Most Republicans Few Democrats Support Keystone Pipeline Land Grab?

[tinydancer]

How did Dante miss Keystone 1 or 11 or all the other pipelines?

 

[tinydancer]

28 Democrats joined the Republican caucus in passing the bill:

Brad Ashford (NE-02)
Sanford Bishop (GA-02)
Bob Brady (PA-01)
Cheri Bustos (IL-17)
Jim Clyburn (SC-06)
Jim Cooper (TN-05)
Jim Costa (CA-16)
Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
Mike Doyle (PA-14)
Gwen Graham (FL-02)
Al Green (TX-09)
Gene Green (TX-29)
Sheila Jackson Lee (TX-18)
Dan Lipinski (IL-03)
David Loebsack (IA-02)
Sean Maloney (NY-18)
Patrick Murphy (FL-18)
Rick Nolan (MN-08)
Donald Norcross (NJ-01)
Colin Peterson (MN-07)
Cedric Richmond (LA-02)
Kurt Schrader (OR-05)
David Scott (GA-13)
Terri Sewell (AL-07)
Albio Sires (NJ-08)
Marc Veasey (TX-33)
Filemon Vela (TX-34)
Tim Walz (MN-01)

Ruben Hinojosa (TX-15) and Bennie Thompson (MS-02) were not in attendance

Explain to me Dante why you only care about this pipeline?

 

[BULLDOG]

Immanent domain is used much more often than it should be, but it has never been given to a foreign country.

What ever, dudette, the individual states exercise their immanent domain, not the company.

And I agree, it is used way too often.

Eminent domain is designed to transfer control of property to the government for the public good. Exactly how is this line be for the public good? It's not for the jobs, because there are few, it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market. Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public

Ok, I'm going to address your talking points one more time.

1. "Exactly how is this line be for the public good?"
It will increase the supply of energy on the world market.

2. "It's not for the jobs, because there are few,"
There will 10s of thousands of short term construction jobs, and many refining and distribution jobs for the product produced.

3. "it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market."
It will aid in energy independence because it will also transport oil from at least 3 US States, OK, WY and ND.

4. "It will not lower our price for gas, but could possibly increase it in some areas of the country."
Why do you think gas prices are falling in the WHOLE country now, can you say supply is greater than demand, not just in the US, but world wide.

5. "Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public"
The land use for 99.9% of the area involved will not change after the line is in, so how are they taking anything? Like I said earlier any additional supply will improve the quality of life of all citizens with lower energy cost.

"The steepening drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks — spurred by soaring domestic energy production and Saudi discounts for crude oil at a time of faltering global demand — is set to provide the United States economy with a multibillion-dollar boost through the holiday season and beyond."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[/QUOTE]


1. How will it increase the supply on the world market by going through the US any more than it would increase it going across Canadian land to a port?

2. Bullshit. The first half didn't supply 1/10 of the jobs you claim. My brother worked on it. Refineries are already scaled up for it, and might add one or two maintenance men, but it's mostly a matter of changing a few numbers on the computers in the control room. There will be no increase of workers in the refineries. All the claims of great job increases are lies.

3.If they want a line to transport domestic oil, they can lay one, or use existing lines. That doesn't require building a line to Canada.

4. The price drop might last a year or two, but if it gets much lower, many of the small producers will close down the wells and sell out to the big producers who will limit production and run the price back up. There is a glut of oil already without the bitumen. The price can't drop much more if at all.

5. That's just too dumb to bother with an answer. Obviously you have never seen what happens when a pipeline is laid.

The only boost will be from a very few temporary jobs. The only real measurable advantage will be for a Canadian company, and the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Not the workers at the refineries, just the refineries themselves.

Your claims are crap and have been proven to be crap many times.

A $2.00 reduction in gas prices save Americans 269 billion dollars a year, you can stick to your commie talking points all you want. I'll gladly take the savings, since I'm on a fixed income, the savings have been like a big pay raise for me and millions of other seniors and the poor.

Isn't it great we have that gas price drop without that pipeline? You don't expect it to drop much more do you?

 

[OKTexas]

What ever, dudette, the individual states exercise their immanent domain, not the company.

