Why are Republicans so determined to invest in "foreign oil"?

[rdean]

We've heard, not just Republicans, but even experts say the US will become the world's number one oil producer.

If that's the case, why invest in Canadian Oil? Just spend the money here. Make it cheap and safe and clean.

Isn't the Alaskan Pipeline about the same length as the Keystone? Won't the Keystone deliver significantly less than half what the Alaska pipeline delivers? How many maintain the Alaska pipeline? A hundred? Two hundred? I don't know. I could go look it up, but I suspect my figures are pretty close.

Looking at all the facts and the tiny number of jobs it will create, why do Republicans have this need to invest in foreign oil? They worked to send millions of jobs to China when they were in charge. They want to do it again? What's wrong with investing the US?

2001 to 2008 U.S. has lost 2.4M jobs to China

Report: 2.4 million jobs lost to China

 

[Stephanie]

omg, like the Democrats aren't invested in it..Hell they probably own stock in a lot them

another failed dumb thread

 

[whitehall]

Generations of regulations proposed by democrats have strangled American oil exploration while democrats winked as they made the Saudi princes rich. The coal industry is all but shut down by Obama mandates. The Keystone pipeline seems like a good compromise but democrats won't even let that happen.

 

[Stephanie]

Generations of regulations proposed by democrats have strangled American oil exploration while democrats winked as they made the Saudi princes rich. The coal industry is all but shut down by Obama mandates. The Keystone pipeline seems like a good compromise but democrats won't even let that happen.

they don't care if they bring us to our knees
Obama promised to do just that and he is keeping that one

 

[Dot Com]

prolly because they hate the middle class

 

[whitehall]

Obama promised "to wean Americans off their dependence on oil". That should send a shudder up your spine since the freaking world still runs on oil whether Obama likes it or not. All democrats have done with their oppressive energy regulations is to raise the price of gasoline for the middle class and the price of diesel has gone through the roof impacting the price every commodity we purchase. Meanwhile the same middle class freezes in the winter because the price of heating oil has become a significant hardship. Democrats have gotten their wish and made the Saudi princes rich and the West Virginia coal miners poor and when we get a reasonable compromise like the Keystone Pipeline democrats still won't let it happen.

 

[Mr. H.]

Mr. Dean, I strongly urge you to look into the Alberta Clipper pipeline project.

As you can see, it also originates in western Canada and it's purpose is to ship tar sands crude into the U.S.

The Alberta Clipper was approved by Obama in 2009 to glowing accolades.

The following is from the State Department website. Read it carefully. I've highlighted some interesting points...



The Department found that the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States. These included increasing the diversity of available supplies among the United States’ worldwide crude oil sources in a time of considerable political tension in other major oil producing countries and regions; shortening the transportation pathway for crude oil supplies; and increasing crude oil supplies from a major non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries producer. Canada is a stable and reliable ally and trading partner of the United States, with which we have free trade agreements which augment the security of this energy supply.


Approval of the permit sends a positive economic signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability and availability of a portion of United States’ energy imports, and in the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction jobs for workers in the United States.

Permit for Alberta Clipper Pipeline Issued

So, it appears that you are calling your Idol and Messiah an idiot.

Are you also saying he was wrong to approve the Alberta Clipper?

 

[whitehall]

Mr. Dean, I strongly urge you to look into the Alberta Clipper pipeline project.

As you can see, it also originates in western Canada and it's purpose is to ship tar sands crude into the U.S.

The Alberta Clipper was approved by Obama in 2009 to glowing accolades.

The following is from the State Department website. Read it carefully. I've highlighted some interesting points...



The Department found that the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States. These included increasing the diversity of available supplies among the United States’ worldwide crude oil sources in a time of considerable political tension in other major oil producing countries and regions; shortening the transportation pathway for crude oil supplies; and increasing crude oil supplies from a major non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries producer. Canada is a stable and reliable ally and trading partner of the United States, with which we have free trade agreements which augment the security of this energy supply.


Approval of the permit sends a positive economic signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability and availability of a portion of United States’ energy imports, and in the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction jobs for workers in the United States.

Permit for Alberta Clipper Pipeline Issued

So, it appears that you are calling your Idol and Messiah an idiot.

Are you also saying he was wrong to approve the Alberta Clipper?

It doesn't matter what president Hussein said in 2009. Democrat politicians are like goldfish. Every trip around the tank is a whole new world. The freaking pipeline is being held up by Obama.

 

[freedombecki]

We've heard, not just Republicans, but even experts say the US will become the world's number one oil producer.

If that's the case, why invest in Canadian Oil? Just spend the money here. Make it cheap and safe and clean.

Isn't the Alaskan Pipeline about the same length as the Keystone? Won't the Keystone deliver significantly less than half what the Alaska pipeline delivers? How many maintain the Alaska pipeline? A hundred? Two hundred? I don't know. I could go look it up, but I suspect my figures are pretty close.

