The Amateur Message Boards of the World Famous VoyeurWeb

And the GOP dances in the end zone in the final seconds of the fourth quarter after a scoring a touchdown in a 73-6 loss...

Looks as if they will add it as a pork barrel project to an 'important" spending bill...

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-controlled Congress cleared a bill Wednesday to construct the Keystone XL oil pipeline, setting up a confrontation with President Barack Obama, who has threatened to veto the measure.

The House passed the bill on a 270-152 vote, endorsing changes made by the Senate that stated climate change was real and not a hoax, and oil sands should no longer be exempt from a tax used to cleanup oil spills.

Supporters were already strategizing on how to secure the pipeline's approval using other legislative means.

"The evidence is in. The case ought to be closed," said Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota, the chief Republican sponsor of the bill, said in a statement "we will continue to press for approval by attaching an approval measure to another bill, perhaps an energy bill or must-pass appropriations legislation."

"Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota, the chief Republican sponsor of the bill, said in a statement "we will continue to press for approval by attaching an approval measure to another bill, perhaps an energy bill or must-pass appropriations legislation."

Hey, wait a minute.
I thought the Republicans said this was a terrible thing to do when the Democrats were doing it.

Republicans are scumbag hypocrites?
Say it isn't so!

Shouldn't they be spending their time working on the do-or-die immigration problem they've been screaming about for years, to secure our borders and revamp immigration policy?
It can wait I guess. It must not be that important after all.

Wait, that's hypocritical too.
What will Tool do when he finds out they were just using him, blowing smoke up his ass for the past 10 years?
What will he do when he learns that Breitbart and FOX don't actually give a flying fuck about it?
What will he do when he learns Republicans actually WANT illegals here?
We won't hear a peep out of them on this for the next two years.

Told ya it would pass!

I told you it would pass too.
Everyone knew it would pass.
Republicans are reliably stupid.

So what's your point?

I told you it would pass too.
Everyone knew it would pass.
Republicans are reliably stupid.

So what's your point?

It passed!

You just know RealTool laughs his head off at America's Funniest Home Videos.

"The guy on the bike just ran his face into the wall!
Come in here, honey! You have to see this!"

You should just watch C-SPAN instead, Tool.

Everybody thought a 52-inch belt would span the vast girth of Clowntoker.

Alas, Clownlicker's belt collapsed like the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

RealJustme wrote:

I told you it would pass too.
Everyone knew it would pass.
Republicans are reliably stupid.

So what's your point?

It passed!

Another GOP victory.

:lol:

Only Hillary's girdle has been exposed to as much strain as Clownslacker's belt.

Which, of course, he sports even with his Sans-a-Belt slacks.

The big question Elk, why is #44 wearing #30 in your picture?

.....Senators voting for the bill got 10 times the amount, at an average $236,544, than those who voted against it ($22,882). Democratic senators who voted for the bill, even though Obama had indicated his opposition, received 3.2 times as much as the Democrats who voted against it ($73, 279 vs. $22,882). Sen. John Hoeven, the Republican from North Dakota who sponsored the legislation, received $275,998.

The contributions happened between Oct. 1, 2012 and Sept. 30, 2014. To say that more money caused the vote is not necessarily a foregone conclusion. It could be that the industry donated more heavily to candidates predisposed to support the bill. But the contributions did happen over a time that was of particular importance to political support of the bill.

Gulf Coast refinery operators have contributed heavily to generally lobbying Congress and federal agencies. Since Jan. 1, 2013, the following top five spent $58.8 million (although there is no way to know what percentage was focused on the pipeline question vs. other topics): ....

What?!

I'm surprised any donations were given to the liberal snakes trying to kill the pipe line, jobs and oil that comes with it. Sounds like Americans and businesses are sending a clear message to Congress, if you put your PC agenda over the interests of Americans then you'll not get money from me.

RealJustme wrote:I'm surprised any donations were given to the liberal snakes trying to kill the pipe line, jobs and oil that comes with it. Sounds like Americans and businesses are sending a clear message to Congress, if you put your PC agenda over the interests of Americans then you'll not get money from me.

What is it that you don't understand?

The pipeline is not economically feasible at current and future oil prices, therefore it will not be constructed.

Elkin's pipeline comments have left him drained of elan vital.

With his endless stream of impotent copy-and-paste whining, this begs the question: What drained away johnforbes' elan vital so long ago?

My guess, from his rampant rhinotillexomania?

He simply picked his nose one too many times.

Forbestardo's pipeline consists of pure C&P.