And I agree, it is used way too often.

Eminent domain is designed to transfer control of property to the government for the public good. Exactly how is this line be for the public good? It's not for the jobs, because there are few, it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market. Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public

Ok, I'm going to address your talking points one more time.

1. "Exactly how is this line be for the public good?"
It will increase the supply of energy on the world market.

2. "It's not for the jobs, because there are few,"
There will 10s of thousands of short term construction jobs, and many refining and distribution jobs for the product produced.

3. "it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market."
It will aid in energy independence because it will also transport oil from at least 3 US States, OK, WY and ND.

4. "It will not lower our price for gas, but could possibly increase it in some areas of the country."
Why do you think gas prices are falling in the WHOLE country now, can you say supply is greater than demand, not just in the US, but world wide.

5. "Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public"
The land use for 99.9% of the area involved will not change after the line is in, so how are they taking anything? Like I said earlier any additional supply will improve the quality of life of all citizens with lower energy cost.

"The steepening drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks — spurred by soaring domestic energy production and Saudi discounts for crude oil at a time of faltering global demand — is set to provide the United States economy with a multibillion-dollar boost through the holiday season and beyond."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[/QUOTE]


1. How will it increase the supply on the world market by going through the US any more than it would increase it going across Canadian land to a port?

2. Bullshit. The first half didn't supply 1/10 of the jobs you claim. My brother worked on it. Refineries are already scaled up for it, and might add one or two maintenance men, but it's mostly a matter of changing a few numbers on the computers in the control room. There will be no increase of workers in the refineries. All the claims of great job increases are lies.

3.If they want a line to transport domestic oil, they can lay one, or use existing lines. That doesn't require building a line to Canada.

4. The price drop might last a year or two, but if it gets much lower, many of the small producers will close down the wells and sell out to the big producers who will limit production and run the price back up. There is a glut of oil already without the bitumen. The price can't drop much more if at all.

5. That's just too dumb to bother with an answer. Obviously you have never seen what happens when a pipeline is laid.

The only boost will be from a very few temporary jobs. The only real measurable advantage will be for a Canadian company, and the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Not the workers at the refineries, just the refineries themselves.

Your claims are crap and have been proven to be crap many times.

A $2.00 reduction in gas prices save Americans 269 billion dollars a year, you can stick to your commie talking points all you want. I'll gladly take the savings, since I'm on a fixed income, the savings have been like a big pay raise for me and millions of other seniors and the poor.

Isn't it great we have that gas price drop without that pipeline? You don't expect it to drop much more do you?

The oil is still coming to market, can you say trains, a much less safe and more expensive way than a pipeline. I wonder how many creeks and rivers those trains cross while winding their way from Canada to the Gulf coast?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

American conservatives hate Canadian health care yet run to Canada to buy their drugs. They hate the Canadians but will support taking land away from Americans in order to fill the pockets of Canadian companies

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What ever, dudette, the individual states exercise their immanent domain, not the company.

And I agree, it is used way too often.

Eminent domain is designed to transfer control of property to the government for the public good. Exactly how is this line be for the public good? It's not for the jobs, because there are few, it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market. Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public

Ok, I'm going to address your talking points one more time.

1. "Exactly how is this line be for the public good?"
It will increase the supply of energy on the world market.

2. "It's not for the jobs, because there are few,"
There will 10s of thousands of short term construction jobs, and many refining and distribution jobs for the product produced.

3. "it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market."
It will aid in energy independence because it will also transport oil from at least 3 US States, OK, WY and ND.

4. "It will not lower our price for gas, but could possibly increase it in some areas of the country."
Why do you think gas prices are falling in the WHOLE country now, can you say supply is greater than demand, not just in the US, but world wide.

5. "Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public"
The land use for 99.9% of the area involved will not change after the line is in, so how are they taking anything? Like I said earlier any additional supply will improve the quality of life of all citizens with lower energy cost.

"The steepening drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks — spurred by soaring domestic energy production and Saudi discounts for crude oil at a time of faltering global demand — is set to provide the United States economy with a multibillion-dollar boost through the holiday season and beyond."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[/QUOTE]


1. How will it increase the supply on the world market by going through the US any more than it would increase it going across Canadian land to a port?

