Washington Post: State Department releases Keystone XL final environmental impact statement (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/state-to-release-keystones-final-environmental-impact-statement-friday/2014/01/31/3a9bb25c-8a83-11e3-a5bd-844629433ba3_story.html)
QuoteThe State Department concluded in its final environmental assessment issued Friday that the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would not significantly alter global greenhouse gas emissions, but officials cautioned that they were still weighing whether or not the project would meet the test of the president's broader climate strategy.
QuoteThe report said that "approval or denial of any one crude oil transport project, including the proposed project, remains unlikely to significantly impact the rate of extraction in the oil sands, or the continued demand for heavy crude oil at refineries in the United States."
"Keystone XL" sounds like it should be a keg of shitty beer or a huge pickup truck or some other dumb product commonly marketed as being hyper-manly. Who names this stuff?
Is the Keystone pipeline even going to happen? Not trying to be political, but I thought the president wasn't going to allow it to happen.
Quote from: US 41 on March 17, 2014, 02:19:48 PM
Is the Keystone pipeline even going to happen? Not trying to be political, but I thought the president wasn't going to allow it to happen.
Of course he'll approve it so he can show the Repubs he's all centrist and willing to compromise. Shame he hasn't realized that the only compromise Repubs would accept is a complete skin transplant from whitey.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 31, 2014, 04:10:06 PM
Washington Post: State Department releases Keystone XL final environmental impact statement (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/state-to-release-keystones-final-environmental-impact-statement-friday/2014/01/31/3a9bb25c-8a83-11e3-a5bd-844629433ba3_story.html)
QuoteThe State Department concluded in its final environmental assessment issued Friday that the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would not significantly alter global greenhouse gas emissions, but officials cautioned that they were still weighing whether or not the project would meet the test of the president's broader climate strategy.
QuoteThe report said that "approval or denial of any one crude oil transport project, including the proposed project, remains unlikely to significantly impact the rate of extraction in the oil sands, or the continued demand for heavy crude oil at refineries in the United States."
What building the pipeline will mean, even if the refined product is exported, is jobs within the US at those refineries. I'd rather refine it here, in a fully modern country with environmental controls than refine it somewhere else with no such controls.
Don't forget jobs to clean up spills. It's a win-win-win.
Quote from: NE2 on March 17, 2014, 02:28:58 PM
Quote from: US 41 on March 17, 2014, 02:19:48 PM
Is the Keystone pipeline even going to happen? Not trying to be political, but I thought the president wasn't going to allow it to happen.
Of course he'll approve it so he can show the Repubs he's all centrist and willing to compromise. Shame he hasn't realized that the only compromise Repubs would accept is a complete skin transplant from whitey.
They want him to become Michael Jackson?
Quote from: vdeane on March 17, 2014, 10:04:12 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 17, 2014, 02:28:58 PM
Quote from: US 41 on March 17, 2014, 02:19:48 PM
Is the Keystone pipeline even going to happen? Not trying to be political, but I thought the president wasn't going to allow it to happen.
Of course he'll approve it so he can show the Repubs he's all centrist and willing to compromise. Shame he hasn't realized that the only compromise Repubs would accept is a complete skin transplant from whitey.
They want him to become Michael Jackson?
Considering he's not even African-American anyway (Kenyan father, white mother), moot point.
He's, first and foremost, a Chicago politician. Color there does not matter. Kickbacks do.
Color matters to the Repubs.
Quote from: NE2 on March 18, 2014, 03:17:15 AM
Color matters to the Repubs.
No, Democrats. The Democrats are the party obsessed with race. The party of slavery. The party of the KKK. The party that opposed civil rights. The party of Jim Crow. The party of govt. sanctioned racism today; affirmative action. The party of race baiting.
The reason Democrats constantly slander the color blind Republicans as racist is that they are the racists. Always have been, still are.
Democrats are obsessed with race. Republicans are obsessed with results.
There was an article in Forbes quite some time ago about how in reality any oil transported via Keystone would NOT go to ait domestic consumption. It seems when the bond package was being prepared and underwritten Goldman Sucks demanded a caviat that any oil going through the pipeline be strictly prohibited from domestic use, otherwise they were going to get the project blackballed in the domestic bond market. The only benefit this pipeline will present is to guarantee a maxing out of refinery capacity in the backdrop of a shrinking US demand for refined oil and Canadian access to Gulf ports. I am a very conservative Republican, just because dems are against it and the GOP for it does not mean that there is ANY free market component to this project.
