[RealJustme]

They should be hiring the first few thousand Americans by this summer and now we can tell the Saudi's to piss off, we'll buy this oil if we need to, Canada won't have to sell it overseas. Happy days are here again!

[lumpster]

Yes but they don't have the 67 votes needed to override a veto.. McConnell tricks the right again.. He gave the right wing the vote but didn't try to make it veto proof. Not the President can veto it and McConnell will come back and say we tried..

[RealJustme]

For Obama to veto the Bill would be political suicide for the Democrats in the next elections, especially if they don't over ride the veto attempt if he's stupid enough to try it.

[elklindo69]

They should be hiring the first few thousand Americans by this summer and now we can tell the Saudi's to piss off, we'll buy this oil if we need to, Canada won't have to sell it overseas. Happy days are here again!

1. Obama will veto it.

2. The pipeline is not economic at $45 per barrel. Therefore it will not be constructed.

3. Oil is a fungible commodity. So whether or not Canada sells to the US or whoever, they will still pay pricing for brent crude which is more expensive than WTI. Don't expect to get any discounted pricing...

Another sucker is born...

:lol:

[Clownkicker]

Sometimes I honestly wonder what planet you're living on, Tool.

The Bill will be vetoed.
There will be no override.
There will be no political ramifications for the Democrats.
We will never tell the Saudis to piss off-- Hell, if G.W. can let them run planes into the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon and there wasn't a peep out of the Republicans over it and you guys graciously escorted all the bin Laden family out of the U.S., why would Republicans tell them to get lost now?
Nobody (certainly not Republicans) cares about the handful of temporary jobs that will not materialize over this.
The oil would not be bought by the U.S.--we have too much currently as it is.
The pipeline is for Canada and China. We would realize no benefits from it besides a few dozen maintenance jobs and some environmental damage from pipeline spills and a leak here and there.

And the Republicans in Congress will be seen to be fools jacking off instead of getting something done.

[RealJustme]

Elk and Clown are against getting oil from Canada and creating jobs for Americans, they would rather use tax money to have China build windmills and import oil from Muslims so both can use our own money to undermine us, that's the liberal way.

[Clownkicker]

Tool, what is it with you clowns?
I give you a list of plain facts and all of a sudden you think you can tell what I am for or against.
Why do you feel a need to attack me personally rather than addressing the facts I listed?
Oh yeah, you've got nothing, just like johnny.

You're wrong, of course, but regardless of what I am for or against, it doesn't change the facts I gave you. There is nothing partisan about reality. Someone needs to give you a wake-up call. It might as well be me.

If the Keystone were to be built, it is unlikely the U.S. would ever see a single barrel of the oil pumped through it.
These people are your handlers, Tool, they are not your friends.

[johnforbes]

The issue isn't the price of oil today, but what it will be down the pike.

If the stranglehold of OPEC is ever to be broken...

[RealJustme]

If the Keystone were to be built, it is unlikely the U.S. would ever see a single barrel of the oil pumped through it.

So you think Canada would rather pay the additional shipping charges to China than just sell it to us? What an idiot, you have to break those strings your handlers keep pulling. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Use some common sense dude, if the Middle East cuts us off or any other type of oil shortage all we have to do is tell Canada here's a check we're saving you the shipping charges and risks involved.

- It provides needed jobs and brings in tons of taxes "from Canada"cities along the line need
- It provides an instant supply of back up oil if ever needed
- It's better for the environment and safer than the means the oil is presently be transported

It's really that simple...spare me the liberal talking points because my facts trumps them.

[Clownkicker]

"So you think Canada would rather pay the additional shipping charges to China than just sell it to us?"-RealStrupid

I thought you ran a business, Tool. :lol:
Your imaginary 'facts' are all screwed up.
Anyone in business knows that the customer, not the business, pays the shipping, one way or the other. What an idiot.
The only question is who will pay the most for the commodity.
China will always pay more because they need it far more and they are sitting on over a trillion dollars they must spend on something. They don't want anything else we have to sell besides commodities.

"It provides needed jobs..." Yeah, a few thousand jobs for two years. Then those jobs evaporate.