2. Bullshit. The first half didn't supply 1/10 of the jobs you claim. My brother worked on it. Refineries are already scaled up for it, and might add one or two maintenance men, but it's mostly a matter of changing a few numbers on the computers in the control room. There will be no increase of workers in the refineries. All the claims of great job increases are lies.

3.If they want a line to transport domestic oil, they can lay one, or use existing lines. That doesn't require building a line to Canada.

4. The price drop might last a year or two, but if it gets much lower, many of the small producers will close down the wells and sell out to the big producers who will limit production and run the price back up. There is a glut of oil already without the bitumen. The price can't drop much more if at all.

5. That's just too dumb to bother with an answer. Obviously you have never seen what happens when a pipeline is laid.

The only boost will be from a very few temporary jobs. The only real measurable advantage will be for a Canadian company, and the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Not the workers at the refineries, just the refineries themselves.

Your claims are crap and have been proven to be crap many times.

A $2.00 reduction in gas prices save Americans 269 billion dollars a year, you can stick to your commie talking points all you want. I'll gladly take the savings, since I'm on a fixed income, the savings have been like a big pay raise for me and millions of other seniors and the poor.

Isn't it great we have that gas price drop without that pipeline? You don't expect it to drop much more do you?

thank you President Obama

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

28 Democrats joined the Republican caucus in passing the bill:

Brad Ashford (NE-02)
Sanford Bishop (GA-02)
Bob Brady (PA-01)
Cheri Bustos (IL-17)
Jim Clyburn (SC-06)
Jim Cooper (TN-05)
Jim Costa (CA-16)
Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
Mike Doyle (PA-14)
Gwen Graham (FL-02)
Al Green (TX-09)
Gene Green (TX-29)
Sheila Jackson Lee (TX-18)
Dan Lipinski (IL-03)
David Loebsack (IA-02)
Sean Maloney (NY-18)
Patrick Murphy (FL-18)
Rick Nolan (MN-08)
Donald Norcross (NJ-01)
Colin Peterson (MN-07)
Cedric Richmond (LA-02)
Kurt Schrader (OR-05)
David Scott (GA-13)
Terri Sewell (AL-07)
Albio Sires (NJ-08)
Marc Veasey (TX-33)
Filemon Vela (TX-34)
Tim Walz (MN-01)

Ruben Hinojosa (TX-15) and Bennie Thompson (MS-02) were not in attendance

Explain to me Dante why you only care about this pipeline?

because it's in the courts?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Eminent domain is designed to transfer control of property to the government for the public good. Exactly how is this line be for the public good? It's not for the jobs, because there are few, it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market. Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public

Ok, I'm going to address your talking points one more time.

1. "Exactly how is this line be for the public good?"
It will increase the supply of energy on the world market.

2. "It's not for the jobs, because there are few,"
There will 10s of thousands of short term construction jobs, and many refining and distribution jobs for the product produced.

3. "it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market."
It will aid in energy independence because it will also transport oil from at least 3 US States, OK, WY and ND.

4. "It will not lower our price for gas, but could possibly increase it in some areas of the country."
Why do you think gas prices are falling in the WHOLE country now, can you say supply is greater than demand, not just in the US, but world wide.

5. "Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public"
The land use for 99.9% of the area involved will not change after the line is in, so how are they taking anything? Like I said earlier any additional supply will improve the quality of life of all citizens with lower energy cost.

"The steepening drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks — spurred by soaring domestic energy production and Saudi discounts for crude oil at a time of faltering global demand — is set to provide the United States economy with a multibillion-dollar boost through the holiday season and beyond."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[/QUOTE]


1. How will it increase the supply on the world market by going through the US any more than it would increase it going across Canadian land to a port?

2. Bullshit. The first half didn't supply 1/10 of the jobs you claim. My brother worked on it. Refineries are already scaled up for it, and might add one or two maintenance men, but it's mostly a matter of changing a few numbers on the computers in the control room. There will be no increase of workers in the refineries. All the claims of great job increases are lies.

