snapped it off in the backs of all the people who were working hard to find a solution agreeable to everybody, and delayed the whole thing in the process.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/16/nebraska-keystone-bill_n_1098185.html