Obama: What an IDIOT!!!

[healthmyths]

REPORT: Obama to reject permit for Keystone oil pipeline!

Where is his intelligence?
This was suppose to be the "smartest" President..
YET he'd rather have 1 million barrels of oil in a risky sea tanker going to China per day with the higher risk of environmental damage
then..
the extremely LOW LOW risk that only 300 barrels in ONE mile of pipeline of 2,147 miles of 700,000 barrels going to the USA might LEAK into holding pools?


How absolutely f..king DUMB!

 

[healthmyths]

IF this rejection isn't further proof Obama HATES big OIL, HATES business AND HATES Americans working .. ...

 

[konradv]

REPORT: Obama to reject permit for Keystone oil pipeline!

Where is his intelligence?
This was suppose to be the "smartest" President..
YET he'd rather have 1 million barrels of oil in a risky sea tanker going to China per day with the higher risk of environmental damage
then..
the extremely LOW LOW risk that only 300 barrels in ONE mile of pipeline of 2,147 miles of 700,000 barrels going to the USA might LEAK into holding pools?

What's dumb is accepting your post at face value. What makes the tanker riskier than the pipeline? Also, we're selling something TO China, instead of the other way around. Let them deal with 19th century technology. We need to be moving towards 21st century solutions.

ITER - the way to new energy

 

[Truthseeker420]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...tar-sands-pipeline-would-drive-up-prices.html

 

[AlanF]

President Obama and his trusted advisors may feel that the safety of the American people, and the natural habitant along the prospective route should override any deal to make money without a sound plan in place to ensure quality of life.

 

[Decepticon]

Yes, because fossil fuel extraction is the FUTURE of energy production.

Not that FREE STUFF from the sun and wind.

 

[Lovebears65]

Yes, because fossil fuel extraction is the FUTURE of energy production.

Not that FREE STUFF from the sun and wind.

Tell that to all the millions of people RIGHT now that is unemployed and could benefit from this!!

 

[healthmyths]

REPORT: Obama to reject permit for Keystone oil pipeline!

Where is his intelligence?
This was suppose to be the "smartest" President..
YET he'd rather have 1 million barrels of oil in a risky sea tanker going to China per day with the higher risk of environmental damage
then..
the extremely LOW LOW risk that only 300 barrels in ONE mile of pipeline of 2,147 miles of 700,000 barrels going to the USA might LEAK into holding pools?

What's dumb is accepting your post at face value. What makes the tanker riskier than the pipeline? Also, we're selling something TO China, instead of the other way around. Let them deal with 19th century technology. We need to be moving towards 21st century solutions.

ITER - the way to new energy

My GOD.. no wonder people like you are proof of Darwin!
A) Tankers holding 1 million per day would equal 700,000 pipeline one day!
B) TANKERS go by SEA.. pipeline BURIED!
C) Tankers are more prone to accidents because of weather, human error etc.
Pipeline is just THAT! When last time your water pipe broke and YOU didn't KNOW and didn't care BUT believe me 300 barrels NOT going through one mile of PIPE is noticed !
D) IDIOT the CHINESE will buy the Canadian OIL.. THUS off the market and making
the USA have to pay MORE on the open market!


"Technology" like Solyndra??? WHAT happened with that bright star?
How many Volts sold?
GM has estimated they’ve sold 6,000 Volts so far.
According to a Mackinac Center study of government subsidies throughout the manufacturing and distribution chain, the actual cost of the vehicle is almost $300,000 — with a quarter-million dollars of taxpayer subsidies going into every vehicle (via the Drudge Report and David Freddoso):
Gov’t subsidies for Chevy Volt up to $250,000 per car? « Hot Air

"Technology".. yea.....!

 

[healthmyths]

President Obama and his trusted advisors may feel that the safety of the American people, and the natural habitant along the prospective route should override any deal to make money without a sound plan in place to ensure quality of life.

So you like Obama think shipping 1 million barrels a day by the sea in a tanker
(equal to 700,000 barrels in pipeline) IS SAFER then a pipeline buried underground with monitors every xx mile and shut off valves that will limit to at most 300 barrels in one mile is SAFER???

WHAT is your conception of oil tankers versus pipelines?

WHICH would create MORE environmental damage?
THE TANKER!!!! THE PIPELINE creates LESS damage PLUS YOU idiot..
WHERE do you think Canada will sell that oil then???
CHINA which will require the shipping by TANKER each DAY!!!
FACTS are so hard to deal with!!

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm glad he called their bluff. China doesn't have the type of refineries at this point to process the nasty Bitumen from Canada's tar sands. I think he should approve the XL extention from Oklahoma to Texas. Better yet, open up the federal water off Fla. and the eastern Gulf of Mexico, lets tap that!

 

[BlindBoo]

President Obama and his trusted advisors may feel that the safety of the American people, and the natural habitant along the prospective route should override any deal to make money without a sound plan in place to ensure quality of life.

So you like Obama think shipping 1 million barrels a day by the sea in a tanker
(equal to 700,000 barrels in pipeline) IS SAFER then a pipeline buried underground with monitors every xx mile and shut off valves that will limit to at most 300 barrels in one mile is SAFER???