3.If they want a line to transport domestic oil, they can lay one, or use existing lines. That doesn't require building a line to Canada.

4. The price drop might last a year or two, but if it gets much lower, many of the small producers will close down the wells and sell out to the big producers who will limit production and run the price back up. There is a glut of oil already without the bitumen. The price can't drop much more if at all.

5. That's just too dumb to bother with an answer. Obviously you have never seen what happens when a pipeline is laid.

The only boost will be from a very few temporary jobs. The only real measurable advantage will be for a Canadian company, and the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Not the workers at the refineries, just the refineries themselves.

Your claims are crap and have been proven to be crap many times.

A $2.00 reduction in gas prices save Americans 269 billion dollars a year, you can stick to your commie talking points all you want. I'll gladly take the savings, since I'm on a fixed income, the savings have been like a big pay raise for me and millions of other seniors and the poor.

Isn't it great we have that gas price drop without that pipeline? You don't expect it to drop much more do you?

The oil is still coming to market, can you say trains, a much less safe and more expensive way than a pipeline. I wonder how many creeks and rivers those trains cross while winding their way from Canada to the Gulf coast?

land. American's land. People like you supported that crazy rancher

 

[OKTexas]

Ok, I'm going to address your talking points one more time.

1. "Exactly how is this line be for the public good?"
It will increase the supply of energy on the world market.

2. "It's not for the jobs, because there are few,"
There will 10s of thousands of short term construction jobs, and many refining and distribution jobs for the product produced.

3. "it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market."
It will aid in energy independence because it will also transport oil from at least 3 US States, OK, WY and ND.

4. "It will not lower our price for gas, but could possibly increase it in some areas of the country."
Why do you think gas prices are falling in the WHOLE country now, can you say supply is greater than demand, not just in the US, but world wide.

5. "Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public"
The land use for 99.9% of the area involved will not change after the line is in, so how are they taking anything? Like I said earlier any additional supply will improve the quality of life of all citizens with lower energy cost.

"The steepening drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks — spurred by soaring domestic energy production and Saudi discounts for crude oil at a time of faltering global demand — is set to provide the United States economy with a multibillion-dollar boost through the holiday season and beyond."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[/QUOTE]


1. How will it increase the supply on the world market by going through the US any more than it would increase it going across Canadian land to a port?

2. Bullshit. The first half didn't supply 1/10 of the jobs you claim. My brother worked on it. Refineries are already scaled up for it, and might add one or two maintenance men, but it's mostly a matter of changing a few numbers on the computers in the control room. There will be no increase of workers in the refineries. All the claims of great job increases are lies.

3.If they want a line to transport domestic oil, they can lay one, or use existing lines. That doesn't require building a line to Canada.

4. The price drop might last a year or two, but if it gets much lower, many of the small producers will close down the wells and sell out to the big producers who will limit production and run the price back up. There is a glut of oil already without the bitumen. The price can't drop much more if at all.

5. That's just too dumb to bother with an answer. Obviously you have never seen what happens when a pipeline is laid.

The only boost will be from a very few temporary jobs. The only real measurable advantage will be for a Canadian company, and the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Not the workers at the refineries, just the refineries themselves.

Your claims are crap and have been proven to be crap many times.

A $2.00 reduction in gas prices save Americans 269 billion dollars a year, you can stick to your commie talking points all you want. I'll gladly take the savings, since I'm on a fixed income, the savings have been like a big pay raise for me and millions of other seniors and the poor.

Isn't it great we have that gas price drop without that pipeline? You don't expect it to drop much more do you?

The oil is still coming to market, can you say trains, a much less safe and more expensive way than a pipeline. I wonder how many creeks and rivers those trains cross while winding their way from Canada to the Gulf coast?

land. American's land. People like you supported that crazy rancher

Talk about being stuck on stupid, good job dainty boy.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

A $2.00 reduction in gas prices save Americans 269 billion dollars a year, you can stick to your commie talking points all you want. I'll gladly take the savings, since I'm on a fixed income, the savings have been like a big pay raise for me and millions of other seniors and the poor.