"It's better for the environment..." Crap, Tool, haven't you seen what tar sand extraction does to "the environment" you're pretending to be concerned about?
http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2013/0 ... adign.html
They scrape off a forest and leave an oily mud hole so big it can be seen from space.
Then they leave huge sterile lakes of toxic oily sludge behind.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... ds-uk-fuel

"Nowhere on Earth is more earth being moved these days than in the Athabasca Valley. To extract each barrel of oil from a surface mine, the industry must first cut down the forest, then remove an average of two tons of peat and dirt that lie above the oil sands layer, then two tons of the sand itself. It must heat several barrels of water to strip the bitumen from the sand and upgrade it, and afterward it discharges contaminated water into tailings ponds like the one near Mildred Lake."-National Geographic

http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-res ... issed.html

"and safer than the means the oil is presently be transported"-

Geezus, Tool, can't you see a difference between oil spills in Canada wilderness and oil spills on U.S. farms, rivers, and cities of the heartland?
If Obama were trying to pass this thing, Republicans would be screaming their heads off that anyone would want to add this needless risk to America. If they're going to extract this stuff in the first place and leave a wasteland behind, then let Canada take the further the risk to their environment, not us.

What's stopping them from building another of these 'safe' pipelines across their own country, Tool, if it's such a good idea instead of sending it on trains? They built the Trans-Canada Pipeline. Let them build another one.
But they would rather trash our country instead of their own, and you're cheering them on.

[Malcolm]

Van Jones says Keystone pipeline only creates 35 permanent jobs......

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/07/25/ ... ne-xl.html
http://www.sott.net/article/254178-Sec- ... L-decision
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/02/ ... n-oil.html
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/12/01/st ... ese-agency

[RealJustme]

Anyone in business knows that the customer, not the business, pays the shipping, one way or the other. What an idiot.

Anyone in business knows that if you can sell a product locally at the same price as you're selling to someone you have deliver it to, you pocket what the shipping costs would have been. Canada factors the shipping costs into the cost per barrel depending on where they deliver it to. Plus if something happens during shipment they don't get a dime from China for the oil. That's all 101 business dude.

[Clownkicker]

"Canada factors the shipping costs into the cost per barrel depending on where they deliver it to."-RealTool

He pretends I'm wrong and then says exactly what I said, that the customer pays the shipping. :lol:

"Plus if something happens during shipment they don't get a dime from China for the oil."-RealTool

They don't have to get a dime from China, dimwit.
They get it from the insurance company that insured the shipment.
That's all 101 business dood.

But I see you backed off the "safer for the environment" schtick. :lol:

[snakeoil]

Read Justme's posts on this thread again. Now you see how easy it is for politicians to manipulate people. To some people facts just get in the way of what they feel is the truth.

Justme:

a. The XL Pipeline is not needed to supply the USA with oil. It is to provide Canada with a warm-water port to export their tremendously dirty oil to the world.

b. As Clown stated it is not economically feasible at the current price of oil.

c. As with the Alaska Pipeline, the XL will require constant maintenance to repair the inevitable spills. Believe it or not, the oil does create friction and will wear through the pipe over time.

d. Although each weld should be x-rayed, the government now allows inspections on random welds.

e. In testimony it was stated that if there was a major leak, it would not be possible to bring the land affected by oil to the condition it was before the spill.

f. Only about 20% of oil that makes it's way into water is recovered.

g. The Native Americans (a soverein nation remember) are up in arms about the pipeline going through their land.

[RealJustme]

They don't have to get a dime from China, dimwit.
They get it from the insurance company that insured the shipment.
That's all 101 business dood.

Dude, if you owned a business you would realize insurance isn't free, a business actually has to pay for it. If you're in the oil business and a shipload of your oil goes down, not only will your Brand be tarnished, your insurance rates will sky rocket. Insurance companies charge businesses more than they pay therefore saying it doesn't cost the company a dime if they loose an oil shipment are words from someone who is thinking in government terms, not business terms.

[Clownkicker]

The exact same thing can be said for a pipeline, you moron.

It's insured.
The insurance costs money.
If there's a spill or an explosion or a fire, their insurance rates go up.
And trust me, if there's a disaster by a foreign oil company on U.S. soil, their Brand will be tarnished...at least among Democrats.
Republicans? Not so much. It's just business to them. Who cares about the farmland? Just pay off the farmer, shut him up, and collect your 7-figure bonus at the end of the year while you laugh at the little people who are still stupid enough to work for a living.

[RealJustme]

Justme:

a. The XL Pipeline is not needed to supply the USA with oil. It is to provide Canada with a warm-water port to export their tremendously dirty oil to the world.

Then why do we import oil from the Saudis?

b. As Clown stated it is not economically feasible at the current price of oil.