Looking at all the facts and the tiny number of jobs it will create, why do Republicans have this need to invest in foreign oil? They worked to send millions of jobs to China when they were in charge. They want to do it again? What's wrong with investing the US?

2001 to 2008 U.S. has lost 2.4M jobs to China

Report: 2.4 million jobs lost to China

Has Obama taken the 2.4M jobs back caused by the Democrat Congress on Bush's stint?

I don't think so.

But his Jobs Czar's General Electric Company sent a $2billion dollar shovel-ready jobs to China his first month in office and caused their competitors to do likewise.

Saying "neener, neener, neener," is inappropriate, and you should not say it so emphatically when you have more egg on your Democrat face than all the Republicans you are blaming put together.

 

[RGR]

We've heard, not just Republicans, but even experts say the US will become the world's number one oil producer.

Lot of good it does to proclaim yourself the biggest producer when your crack/crude habit is twice as large as that though.

If that's the case, why invest in Canadian Oil? Just spend the money here. Make it cheap and safe and clean.

We all like Canadians. Everybody does. Makes far more sense giving them the money rather than Venezuelans or Saudis.

Looking at all the facts and the tiny number of jobs it will create, why do Republicans have this need to invest in foreign oil?

Transporting the oil of others to keep American refineries busy isn't just tiny jobs, and it supports a fine American export industry.

They worked to send millions of jobs to China when they were in charge. They want to do it again? What's wrong with investing the US?

Nothing. But it wasn't Republicans who signed the biggest "ship all the auto manufacturing jobs to Mexico" bill in the country now was it?

When Bill wasn't chasing skirts around the Oval Office he was busy giving away American auto manufacturing with NAFTA. There is a reason my last Ford wasn't built in Michigan but Mexico.

 

[rdean]

We've heard, not just Republicans, but even experts say the US will become the world's number one oil producer.

If that's the case, why invest in Canadian Oil? Just spend the money here. Make it cheap and safe and clean.

Isn't the Alaskan Pipeline about the same length as the Keystone? Won't the Keystone deliver significantly less than half what the Alaska pipeline delivers? How many maintain the Alaska pipeline? A hundred? Two hundred? I don't know. I could go look it up, but I suspect my figures are pretty close.

Looking at all the facts and the tiny number of jobs it will create, why do Republicans have this need to invest in foreign oil? They worked to send millions of jobs to China when they were in charge. They want to do it again? What's wrong with investing the US?

2001 to 2008 U.S. has lost 2.4M jobs to China

Report: 2.4 million jobs lost to China

Has Obama taken the 2.4M jobs back caused by the Democrat Congress on Bush's stint?

I don't think so.

But his Jobs Czar's General Electric Company sent a $2billion dollar shovel-ready jobs to China his first month in office and caused their competitors to do likewise.

Saying "neener, neener, neener," is inappropriate, and you should not say it so emphatically when you have more egg on your Democrat face than all the Republicans you are blaming put together.

A Democratic Congress? You mean for two years out of Bush's eight? Republicans used reconciliation three times. Do you know for what?

 

[rdean]

Mr. Dean, I strongly urge you to look into the Alberta Clipper pipeline project.

As you can see, it also originates in western Canada and it's purpose is to ship tar sands crude into the U.S.

The Alberta Clipper was approved by Obama in 2009 to glowing accolades.

The following is from the State Department website. Read it carefully. I've highlighted some interesting points...



The Department found that the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States. These included increasing the diversity of available supplies among the United States’ worldwide crude oil sources in a time of considerable political tension in other major oil producing countries and regions; shortening the transportation pathway for crude oil supplies; and increasing crude oil supplies from a major non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries producer. Canada is a stable and reliable ally and trading partner of the United States, with which we have free trade agreements which augment the security of this energy supply.


Approval of the permit sends a positive economic signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability and availability of a portion of United States’ energy imports, and in the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction jobs for workers in the United States.

Permit for Alberta Clipper Pipeline Issued

So, it appears that you are calling your Idol and Messiah an idiot.

Are you also saying he was wrong to approve the Alberta Clipper?

Does that pipeline only go through one state?

Lucky they've never had a spill or a leak.

Keystone XL's Bigger, Older, and Leakier Brother: The Alberta Clipper springs 5,000 gallon leak

 

[rdean]

I'm not sure Republicans understand that Canada is a "foreign country".

 

[Mr. H.]

Mr. Dean, I strongly urge you to look into the Alberta Clipper pipeline project.

As you can see, it also originates in western Canada and it's purpose is to ship tar sands crude into the U.S.

The Alberta Clipper was approved by Obama in 2009 to glowing accolades.

The following is from the State Department website. Read it carefully. I've highlighted some interesting points...