Isn't it great we have that gas price drop without that pipeline? You don't expect it to drop much more do you?

The oil is still coming to market, can you say trains, a much less safe and more expensive way than a pipeline. I wonder how many creeks and rivers those trains cross while winding their way from Canada to the Gulf coast?

land. American's land. People like you supported that crazy rancher

Talk about being stuck on stupid, good job dainty boy.

Okay, you supported the government over Cliven Bundy

 

[BULLDOG]

Eminent domain is designed to transfer control of property to the government for the public good. Exactly how is this line be for the public good? It's not for the jobs, because there are few, it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market. Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public

Ok, I'm going to address your talking points one more time.

1. "Exactly how is this line be for the public good?"
It will increase the supply of energy on the world market.

2. "It's not for the jobs, because there are few,"
There will 10s of thousands of short term construction jobs, and many refining and distribution jobs for the product produced.

3. "it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market."
It will aid in energy independence because it will also transport oil from at least 3 US States, OK, WY and ND.

4. "It will not lower our price for gas, but could possibly increase it in some areas of the country."
Why do you think gas prices are falling in the WHOLE country now, can you say supply is greater than demand, not just in the US, but world wide.

5. "Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public"
The land use for 99.9% of the area involved will not change after the line is in, so how are they taking anything? Like I said earlier any additional supply will improve the quality of life of all citizens with lower energy cost.

"The steepening drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks — spurred by soaring domestic energy production and Saudi discounts for crude oil at a time of faltering global demand — is set to provide the United States economy with a multibillion-dollar boost through the holiday season and beyond."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[/QUOTE]


1. How will it increase the supply on the world market by going through the US any more than it would increase it going across Canadian land to a port?

2. Bullshit. The first half didn't supply 1/10 of the jobs you claim. My brother worked on it. Refineries are already scaled up for it, and might add one or two maintenance men, but it's mostly a matter of changing a few numbers on the computers in the control room. There will be no increase of workers in the refineries. All the claims of great job increases are lies.

3.If they want a line to transport domestic oil, they can lay one, or use existing lines. That doesn't require building a line to Canada.

4. The price drop might last a year or two, but if it gets much lower, many of the small producers will close down the wells and sell out to the big producers who will limit production and run the price back up. There is a glut of oil already without the bitumen. The price can't drop much more if at all.

5. That's just too dumb to bother with an answer. Obviously you have never seen what happens when a pipeline is laid.

The only boost will be from a very few temporary jobs. The only real measurable advantage will be for a Canadian company, and the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Not the workers at the refineries, just the refineries themselves.

Your claims are crap and have been proven to be crap many times.

A $2.00 reduction in gas prices save Americans 269 billion dollars a year, you can stick to your commie talking points all you want. I'll gladly take the savings, since I'm on a fixed income, the savings have been like a big pay raise for me and millions of other seniors and the poor.

Isn't it great we have that gas price drop without that pipeline? You don't expect it to drop much more do you?

The oil is still coming to market, can you say trains, a much less safe and more expensive way than a pipeline. I wonder how many creeks and rivers those trains cross while winding their way from Canada to the Gulf coast?

Not in the volume that line would have, and I don't care abut the expense. It's their product, and their concern about the expense, not ours. If having that line would be such a great thing for the US, why doesn't Canada want it on their land?

 

[BULLDOG]

A $2.00 reduction in gas prices save Americans 269 billion dollars a year, you can stick to your commie talking points all you want. I'll gladly take the savings, since I'm on a fixed income, the savings have been like a big pay raise for me and millions of other seniors and the poor.

Isn't it great we have that gas price drop without that pipeline? You don't expect it to drop much more do you?

The oil is still coming to market, can you say trains, a much less safe and more expensive way than a pipeline. I wonder how many creeks and rivers those trains cross while winding their way from Canada to the Gulf coast?

land. American's land. People like you supported that crazy rancher

Talk about being stuck on stupid, good job dainty boy.

You are the one who keeps making claims that have been proven wrong so many times. You either have stock in keystone, or are another one of those who care more about the rich than you do about yourself and your own family. Pretty stupid.