How YOUR Senator Voted On Keystone XL

[JoeNormal]

Both Utah senators are Koch suckers. Big surprise.

And George Soros and Powell Jobs contributed as much or more to the Democrat effort. So what?

I probably gave the impression that I'm a big fan of Democrats when I'm not. The only thing positive I can say about them is that they're not Republicans. Tell me what Soros and Powell have done and maybe I'll condemn them as harshly as I do the Kochs.

Soros' currency trading record is pretty much common knowledge to anyone that ever looks at the dark side of their icons. Why not do a bit of research.

As for Powell Jobs, I'm sure she is a nice lady, but she does spread around Steve's apple bucks to any Progressive that asks.

I'm aware of some of what Soros has done and all I can say is that extreme wealth is not a good thing. It's not good when it influences either side of the political spectrum but unfortunately, it seems to be biased toward the right which makes it especially self serving.

 

[Ernie S.]

Well, extreme wealth is behind the hold up of Keystone. Warren Buffet stands to make more billions shipping oil by rail.

 

[JoeNormal]

Well, extreme wealth is behind the hold up of Keystone. Warren Buffet stands to make more billions shipping oil by rail.

I'll be no more of a supporter of Warren Buffet transporting this stuff than I would be of the Kochs.

 

[Newby]

Both of PA Senators voted for the passage. Nice to see some bi-partisan common sense from my elected officials.

That's because it's a huge industry in PA and creating a lot of jobs, Casey would have been stupid to have voted against it if he wanted reelected.

 

[Redfish]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

are you really that ignorant? the country is already crisscrossed by pipelines, its the safest way to move oil. Would you feel better if it was on trains and trucks?

opposition to this is lunacy, it is not based on facts. But I am glad that the dems in the senate dumped on Mary Landrieu.

 

[Ernie S.]

Well, extreme wealth is behind the hold up of Keystone. Warren Buffet stands to make more billions shipping oil by rail.

I'll be no more of a supporter of Warren Buffet transporting this stuff than I would be of the Kochs.

The Kocks don't do pipelines as far as I know. They do own and lease super tankers. They actually move a commodity and create wealth. George Soros destroys economies to make his billions.

 

[jillian]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

 

[jillian]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

are you really that ignorant? the country is already crisscrossed by pipelines, its the safest way to move oil. Would you feel better if it was on trains and trucks?

opposition to this is lunacy, it is not based on facts. But I am glad that the dems in the senate dumped on Mary Landrieu.

once again, it's always amusing to have an ignorant winger insult *my* intelligence. if it makes you feel better about yourself have at it.

the facts are in the article I linked. opposition is appropriate.

wingers like you have trouble with fact-based reality. I understand.

 

[martybegan]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

 

[jillian]

Both Utah senators are Koch suckers. Big surprise.

And George Soros and Powell Jobs contributed as much or more to the Democrat effort. So what?

I probably gave the impression that I'm a big fan of Democrats when I'm not. The only thing positive I can say about them is that they're not Republicans. Tell me what Soros and Powell have done and maybe I'll condemn them as harshly as I do the Kochs.

Soros' currency trading record is pretty much common knowledge to anyone that ever looks at the dark side of their icons. Why not do a bit of research.

As for Powell Jobs, I'm sure she is a nice lady, but she does spread around Steve's apple bucks to any Progressive that asks.

I have no interest in soros. the wingers certainly do, though.

you should concern yourself more with the Koch's and the lies they tell the right.

and neither soros nor powell nor apple have anything to do with the fraud of the pipeline.

 

[jillian]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

all jobs are not equal. some benefit us as a society (for example, infrastructure jobs like roads, high speed transit, bridges, tunnels, etc). the pipeline benefits no one but a Canadian oil company and the multi-national corporations while undermining our environment and, arguably violating a number of treaties with native American tribes along the way. (though I have far more looking into that to do before I accept it as true).

I am making no observation as to engineering techniques. I leave that to you and others who know about that area. I am, however, commenting on the utility of a project that benefits no one but multi-national corporations and, ultimately, employes a handful of people.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

So those jobs are fake ones?,you have no idea what you are blabbering about. A pipeline system this size once complete will have many more than 44 jobs,it will provide thousands while it is under construction.

She said "permanent" jobs.

 

[Redfish]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

are you really that ignorant? the country is already crisscrossed by pipelines, its the safest way to move oil. Would you feel better if it was on trains and trucks?

opposition to this is lunacy, it is not based on facts. But I am glad that the dems in the senate dumped on Mary Landrieu.

once again, it's always amusing to have an ignorant winger insult *my* intelligence. if it makes you feel better about yourself have at it.

the facts are in the article I linked. opposition is appropriate.

wingers like you have trouble with fact-based reality. I understand.

your ignorance knows no bounds. You don't want keystone because you don't want fossil fuels.

So, tell us what currently available non-fossil energy source can do the following:
1. power our cities
2. power an 18 wheeler from coast to coast
3. power an airplane across the country
4. keep you, and everyone else, warm in winter and cool in summer

Just 4 things, what will replace fossil fuels in the next 50 years to do those 4 things?

 

[jillian]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

So those jobs are fake ones?,you have no idea what you are blabbering about. A pipeline system this size once complete will have many more than 44 jobs,it will provide thousands while it is under construction.

She said "permanent" jobs.

indeed, I did. comprehension isn't his thing. (though it looks like the number of jobs may be a whopping 50 or so).

 

[Redfish]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

So those jobs are fake ones?,you have no idea what you are blabbering about. A pipeline system this size once complete will have many more than 44 jobs,it will provide thousands while it is under construction.

She said "permanent" jobs.

indeed, I did. comprehension isn't his thing. (though it looks like the number of jobs may be a whopping 50 or so).

cheaper energy will create millions of jobs, thats the long term affect of keystone. it will also help us reduce our dependence on the mideast ragheads who hate us.

