BO Admin reject Keystone Pipeline

H

Horn6721

Hook'em
BO must think the unions ( which would have benefited from thousands of well paying middle class jobs) will vote for him anyway.

from link
"
By Juliet Eilperin and Steven Mufson, Wednesday, January 18, 10:39 AM




The Obama administration will announce this afternoon it is rejecting a Canadian firm’s application for a permit to build and operate a massive oil pipeline across the U.S.-Canada border, according to sources who have been briefed on the matter.

However the administration will allow TransCanada to reapply after it develops an alternate route through the sensitive habitat of Nebraska’s Sandhills. Deputy Secretary of State William J. Burns will make the announcement, which comes in response to a congressionally-mandated deadline of Feb. 21 for action on the proposed Keystone pipelineThe Link

an alternate route was already selected and approved by the Ne Gov and lege.

Is there a good non political reason for BO to turn this down?
 
So Boehner insures the Payroll Tax will go through with a decision by the Obama Administration on the pipeline.

Obama says they did not have enough time to evaluate the project. So Obama made a deal with Boehner and broke it!!!

The State Department has been studying this for three years, do not give me any crap about enough time.

Boehner took it in the shorts hard and fast.

NO MORE COMPROMISE, they will break their committment over and over again!!!!! How many times are we going to be Charlie to their Lucy?
 
I haven't read any updates on the reported alternative route that the P/L could be placed. However, I am caught wondering this: the U.S. demands fossil fuels to keep our economy at current pace with growth, and will either need to reach to Canada or the ME and South America to meet those demands. By rejecting this P/L, are the environmentalists and the President's administration conveying the opinion that they believe that transporting crude via VLCC's (very large cargo containers, i.e. shipliners) is safer than a P/L from Canada to the GoM?

Any serious replies?
 
True insanity. There is not a good reason to reject this. Oh well, he is digging the grave for his administration. That is the positive side of this decision.
 
Sadly it is the hard core Barack Obama supporters that deter his administration from doing the right thing. Much more so than his detractors.
 
Actually the agreement with Boehner and BO on this was BO would ONLY reject it if he felt it was not in the nations interests.
So far he has not explained why he rejected it

The project was studied extensively for 3 years by Fed government and but each state's government and was signed off on .
The people in nebraska had concerns so al althernate route was found and signed off on.

I guess we will have to wait for BO to explain what national interests he thinks would not have been served by this. I know he wants higher gas prices, well he will get them .
 
Everything that 6271 said may be true, but it doesn't seem to support Whiteapples' contention that BO broke a deal.

It sounds to me like he did what he was required to under the terms of the deal.
 
Bevo, I think one good reason to support it is the amount of jobs it could likely produce. I read that when the Trans-Alaska P/L was built, it needed 20-30,000 jobs to complete a 4-500 mile project. The original Trans-Canada project was rumored to have up and over 110,000 jobs attached to it, and it's more than 1700 miles long.

That's just one angle I'm caught wondering. By rejecting the project, is Obama insinuating that the payroll tax cut extension would save more jobs than this project would create?

As for which countries are going to be the end-user of the Canadian sands oil, I have no data to show who has contracts waiting on it if the project were to proceed. However, I doubt that this project was solely for the refiners' sake, or that none of the distillates would be consumed by the U.S., considering that Canada is already our largest provider.
 
BI
well until we read what justification BO has that the pipleline is not in the nation's interest we won't know if he broke his agreement.


Hopefully BO will explain why he rehjected a deal that had bi partisan support, support of the states affected and would create thousands of middle class jobs. many almost immediately.
Not that we need jobs here in USA or anything.
btw here is the link on NE gov oking the pipelineThe Link
 
also, Bevo, per your comment referring to crude being pumped across the plains down into Gulf refineries, I again honestly have to ask which is a greater enemy--moving fossil fuels downhill across the countryside, or, moving thousands of ships across the Atlantic and into/out of Houston ship channel?
 
Obama won't keep his word with Democrats:

media_httpwwwcatholic_lanyo.jpg.scaled500.jpg


What in the world made Boehner think he'd keep his word with him???
 
The amusing, but sad, thing is that in the name of environmentalism, the oil will end up being sent to China to be refined. So, instead of it being done under our stringent regulations, it will be done under China's lax regulation. Add to that the additional risk of transportation (which is minimal but finite) and the net environmental effect to the globe will increase.
 
Doesn't it make you wonder why the Republicans attached such a ridiculous rider to a bill that extended the payroll tax-cut even though they were told that the result would be that the Obama administration would not approve it if forced to approve it within 60 days?

If I tell you that if you do A I will respond with B then you go and do A and I respond with B, whose fault is it that B was the ultimate response?
 
Just further proof of Obama being by far the worst president ever. Like a fellow poster here once said "Obama makes him what to stratch Jimmy Carter's face with his finger nails in Mt Rushmore."
 
I35,

Unless you guys can give me some concrete reasons as to why this is the best course for America, I reject your assertion that it is.


And, as I said, if the Republicans are concerned with creating jobs, why did they force the President down this path when told straight out by the President that, if they did, he would reject it.

The Link
 
The repubs should work on getting a middle class tax cut through instead of bawling over a sensible decision by the Prez. I'm glad that we have a president who cares about the environment and maintaining SOME clean air and clean water.
hookem.gif
flag.gif
 
^^^
Based on my opinion, B.I., that's why I used the term "it seems to me." However, my opinion is not entirely worthless in these matters. I could do the research and give you examples of oil-carrying pipeline projects that were approved by various government agencies in much less time than 3 years. But even if I did, I doubt if it would change your opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top