False certitude

Putin is the greatest geopolitical foe

Obama is a muzzie, birth certificate, playing golf...etc...etc...

It's time tree huggers like Elk come face to face with one undeniable fact.....Man will never give up using fossil fuels...and for that reason alone the pipeline needs to be built. It's expensive but not as expensive as it will be 20-30 years from now. There will come a time when oil from the Middle East will no longer be available to us....at any price.
America runs on oil, and it will keep demanding oil, and we will not care where it comes from.

sillydaddy wrote:It's time tree huggers like Elk come face to face with one undeniable fact.....Man will never give up using fossil fuels...and for that reason alone the pipeline needs to be built. It's expensive but not as expensive as it will be 20-30 years from now. There will come a time when oil from the Middle East will no longer be available to us....at any price.
America runs on oil, and it will keep demanding oil, and we will not care where it comes from.

Will someone tell this fool that there is not an infinite source of oil, gas, and coal on the planet...

Clowntoker's pipeline comments have left him drained of elan vital.

Will someone tell this fool that there is not an infinite source of oil, gas, and coal on the planet...

Clown, there isn't an infinite source of oxygen either, so please stop using it.

Your right Real....elk does have a comprehension problem. Of course oil is a finite natural resource...that's what I'm telling you.

Elkin's pipeline postings have been running downhill.

RealJustme wrote:

Will someone tell this fool that there is not an infinite source of oil, gas, and coal on the planet...

Clown, there isn't an infinite source of oxygen either, so please stop using it.

Strawman argument...

It is true that O2 is not infinite, but that is misleading and dishonest in the context of the ecosystem of the planet. CO2 and O2 is a self sustaining ecosystem balanced by plants and mammals.

Hydrocarbons are a resource that is being consumed by humans and not being replenished, therefore will be completely consumed...eventually.

The carbon in a number 2 pencil has more brainpower than Elkin...

It is true that O2 is not infinite, but that is misleading and dishonest in the context of the ecosystem of the planet. CO2 and O2 is a self sustaining ecosystem balanced by plants and mammals.

Hydrocarbons are a resource that is being consumed by humans and not being replenished, therefore will be completely consumed...eventually.

Dude, hydrocarbons are formed from organic matter like dead people, plants, animals, etc. As long as these organic matters are around, new hydrocarbons will be replenished. Besides what do you have against organic?

(Reuters) - A CSX Corp train hauling North Dakota crude derailed in West Virginia on Monday, setting a number of cars ablaze, destroying a house and forcing the evacuation of two towns in the second significant oil-train incident in three days....

The Missouri River and the Mississippi River will be next.....you retarded fuckers......

Reuters) - A CSX Corp train hauling North Dakota crude derailed in West Virginia on Monday, setting a number of cars ablaze, destroying a house and forcing the evacuation of two towns in the second significant oil-train incident in three days....

The Missouri River and the Mississippi River will be next.....you retarded fuckers......

Yep, the retards would rather ship oil by trains or trucks than the much safer pipeline, hope this incident wakes some people up for the need of the pipeline. If the oil spill from the derailed railroad cars does cause environmental damages it'll expedite the construction of the pipeline.

RealJustme wrote:

Reuters) - A CSX Corp train hauling North Dakota crude derailed in West Virginia on Monday, setting a number of cars ablaze, destroying a house and forcing the evacuation of two towns in the second significant oil-train incident in three days....

The Missouri River and the Mississippi River will be next.....you retarded fuckers......

Yep, the retards would rather ship oil by trains or trucks than the much safer pipeline, hope this incident wakes some people up for the need of the pipeline. If the oil spill from the derailed railroad cars does cause environmental damages it'll expedite the construction of the pipeline.

Pipelines spill more oil per unit shipped than by rail...

DUH!

May 14 (Bloomberg) -- Pipelines in North America spilled three times as much crude oil as trains for comparative distances over an eight-year period, the International Energy Agency said today in a study it based on U.S. Department of Transportation data.

The Paris-based energy adviser also said that the risk of a train spill was six times greater than a pipeline incident over the period between 2004 and 2012.

“Increasing volumes of crude oil transported by rail raise questions of safety,” the IEA said in its medium-term oil market report. “Our analysis reveals that compared to pipelines, rail incident rates are higher while the opposite holds for spill rates.”

Thanks for the link Elk, never would have thought you were a pipeline supporter.

The Paris-based energy adviser also said that the risk of a train spill was six times greater than a pipeline incident over the period between 2004 and 2012.

