Party of NO strikes again: Obama vetoes Keystone XL pipeline

[IlarMeilyr]

The argument in favor of this pipeline is weak.

The attempt by nutters to label the Democrats as "the party of no" is even weaker.

We can count on our USMB nutters to disregard that fact and support whatever position opposes the POTUS. It results from being weak.

It doesnt matter how strong or weak the argument is. Private companies are paying to have it done. It wont cost the gov anything and they will make money. The onus is on explaining why it is counter productive.

Who's explanation would you deem acceptable? I can give you a dozen.

Go ahead. Because all the environmental studies done dont show any damage.
So what's the argument for why gov't should prohibit it?

if it was a left wing project the right would automatically reject it, so since its a right wing pet project I automatically reject it. The right isn't known for brilliant ideas, or ANY ideas for that matter.

^ siete thinks that pap was the height of originality. His notion of a good idea stands exposed as the derivative version of "thinking" it is. Schmucks like Soros tell dufus twits like siete WHAT to think.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The argument in favor of this pipeline is weak.

The attempt by nutters to label the Democrats as "the party of no" is even weaker.

We can count on our USMB nutters to disregard that fact and support whatever position opposes the POTUS. It results from being weak.

It doesnt matter how strong or weak the argument is. Private companies are paying to have it done. It wont cost the gov anything and they will make money. The onus is on explaining why it is counter productive.

Who's explanation would you deem acceptable? I can give you a dozen.

Go ahead. Because all the environmental studies done dont show any damage.
So what's the argument for why gov't should prohibit it?

Argument 1 : Environmental Impact

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/20140032.pdf

 

[kaz]

Oil companies need a little higher oil price to survive....

Making sense isn't your bag

 

[AceRothstein]

OUTRAGE ALERT!

 

[kaz]

I blame America. WE (collectively speaking) put that uninformed dip-shit into the position of President.

And WE (collectively speaking) failed to provide him with an opposition Congress in large enough numbers to override his petulant petty little vetoes.

He had no qualifications for any other jobs and he wanted that one. What else were we going to do with him?

 

[Siete]

The argument in favor of this pipeline is weak.

The attempt by nutters to label the Democrats as "the party of no" is even weaker.

We can count on our USMB nutters to disregard that fact and support whatever position opposes the POTUS. It results from being weak.

It doesnt matter how strong or weak the argument is. Private companies are paying to have it done. It wont cost the gov anything and they will make money. The onus is on explaining why it is counter productive.

Who's explanation would you deem acceptable? I can give you a dozen.

Go ahead. Because all the environmental studies done dont show any damage.
So what's the argument for why gov't should prohibit it?

if it was a left wing project the right would automatically reject it, so since its a right wing pet project I automatically reject it. The right isn't known for brilliant ideas, or ANY ideas for that matter.

^ siete thinks that pap was the height of originality. His notion of a good idea stands exposed as the derivative version of "thinking" it is. Schmucks like Soros tell dufus twits like siete WHAT to think.

if only I were a Democrat you might sound smart.... nah, not even then. You're an idiot.

 

[kaz]

so shoot him, Obama killed union jobs, vetoes a project that has NO effect on gas prices, enabled American oil to be refined without standing in line with CANADIAN oil, and fucked Boehner's stock purchases ...


awwwwww

Gotcha, oil supplies have no impact on oil prices. It's sad they don't teach basic economics in high school, if they did the Democratic party would die

 

[Judicial review]

We'll Obama's legacy is so fucked. He will now officially go down as the worst president in the history of our nation. Due to this the GOP needs to shut down the government. Time to play hard ball. Let's see just how far this President will take it and let the country turn on him.

 

[The Rabbi]

The argument in favor of this pipeline is weak.

The attempt by nutters to label the Democrats as "the party of no" is even weaker.

We can count on our USMB nutters to disregard that fact and support whatever position opposes the POTUS. It results from being weak.