 

[martybegan]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

all jobs are not equal. some benefit us as a society (for example, infrastructure jobs like roads, high speed transit, bridges, tunnels, etc). the pipeline benefits no one but a Canadian oil company and the multi-national corporations while undermining our environment and, arguably violating a number of treaties with native American tribes along the way. (though I have far more looking into that to do before I accept it as true).

I am making no observation as to engineering techniques. I leave that to you and others who know about that area. I am, however, commenting on the utility of a project that benefits no one but multi-national corporations and, ultimately, employes a handful of people.

If the pipeline makes it cheaper to get the oil to market, even foreign markets, it lowers prices in general and makes everyone get cheaper fuel. And considering the oil will get out somehow, and a pipeline is the safest method of doing so, your environmental concerns ring hollow.

and when corporations benefit, stockholders benefit, and considering most of us are indirect stockholders in our pensions and 401k's I fail to see the view that we do not benefit financially even if we don't pull a drop of oil out of the line for local use, which is not determined to be true at all yet.

and again, your side has a habit of forgetting all the ancillary jobs created when it comes to things you don't like (but bulking them up when it involves things you do like). Thinks like increased port activity, and potential refining increases.

 

[Ernie S.]

Both Utah senators are Koch suckers. Big surprise.

And George Soros and Powell Jobs contributed as much or more to the Democrat effort. So what?

I probably gave the impression that I'm a big fan of Democrats when I'm not. The only thing positive I can say about them is that they're not Republicans. Tell me what Soros and Powell have done and maybe I'll condemn them as harshly as I do the Kochs.

Soros' currency trading record is pretty much common knowledge to anyone that ever looks at the dark side of their icons. Why not do a bit of research.

As for Powell Jobs, I'm sure she is a nice lady, but she does spread around Steve's apple bucks to any Progressive that asks.

I have no interest in soros. the wingers certainly do, though.

you should concern yourself more with the Koch's and the lies they tell the right.

and neither soros nor powell nor apple have anything to do with the fraud of the pipeline.

Ahh but Warren Buffet does. He makes billions transporting oil by rail and truck, billions he stands to lose when Keystone is built.

You're smarter than that, Jill. Read something besides the DNC talking points.

 

[jillian]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

all jobs are not equal. some benefit us as a society (for example, infrastructure jobs like roads, high speed transit, bridges, tunnels, etc). the pipeline benefits no one but a Canadian oil company and the multi-national corporations while undermining our environment and, arguably violating a number of treaties with native American tribes along the way. (though I have far more looking into that to do before I accept it as true).

I am making no observation as to engineering techniques. I leave that to you and others who know about that area. I am, however, commenting on the utility of a project that benefits no one but multi-national corporations and, ultimately, employes a handful of people.

If the pipeline makes it cheaper to get the oil to market, even foreign markets, it lowers prices in general and makes everyone get cheaper fuel. And considering the oil will get out somehow, and a pipeline is the safest method of doing so, your environmental concerns ring hollow.

and when corporations benefit, stockholders benefit, and considering most of us are indirect stockholders in our pensions and 401k's I fail to see the view that we do not benefit financially even if we don't pull a drop of oil out of the line for local use, which is not determined to be true at all yet.

and again, your side has a habit of forgetting all the ancillary jobs created when it comes to things you don't like (but bulking them up when it involves things you do like). Thinks like increased port activity, and potential refining increases.

again, if you look at the article I linked. the pipeline does NOT make gas cheaper.

i'm not the one who forgets the ancillary jobs (which, again, are transient). i'm simply pointing out that the trade off for this particular project isn't worth it. and the right really has no standing to talk about job creation and ancillary jobs since every time a jobs program is discussed the answer from the right is cut taxes for the people who don't need them cut so we can pretend that money actually ends up benefitting workers.

 

[jillian]

Both Utah senators are Koch suckers. Big surprise.

And George Soros and Powell Jobs contributed as much or more to the Democrat effort. So what?

I probably gave the impression that I'm a big fan of Democrats when I'm not. The only thing positive I can say about them is that they're not Republicans. Tell me what Soros and Powell have done and maybe I'll condemn them as harshly as I do the Kochs.

Soros' currency trading record is pretty much common knowledge to anyone that ever looks at the dark side of their icons. Why not do a bit of research.

As for Powell Jobs, I'm sure she is a nice lady, but she does spread around Steve's apple bucks to any Progressive that asks.

I have no interest in soros. the wingers certainly do, though.

you should concern yourself more with the Koch's and the lies they tell the right.

and neither soros nor powell nor apple have anything to do with the fraud of the pipeline.

Ahh but Warren Buffet does. He makes billions transporting oil by rail and truck, billions he stands to lose when Keystone is built.

You're smarter than that, Jill. Read something besides the DNC talking points.

that's a nice defection. and if I relied on DNC talking points I'd rely on other things. but I don't. so it's a non-issue. you hon, have been watching too much fake news.

 

[Ernie S.]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

all jobs are not equal. some benefit us as a society (for example, infrastructure jobs like roads, high speed transit, bridges, tunnels, etc). the pipeline benefits no one but a Canadian oil company and the multi-national corporations while undermining our environment and, arguably violating a number of treaties with native American tribes along the way. (though I have far more looking into that to do before I accept it as true).

I am making no observation as to engineering techniques. I leave that to you and others who know about that area. I am, however, commenting on the utility of a project that benefits no one but multi-national corporations and, ultimately, employes a handful of people.

The pipeline will keep oil off the rails and roads and benefit different multi-national corporations.
Yes, someone will make money no matter how oil is moved. You seem to have a problem with just who makes it.