“Increasing volumes of crude oil transported by rail raise questions of safety,” the IEA said in its medium-term oil market report. “Our analysis reveals that compared to pipelines, rail incident rates are higher while the opposite holds for spill rates.”

It's time to get with the times and put the environment over politics, build the damn pipelines.

MOUNT CARBON, W.Va. (AP) — Oil from North Dakota's shale fields was still burning in West Virginia a day after a train carrying more than 3 million gallons of crude derailed in a snowstorm, shooting fireballs into the sky.

Hundreds of families were evacuated and nearby water treatment plants were temporarily shut down after 19 tanker cars left the tracks and caught fire, leaking oil into a Kanawha River tributary and burning a nearby house down to its foundation.

Rail shipments of crude have increased from 9,500 carloads in 2008 to more than 435,000 in 2013, driven by a boom in the Bakken oil patch of North Dakota and Montana. Limited pipeline capacity there forces about 70 percent of the crude to reach refineries by rail, according to American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers.

The downside: Trains hauling Bakken-region oil have been involved in major accidents in Virginia, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Alabama and Lac-Megantic, Quebec, where 47 people were killed by an explosive derailment in 2013. Reports of oil leaking from railroad tank cars also are increasing, from 12 in 2008 to 186 last year, according to Department of Transportation records reviewed by The Associated Press.

Just Saturday — two days before the West Virginia wreck — 29 cars of a 100-car Canadian National Railway train carrying Bakken crude derailed in a remote, wooded area about 50 miles south of Timmins, Ontario, spilling oil and catching fire.

This train was bound for an oil shipping depot in Yorktown, Virginia, using model 1232 tank cars, which include safety upgrades voluntarily adopted by the industry four years ago. An estimated $7 billion has been spent to put 57,000 of these cars into service, according to the Railway Supply Institute.

But a similar accident, also involving model 1232s, happened along the same route in Lynchburg, Virginia, last year. It was one of a series of ruptures and fires that prompted the Obama Administration to consider requiring upgrades such as thicker tanks, shields to prevent tankers from crumpling, rollover protections and electronic brakes that could make cars stop simultaneously, rather than slam into each other.

RealTool is interpreting the information he has in a meaningless, ignorant fashion.

The Pipeline Safety Trust interprets the data in a more meaningful way.

"Pipelines spill more, both based on sheer volume, and on a per-ton-mile or per-barrel-mile basis.
Rail transport accidents cause more injuries to humans on a per-barrel-mile or per-ton-mile basis.
The probability of a spill from Rail is greater on a per-barrel-mile or per-ton-mile basis, though the majority of spills tend to be quite small in volume."

In other words, while trains have more frequent spills, they are much smaller spills and do far less damage than when a pipeline has a spill. They are also accessible to clean up efforts.
A train accident spills a few thousand gallons, at most.
A pipeline spills thousands of barrels often in remote areas where it can't or won't be cleaned up.

"It's time to get with the times and put the environment over politics, build the damn pipelines."-RealTool
As RealTool just said, we should put the environment over politics, but he seems to be confused about his conclusion. Pipelines do far more damage to the environment.
Pipelines statistically do far more damage than rail.

When it comes to a barrel, Clownsucker knows whereof he speaks.

Those who have seen his portly physique know that he deeply resembles a barrel (including the bung).

A train accident spills a few thousand gallons, at most.

Elk, once again you demonstrate you have a reading comprehension problem.

MOUNT CARBON, W.Va. (AP) — Oil from North Dakota's shale fields was still burning in West Virginia a day after a train carrying more than 3 million gallons of crude derailed in a snowstorm, shooting fireballs into the sky.

Local news in VA reports that over half of the oil cargo has spilled into streams = 1.5 million gallons. Now Clown don't you feel stupid? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Tool, only 19 cars left the tracks at all and only one or two went into the river.

That is no where near 1.5 million gallons, even if it all spilled, which it didn't.
You're probably just badly confused, as always. Your reading comprehension is abysmal.
Your own referenced article says that "at least one tanker [plunged] into the river." and all of that didn't leak. Some of it burned.


You're making it up again.

Now Tool don't you feel stupid?

Now Tool don't you feel stupid?

Nope

He can't refute it, but he still doesn't have the brains to realize how stupid he is. :lol:

When it comes to a barrel, Clownsucker knows whereof he speaks.

Those who have seen his portly physique know that he deeply resembles a barrel (including the bung).

Now there's a big surprise, johnfruity can't stop talking about bungs.

Why not do it some more, Liberace.:lol:

When it comes to a barrel, Clownsucker knows whereof he speaks.