WHAT is your conception of oil tankers versus pipelines?

WHICH would create MORE environmental damage?
THE TANKER!!!! THE PIPELINE creates LESS damage PLUS YOU idiot..
WHERE do you think Canada will sell that oil then???
CHINA which will require the shipping by TANKER each DAY!!!
FACTS are so hard to deal with!!

First Obama isn't shipping anything. It would be Canada doing the shipping. And it's not really crude oil. The stuff is so thick that they need to dilute it to ship it. Event still if they plan to ship it anywhere there is quite a bit of opposition.

http://www.nrdc.org/international/files/PipelineandTankerFS.pdf

 

[Teals_Of_Wonder]

Obama is so out of whack, He's already lost the Angry and Squirming Vibrator Vote
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvk-2BiTIck]Obama A Complete Idiot - The Unscensord Vibrator Version - YouTube[/ame]

 

[healthmyths]

President Obama and his trusted advisors may feel that the safety of the American people, and the natural habitant along the prospective route should override any deal to make money without a sound plan in place to ensure quality of life.

So you like Obama think shipping 1 million barrels a day by the sea in a tanker
(equal to 700,000 barrels in pipeline) IS SAFER then a pipeline buried underground with monitors every xx mile and shut off valves that will limit to at most 300 barrels in one mile is SAFER???

WHAT is your conception of oil tankers versus pipelines?

WHICH would create MORE environmental damage?
THE TANKER!!!! THE PIPELINE creates LESS damage PLUS YOU idiot..
WHERE do you think Canada will sell that oil then???
CHINA which will require the shipping by TANKER each DAY!!!
FACTS are so hard to deal with!!

First Obama isn't shipping anything. It would be Canada doing the shipping. And it's not really crude oil. The stuff is so thick that they need to dilute it to ship it. Event still if they plan to ship it anywhere there is quite a bit of opposition.

http://www.nrdc.org/international/files/PipelineandTankerFS.pdf

FIRST IT doesn't make a difference IF OBAMA/Canada who shitting cares?
IT IS 1 million barrels of oil thick,etc. worse then!

Simply put WHICH IS A BIGGER NUMBER???
1 million barrels by Tanker prone to human errors, Acts of GOD?????
OR
300 barrels which is what one mile of 2,147 miles holds!

WHICH IS THE BIGGER NUMBER??

DUH.. wouldn't you think no you aren't thinking.. the larger number transported by the riskier mechanism would have a greater affect then a smaller number shipped underground???

HOW f..,ing stupid! What are people like you thinking?

I am asking a very fundamental question here..
WHICH IS BIGGER 1 million barrels or 300 barrels???
CAN YOU figure that out???

 

[healthmyths]

I am totally flabbergasted!

I asked which is a greater risk to the environment:
1 million barrels by sea or
300 barrels buried underground of damaging more of the environment?


WHICH has the greater RISK of occurring?
Sea transport docking loading, sailing, docking unloading all events handled by humans!
OR
By pipeline with monitors only having to watch the flow!

WHICH has the greater risk of an accident?

 

[healthmyths]

REPORT: Obama to reject permit for Keystone oil pipeline!

Where is his intelligence?
This was suppose to be the "smartest" President..
YET he'd rather have 1 million barrels of oil in a risky sea tanker going to China per day with the higher risk of environmental damage
then..
the extremely LOW LOW risk that only 300 barrels in ONE mile of pipeline of 2,147 miles of 700,000 barrels going to the USA might LEAK into holding pools?

What's dumb is accepting your post at face value. What makes the tanker riskier than the pipeline? Also, we're selling something TO China, instead of the other way around. Let them deal with 19th century technology. We need to be moving towards 21st century solutions.

ITER - the way to new energy

WHO is selling idiot? THE USA is buying at a great discount..
1) no costs in tanker rental
2) considerably LESS environment cleanup expenses
3) NO jobs in shipping OIL to China!

 

[LordBrownTrout]

With O killing jobs being proffered by private enterprise, is there any state outside of Ca, NY, or Il, that he possibly has a chance at in November? This is beyond bizarre.

 

[g5000]

Yes, because fossil fuel extraction is the FUTURE of energy production.

Not that FREE STUFF from the sun and wind.

Sun and wind power wouldn't even make a tiny dent in the amount of energy being produced by fossil fuels.

 

[Claudette]

If wind and solar were viable and affordable it would already be in widespread use.

It ain't.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Yes, because fossil fuel extraction is the FUTURE of energy production.

Not that FREE STUFF from the sun and wind.

Sun and wind power wouldn't even make a tiny dent in the amount of energy being produced by fossil fuels.

Exactly. They're supplemental, at best, on a residential level. I would seriously look into outfitting my next house with solar and wind capabilities if it were practical but I just can't justify it when it takes forty years to see a return on investment.

 

[Katzndogz]

A tanker that has an oil spill is going to be of much greater propaganda purpose than a pipeline with a leak.