The Department found that the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States. These included increasing the diversity of available supplies among the United States’ worldwide crude oil sources in a time of considerable political tension in other major oil producing countries and regions; shortening the transportation pathway for crude oil supplies; and increasing crude oil supplies from a major non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries producer. Canada is a stable and reliable ally and trading partner of the United States, with which we have free trade agreements which augment the security of this energy supply.


Approval of the permit sends a positive economic signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability and availability of a portion of United States’ energy imports, and in the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction jobs for workers in the United States.

Permit for Alberta Clipper Pipeline Issued

So, it appears that you are calling your Idol and Messiah an idiot.

Are you also saying he was wrong to approve the Alberta Clipper?

Does that pipeline only go through one state?

Lucky they've never had a spill or a leak.

Keystone XL's Bigger, Older, and Leakier Brother: The Alberta Clipper springs 5,000 gallon leak

Inconsequential. And you are also aware of the risks associated with "green" and "renewable" and "sustainable" energy production. Don't be so coy.

I'm not sure Republicans understand that Canada is a "foreign country".

I again refer you to the State Department comments regarding Canada and the Alberta Clipper project.

 

[RGR]

I'm not sure Republicans understand that Canada is a "foreign country".

i'm not sure Canada IS a foreign country.

 

[Samson]

Mr. Dean, I strongly urge you to look into the Alberta Clipper pipeline project.

As you can see, it also originates in western Canada and it's purpose is to ship tar sands crude into the U.S.

The Alberta Clipper was approved by Obama in 2009 to glowing accolades.

The following is from the State Department website. Read it carefully. I've highlighted some interesting points...



The Department found that the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States. These included increasing the diversity of available supplies among the United States’ worldwide crude oil sources in a time of considerable political tension in other major oil producing countries and regions; shortening the transportation pathway for crude oil supplies; and increasing crude oil supplies from a major non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries producer. Canada is a stable and reliable ally and trading partner of the United States, with which we have free trade agreements which augment the security of this energy supply.


Approval of the permit sends a positive economic signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability and availability of a portion of United States’ energy imports, and in the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction jobs for workers in the United States.

Permit for Alberta Clipper Pipeline Issued

So, it appears that you are calling your Idol and Messiah an idiot.

Are you also saying he was wrong to approve the Alberta Clipper?

Does that pipeline only go through one state?

Yes.

You've seen a map before, right?

 

[rdean]

I'm not sure Republicans understand that Canada is a "foreign country".

i'm not sure Canada IS a foreign country.

Canadians think so. They fight stupid by banning Fox.

 

[elektra]

We've heard, not just Republicans, but even experts say the US will become the world's number one oil producer.

If that's the case, why invest in Canadian Oil? Just spend the money here. Make it cheap and safe and clean.

Isn't the Alaskan Pipeline about the same length as the Keystone? Won't the Keystone deliver significantly less than half what the Alaska pipeline delivers? How many maintain the Alaska pipeline? A hundred? Two hundred? I don't know. I could go look it up, but I suspect my figures are pretty close.

Looking at all the facts and the tiny number of jobs it will create, why do Republicans have this need to invest in foreign oil? They worked to send millions of jobs to China when they were in charge. They want to do it again? What's wrong with investing the US?

2001 to 2008 U.S. has lost 2.4M jobs to China

Report: 2.4 million jobs lost to China

Do a search on Occidental Petroleum and Al Gore. Just one simple search makes this thread look like a political hack propaganda piece.

 

[Politico]

I'm not sure Republicans understand that Canada is a "foreign country".

I am sure you don't understand oil being shipped out of the country doesn't equal independence.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Lot of good it does to proclaim yourself the biggest producer when your crack/crude habit is twice as large as that though.

Very good. ... But then, how do you reconcile that with your long history here of suggesting the U.S. can seamlessly transition off fossil fuels and conserve whenever it wants? I mean, it was a pillar of your "no problem" approach to net oil depletion denial.

I guess crack addicts don't have it so bad, by your logic.

Nothing. But it wasn't Republicans who signed the biggest "ship all the auto manufacturing jobs to Mexico" bill in the country now was it?

When Bill wasn't chasing skirts around the Oval Office he was busy giving away American auto manufacturing with NAFTA. There is a reason my last Ford wasn't built in Michigan but Mexico.

Clever. I suppose you were hoping no one called you on your latest round of intellectual dishonesty. Not to defend corporate DINO Clinton one iota, but NAFTA was one-term Bush's baby. Clinton was merely left to sign it into law, after adding a few "liberal" provisions, mind you, that the fascist before him never would have considered.

Worse, yet, it was under Chimpy Bush that Sarbanes–Oxley passed, bringing corporate tax dodging and U.S. labor destruction to whole new levels.

Or, wait... Maybe you weren't lying, and just aren't very bright.