Do you REALLY think oil will remain at it's current price?

c. As with the Alaska Pipeline, the XL will require constant maintenance to repair the inevitable spills. Believe it or not, the oil does create friction and will wear through the pipe over time.

Even the government study by the EPA said there the pipeline would reduce the chance of oil spills, as far as the oil causing friction in the pipes, LOL if they have to be replaced that's more jobs for Americans, win, win.

d. Although each weld should be x-rayed, the government now allows inspections on random welds.

Now your blaming Obama's government for making us unsafe. :lol:

e. In testimony it was stated that if there was a major leak, it would not be possible to bring the land affected by oil to the condition it was before the spill.

EPA has already said pipelines are the safest way to transport oil plus no fossil fuel has to be burned to transport it, a win, win.

f. Only about 20% of oil that makes it's way into water is recovered.

WOW, that much? that's pretty good.

g. The Native Americans (a soverein nation remember) are up in arms about the pipeline going through their land.

No, they are just arguing for more money to allow it go through their lands, gimme, gimme, gimme.

[Clownkicker]

"Even the government study by the EPA said there the pipeline would reduce the chance of oil spills,..."-RealTool
"EPA has already said pipelines are the safest way to transport oil plus no fossil fuel has to be burned to transport it, a win, win."-RealTool

So why don't you demand they build a pipeline in Canada to transport it instead of shipping it by rail?
After all, you're so concerned about the environment you should be insisting upon it.
And they wouldn't have to deal with the huge regulatory delays to get it built in the U.S.
It's a win-win. :lol: That's your yardstick for supporting a plan, right?

"...as far as the oil causing friction in the pipes, LOL if they have to be replaced that's more jobs for Americans, win, win."-RealTool

The problem is they don't inspect and repair as they should because it cuts into profits.
They wait for a spill and then hem and haw and grudgingly do the minimum to give cover to the Republicans so their base (you) will be fooled into thinking all is safe and well. It's not. In the price, they have already factored in the number of spills they expect to happen. It's not "IF", it's "When".

So why are you supporting the construction of another terrorist target on U.S. soil that only benefits foreigners, the wealthy, and Senators?

[RealJustme]

The exact same thing can be said for a pipeline, you moron.

It's insured.
The insurance costs money.
If there's a spill their insurance rates go up.

Glad to see came off your stance that oil spills don't cost a business a dime.

It better to have an oil spill on land then in water, did you know only 20% of oil is recovered when oil spills into water? Plus think of all the pollution from the thousands of trucks and trains that are currently being used to transport oil, the pipeline doesn't burn fuels, it's eco friendly

[RealJustme]

So why are you supporting the construction of another terrorist target on U.S. soil that only benefits foreigners and Senators?

We already have 2.5 million miles of pipe transporting gas and oil, all your anti pipeline liberal talking points have been debunked. It's not about the pipeline, it's about the oil, you liberals want to shut down the burning of fossil fuels and run the country on empty words because your handlers told you green energy is the only answer. :lol: :lol: :lol:

The terrorist will go after our water supplies, bombing a pipeline that's be repaired in two days doesn't return the deaths they're after.

[Clownkicker]

"Glad to see came off your stance that oil spills don't cost a business a dime."_RealLyingSackofShit

Show me where I ever said a spill doesn't cost a business a dime.
I said they don't have to recover the loss from the Chinese.
Cripes, how do you live with yourself?

"It better to have an oil spill on land then in water,..."-RealIgnoramus

Tool, the oil would STILL be shipped on water, AFTER it has been pumped across the land.
It's going to China. There is no pipeline from Canada to China.
Exactly how stupid are you? You're arguing my case for me.

[RealJustme]

It's going to China. There is no pipeline from Canada to China.
Exactly how stupid are you? You're arguing my case for me.

So now you're for a pipeline to China?

[Clownkicker]

^^^That's how you know the board's Babboon RealTool is thoroughly beaten.

He finally ignores every point I made and just starts flinging his shit around his cage. :lol:

[RealJustme]

He finally ignores every point I made and just starts flinging his shit around his cage.

What point?

I do have to admit, getting you all worked up trying to defend liberal talking points that can't be defended has given me more laughs today than I normally have all day, thanks dude. My secretary asked me a few minutes ago what the hell I was cracking up about.

[Clownkicker]

So now you're trying to convince us you're a hyena and not a Baboon?

I think a dingo ate your failed talking points.

[johnforbes]

Clownchoker's posts are low octane

[elklindo69]

I really don't understand why the GOP and their mindless followers are getting hard-on over this bullshit issue, other to prove that they can beat Obama just for the sake of winning.