Those who have seen his portly physique know that he deeply resembles a barrel (including the bung).

Tell us again what you dream about at night, johnny. :lol:

We all bemoan the year Clownslacker studied psychology.

His nickname was "Jung Bung."

One more time, johnny, what orifice do dimwitted, flaming closet cases obsess about?

RealJustme wrote:Thanks for the link Elk, never would have thought you were a pipeline supporter.

The Paris-based energy adviser also said that the risk of a train spill was six times greater than a pipeline incident over the period between 2004 and 2012.

“Increasing volumes of crude oil transported by rail raise questions of safety,” the IEA said in its medium-term oil market report. “Our analysis reveals that compared to pipelines, rail incident rates are higher while the opposite holds for spill rates.”

It's time to get with the times and put the environment over politics, build the damn pipelines.

MOUNT CARBON, W.Va. (AP) — Oil from North Dakota's shale fields was still burning in West Virginia a day after a train carrying more than 3 million gallons of crude derailed in a snowstorm, shooting fireballs into the sky.

Hundreds of families were evacuated and nearby water treatment plants were temporarily shut down after 19 tanker cars left the tracks and caught fire, leaking oil into a Kanawha River tributary and burning a nearby house down to its foundation.

Rail shipments of crude have increased from 9,500 carloads in 2008 to more than 435,000 in 2013, driven by a boom in the Bakken oil patch of North Dakota and Montana. Limited pipeline capacity there forces about 70 percent of the crude to reach refineries by rail, according to American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers.

The downside: Trains hauling Bakken-region oil have been involved in major accidents in Virginia, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Alabama and Lac-Megantic, Quebec, where 47 people were killed by an explosive derailment in 2013. Reports of oil leaking from railroad tank cars also are increasing, from 12 in 2008 to 186 last year, according to Department of Transportation records reviewed by The Associated Press.

Just Saturday — two days before the West Virginia wreck — 29 cars of a 100-car Canadian National Railway train carrying Bakken crude derailed in a remote, wooded area about 50 miles south of Timmins, Ontario, spilling oil and catching fire.

This train was bound for an oil shipping depot in Yorktown, Virginia, using model 1232 tank cars, which include safety upgrades voluntarily adopted by the industry four years ago. An estimated $7 billion has been spent to put 57,000 of these cars into service, according to the Railway Supply Institute.

But a similar accident, also involving model 1232s, happened along the same route in Lynchburg, Virginia, last year. It was one of a series of ruptures and fires that prompted the Obama Administration to consider requiring upgrades such as thicker tanks, shields to prevent tankers from crumpling, rollover protections and electronic brakes that could make cars stop simultaneously, rather than slam into each other.

The pipeline will not be constructed because oil prices are too low.

If you want to mitigate the risk of oil spills, the answer is not a new pipeline. You build safer trains...

Ya Dummy

:lol:

If you want to mitigate the risk of oil spills, the answer is not a new pipeline. You build safer trains...

You mean bigger bumpers and seatbelts?

We would all like to mitigate the raw stupidity of Clownslacker's posts, but nothing will.

"We would all like to mitigate the raw stupidity of Clownslacker's posts, but nothing will."-johnfoumart

This is posted immediately after:

"If you want to mitigate the risk of oil spills, the answer is not a new pipeline. You build safer trains..."-Elklindo
"You mean bigger bumpers and seatbelts?"-RealTool


But does johnflavescent say a thing about the raw stupidity of The Tool?
Of course not. johnny's a dimwitted hypocrite.

The pipeline will not be constructed because oil prices are too low. ~~ elk

Elk is against the pipeline because he is not comfortable paying under 3 dollars a gallon at the pump......once the price goes up to where he can't afford it than he will be on board.

Of course idiot elk doesn't realize that by then the price of the pipeline may have doubled.

Elk wants to put seatbelts on trains to make them safer from oil spills, that's how liberals think.

^^^^^johnny, any comments about raw stupidity for RealTool?

johhny?

^^^^^johnny, any comments about raw stupidity for RealTool?

John has seen enough of your posts to know who has displayed raw stupidity. Rather than admitting pipelines are the safest way to transport oil you make a typical liberal statement that trains would be safer if we make them safer so trains are safer. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Tool, you can't simply post flat out lies about me to argue your point.

"Rather than admitting pipelines are the safest way to transport oil you make a typical liberal statement that trains would be safer if we make them safer so trains are safer. "-RealLiar

I never said that. You made it up, as you and your handlers make up nearly everything you post.

When you do that I know you've been beaten into helplessness, just as johnforbes is intellectually helpless.