It doesnt matter how strong or weak the argument is. Private companies are paying to have it done. It wont cost the gov anything and they will make money. The onus is on explaining why it is counter productive.

Who's explanation would you deem acceptable? I can give you a dozen.

Go ahead. Because all the environmental studies done dont show any damage.
So what's the argument for why gov't should prohibit it?

Argument 1 : Environmental Impact

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/20140032.pdf

/fail

 

[LoneLaugher]

Argument 2: Economic Impact

http://www.nrdc.org/energy/files/keystonejobs-4pgr.pdf

 

[Little-Acorn]

if it was a left wing project the right would automatically reject it,

If it is destructive to the country, conservatives would reject it.

It's not conservatives' fault that most liberal programs are destructive to the country.

 

[rightwinger]

Sweet

 

[kaz]

The argument in favor of this pipeline is weak

There is no argument against it other than partisan politics

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The argument in favor of this pipeline is weak

There is no argument against it other than partisan politics

Untrue, as always.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The Dims are assholes. But they are bold and consistent in DOING what they seek to accomplish.

The GOP are not as institutionally inclined to be assholes. But there's not much value in being "more" right-thinking than your opposition numbers if you are too fucking weak and flaccid to DO anything about it.

Complete lack of awareness. It's freakish.

^ It's always fun to read your sentence fragments. They are as close to a complete "thought" as you seem to be able to get.

The Republicans are more right on the issues than you asshole lolberal Democraps. Nevertheless, the Dims ARE more prone to making concerted efforts to accomplish the shit they wish to accomplish. The Republicans, tend to be far too wishy washy. It shows. By their diffidence, the GOP consistently cedes the field to the asshole Dims. It's fucking tragic.

You lack awareness.

 

[kaz]

Good.

Now you get the party of no reference by the OP...

 

[Siete]

so shoot him, Obama killed union jobs, vetoes a project that has NO effect on gas prices, enabled American oil to be refined without standing in line with CANADIAN oil, and fucked Boehner's stock purchases ...


awwwwww

Gotcha, oil supplies have no impact on oil prices. It's sad they don't teach basic economics in high school, if they did the Democratic party would die

read that again Goober, I said Keystone has or will have NO impact on oil prices ...what part of DUMB are you ?

 

[kaz]

When your party makes preventing economic recovery the primary plank in its platform for 6 years.......you get this weak sauce. There are no "can do" people leading the nutters. No new ideas.

Gotcha, opposing socialism would only be done to block a recovery. What a moron...

 

[LoneLaugher]

The argument in favor of this pipeline is weak.

The attempt by nutters to label the Democrats as "the party of no" is even weaker.

We can count on our USMB nutters to disregard that fact and support whatever position opposes the POTUS. It results from being weak.

It doesnt matter how strong or weak the argument is. Private companies are paying to have it done. It wont cost the gov anything and they will make money. The onus is on explaining why it is counter productive.

Who's explanation would you deem acceptable? I can give you a dozen.

Go ahead. Because all the environmental studies done dont show any damage.
So what's the argument for why gov't should prohibit it?

Argument 1 : Environmental Impact

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/20140032.pdf

/fail

Excellent analysis. Well done.

 

[kaz]

The argument in favor of this pipeline is weak.

The attempt by nutters to label the Democrats as "the party of no" is even weaker.

We can count on our USMB nutters to disregard that fact and support whatever position opposes the POTUS. It results from being weak.

It doesnt matter how strong or weak the argument is. Private companies are paying to have it done. It wont cost the gov anything and they will make money. The onus is on explaining why it is counter productive.

Who's explanation would you deem acceptable? I can give you a dozen.

Go ahead. Because all the environmental studies done dont show any damage.
So what's the argument for why gov't should prohibit it?

if it was a left wing project the right would automatically reject it, so since its a right wing pet project I automatically reject it. The right isn't known for brilliant ideas, or ANY ideas for that matter.

Democrats love to mindlessly parrot that vacuous statement, don't you?