Most Republicans Few Democrats Support Keystone Pipeline Land Grab? There are the state politicians and the national politicians. The GOP overwhelmingly supports a foreign company taking land from Americans. Why?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We built the freeways, not a Russian company.You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
We built the freeways, not a Russian company.You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Forcing Americans to sell their land to a Canadian company is like forcing Americans to sell land for infrastructure? How so?
The pipeline is not going to be part of an American infrastructure for Americans to use/enjoy.
Matthew GOP has been against land grabs that would benefit Americans. Why attack without explaining?
Land grab? Oh, so that's the new narrative?Most Republicans Few Democrats Support Keystone Pipeline Land Grab? There are the state politicians and the national politicians. The GOP overwhelmingly supports a foreign company taking land from Americans. Why?
Most Republicans Few Democrats Support Keystone Pipeline Land Grab? There are the state politicians and the national politicians. The GOP overwhelmingly supports a foreign company taking land from Americans. Why?
If the land can be bought without the use of eminent domain I am all for it.
In the last few years I have witnessed many miles of gas pipeling being run and I have not heard a word about the use of eminent domain. If it can be done to run pipelines in the east it certainly can be done in the west.
That's a good thing...now, all that are needed in the Senate are 14 democrats to cross the aisle.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
Stop the nonsense.Forcing Americans to sell their land to a Canadian company?
If the land can be bought without the use of eminent domain I am all for it.
In the last few years I have witnessed many miles of gas pipeling being run and I have not heard a word about the use of eminent domain. If it can be done to run pipelines in the east it certainly can be done in the west.
There has been a legal struggle for years, because Trans-Canada has been bullying ranchers with the threat of imminent domain the whole time:
Pipeline to Hell - Broowaha
-
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
We built the freeways, not a Russian company.You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Forcing Americans to sell their land to a Canadian company is like forcing Americans to sell land for infrastructure? How so?
The pipeline is not going to be part of an American infrastructure for Americans to use/enjoy.
Matthew GOP has been against land grabs that would benefit Americans. Why attack without explaining?
Little Dainty Boy doesn't understand the difference between paying for a right of way and purchasing land, most of the land in question is agricultural and the pipeline will have very little impact on the lands usage.
If the land can be bought without the use of eminent domain I am all for it.
In the last few years I have witnessed many miles of gas pipeling being run and I have not heard a word about the use of eminent domain. If it can be done to run pipelines in the east it certainly can be done in the west.
There has been a legal struggle for years, because Trans-Canada has been bullying ranchers with the threat of imminent domain the whole time:
Pipeline to Hell - Broowaha
-
This is where a leader steps in and tell Trans-Canada that they need to buy the land. Put up or shut up. It can be done. If this is just ranch land then bury the damn thing and there shouldn't be any complaints.
This is the same argument we had when the Alaskan pipeline was built. Nothing bad has happened, yet.