Quote from: Landshark on April 04, 2014, 01:54:29 AM
Quote from: NE2 on March 18, 2014, 03:17:15 AM
No, Democrats. The Democrats are the party obsessed with race. The party of slavery. The party of the KKK. The party that opposed civil rights. The party of Jim Crow. The party of govt. sanctioned racism today; affirmative action. The party of race baiting.
The reason Democrats constantly slander the color blind Republicans as racist is that they are the racists. Always have been, still are.
Democrats are obsessed with race. Republicans are obsessed with results.
+1
Quote from: Landshark on April 04, 2014, 01:54:29 AM
Quote from: NE2 on March 18, 2014, 03:17:15 AM
Color matters to the Repubs.
No, Democrats. The Democrats are the party obsessed with race. The party of slavery. The party of the KKK. The party that opposed civil rights. The party of Jim Crow. The party of govt. sanctioned racism today; affirmative action. The party of race baiting.
The reason Democrats constantly slander the color blind Republicans as racist is that they are the racists. Always have been, still are.
Democrats are obsessed with race. Republicans are obsessed with results.
This ignores the realignment of the two parties that occurred during the 1960s, when Lyndon Johnson's support of the Civil Rights Act turned many of these voters off of the party. Nixon's "Southern Strategy" was designed to bring them into the Republican Party. This is all well documented.
Compare Presidental election maps pre-Johnson to post-Johnson. You'll see a lot of the "red" and "blue" states are switched for this reason.
Thank you, Scott. You cannot judge a party based on what it was like in 1960, or in 1860 for that matter. "We had Lincoln, therefore we can never be racist!"
Republicans may be obsessed with "results", but they don't question why those results favor the white male over and over, or how that's even a problem. They figure that everyone else just doesn't want it as much, because we've all had equal opportunities since MLK came along and Jim Crow ended and the Civil Rights Act was passed. Sure. :rolleyes: You can ignore inequality pretty easily when you're not the victim of it.
You can't try to fix racism without first acknowledging it exists and talking about it, so being "obsessed with race" isn't necessarily a sign that you're the bad guy.
Lots more I could say, but it seems pointless. It's not like either side is going to convince the other that they're wrong here. (Oh, and I definitely don't agree with everything the Dems do when it comes to this stuff.)
None of this political discussion is related to Keystone. It stops here. If it doesn't, I'll just remove all the posts. Thanks.
Quote from: Brandon on March 17, 2014, 02:58:20 PM
What building the pipeline will mean, even if the refined product is exported, is jobs within the US at those refineries. I'd rather refine it here, in a fully modern country with environmental controls than refine it somewhere else with no such controls.
Agreed.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on April 04, 2014, 02:12:20 AM
There was an article in Forbes quite some time ago about how in reality any oil transported via Keystone would NOT go to ait domestic consumption. It seems when the bond package was being prepared and underwritten Goldman Sucks demanded a caviat that any oil going through the pipeline be strictly prohibited from domestic use, otherwise they were going to get the project blackballed in the domestic bond market. The only benefit this pipeline will present is to guarantee a maxing out of refinery capacity in the backdrop of a shrinking US demand for refined oil and Canadian access to Gulf ports. I am a very conservative Republican, just because dems are against it and the GOP for it does not mean that there is ANY free market component to this project.
I have
never heard of such a restriction. If the oil arrives at refineries in Texas, then how is anyone going to make sure that product refined from Alberta tar sands oil does not end up in the Plantation or Colonial Pipeline systems, which lead to the Atlantic coast states from the Gulf coast?
What about oil that may get transported from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota via Keystone XL (which is a possibility)?
Another mode of transportation that
will carry oil from North Dakota and Alberta without (or maybe
with) Keystone XL are tank cars on the railroads.
And there are issues with
that as well. See this article from the McClatchy Washington Bureau: Crude oil trains revive Philadelphia refineries but deliver new risks (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/04/07/223634/crude-oil-trains-revive-philadelphia.html) (full disclosure: I know the author of this article).