1. Obama will probably veto the bill.

2. The GOP will then attach it to a spending bill to force Obama's hand.

3. At that point we are back again to playing chicken with a suicidal maniac in the GOP, who all ready forced a government shut down, that the public blamed on the GOP.

4. Obama at that point should just let the bill pass and let the GOP get their pyrrhic victory. Because Transcanada will most likely not build the Keystone pipeline anyway. Oil at $45 per barrel is not economic for tar sands oil which requires $70ish to break even,

I don't expect the Saudi's to cut production to allow US shale oil drillers to regain market share. The greatest geopolitical threat to the United States is in the economic shithole, their debt was downgraded to junk status, and the ruble has been cut in half, so the Russians dying for hard cash will not cut production anytime soon.

[snakeoil]

We don't get a drop of oil from the Saudis. We get our extra (very little) from Mexico, Venezuela and Brazil. Citco is Venezuela's oil outlet in America.

[RealJustme]

We don't get a drop of oil from the Saudis.

Dude you've been totally brained washed, even the Obama Administration says we need 826 thousand barrels per day from the Saudi's.

http://www.eia.gov/.../imports/companylevel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; The top five sources of U.S. crude oil imports for October were Canada (3,050 thousand barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (826 thousand barrels per day), Mexico (734 thousand barrels per day), Venezuela (627 thousand barrels per day), and Colombia (325 thousand barrels per day).Dec 30, 2014

Not a drop from the Saudi's not a drop, shake those liberal talking points Elk :lol: :lol: :lol:

[elklindo69]

We don't get a drop of oil from the Saudis.

Dude you've been totally brained washed, even the Obama Administration says we need 826 thousand barrels per day from the Saudi's.

http://www.eia.gov/.../imports/companylevel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; The top five sources of U.S. crude oil imports for October were Canada (3,050 thousand barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (826 thousand barrels per day), Mexico (734 thousand barrels per day), Venezuela (627 thousand barrels per day), and Colombia (325 thousand barrels per day).Dec 30, 2014

Not a drop from the Saudi's not a drop, shake those liberal talking points Elk :lol: :lol: :lol:

Justme....What is it that you don't get????

Oil is a fungible commodity. The US can get oil from anywhere in the world, not just from Saudi Arabia. When did I ever say that? BTW, Saudi Arabia is one of the largest producers of oil in the world. So they directly manipulate the price of oil by adjusting their daily production.

Regardless, Keystone is probably not going to get constructed anyway...

[RealJustme]

Justme....What is it that you don't get????

Oil is a fungible commodity. The US can get oil from anywhere in the world, not just from Saudi Arabia

We buy 826 thousand barrels per day from the Saudi's, what is about that fact that you don't get? The Saudis jail gays, don't allow women to drive and blacks can't own land or vote, I would think you would hate the Saudis and want to get our oil from Canada instead of them?

[snakeoil]

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/0 ... rejection/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[snakeoil]

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/0 ... tar-sands/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RealJustme]

Just imagine the carbon foot print it takes to ship 826 thousand barrels per day from the Saudi's, now just imagine if one of those oil cargo ships sink or leak their cargo, I've been told we can only recover 20% of the spilled oil, and those ships are coming into our ports every day, discount the carbon footprint it's a environmental disaster waiting to happen.

[Clownkicker]

^^^^^Wow, RealTool coming out making a case for stiffer safety standards on oil tankers, recognizing that they are currently environmental disasters waiting to happen.

That will cut into corporate profits, Tool.
You may want to rethink your position on that.
What do your handlers say?

[RealJustme]

^^^^^Wow, RealTool coming out making a case for stiffer safety standards on oil tankers, recognizing that they are currently environmental disasters waiting to happen

Yep, that's why we need to go with pipelines.

[elklindo69]

^^^^^Wow, RealTool coming out making a case for stiffer safety standards on oil tankers, recognizing that they are currently environmental disasters waiting to happen

Yep, that's why we need to go with pipelines.

Justme, are you really that foolish to believe that Canadian oil will replace middle eastern sourced oil?

The United States oil reserves are only a fraction of what the Saudi's have. And if your 'sources' haven't told you, but oil producction from fracking shale formations will peak by the end of the decade. So the United States will be sourcing oil from the Saudi's for a very long time...

:lol:

[RealJustme]

Justme, are you really that foolish to believe that Canadian oil will replace middle eastern sourced oil?

Probably not until Obama is out office.