Canadians - any chance your country can delay reacting to the Keystone debacle?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 2:28 PM GMT
    This looks like its political impact in the US will be huge. As the price of gas goes up this summer, it will be Obama's gas and he will be slammed as an election issue.

    Obama made a deal with the unions. He would reject the pipeline in return for stuffing the NLRB with union stooges. In addition to a pathetic energy policy, it clearly demonstrates that politics trumps jobs and the support for the middle class is a facade, only convenient when it doesn't interfere with his power deals and radical ideology.

    I only hope Canada can consider the increasing likelihood that Obama will be removed from office next January and delay making other commitments until the Administration changes, and this will be one factor motivating that change.

    Aside from any opinions about Trump, his points are quite valid. Trump on Obama and Keystone: 'Absolutely Disgraceful':
    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1400888333001/trump-on-obama-and-keystone-absolutely-disgraceful/?playlist_id=86857
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 2:45 PM GMT
    Spouting doomsday stuff?

    Keystone to re-apply for Presidential Permit
    http://pipelinesinternational.com/news/keystone_to_re-apply_for_presidential_permit/065765/

    "TransCanada President and Chief Executive Officer Russ Girling said “This outcome is one of the scenarios we anticipated. While we are disappointed, TransCanada remains fully committed to the construction of Keystone XL."
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Jan 19, 2012 2:53 PM GMT
    Huge blow to any step forward in an Energy policy that could free us from our dependence on oil from the mideast. Yet another administration that talks about it but does little or anything to actually do anything about it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 3:21 PM GMT
    Let me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 3:26 PM GMT
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.

    An absolutely ridiculous reading of the message. I am just asking if Canada can hold off making other firm commitments.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 3:43 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.

    An absolutely ridiculous reading of the message. I am just asking if Canada can hold off making other firm commitments.


    You mean Canada's Enbridge pipeline? The whole thing is mired in hot water, which is fine because it's our curious Canadian un-doing way of doing things.

    Now our news is saying that your admin has currently nixed the Keystone pipeline for now, but not at all for the interesting but odd reasons you stated in your first post.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 3:47 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.

    An absolutely ridiculous reading of the message. I am just asking if Canada can hold off making other firm commitments.


    You mean Canada's Enbridge pipeline? The whole thing is mired in hot water, which is fine because it's our curious Canadian un-doing way of doing things.

    Now our news is saying that your admin has currently nixed the Keystone pipeline for now, but not at all for the interesting but odd reasons you stated in your first post.

    The Obama decision is widely seen here as political, as I mentioned above. Not surprising if the Canadian media takes the White House talking points as truth.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 3:51 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.

    An absolutely ridiculous reading of the message. I am just asking if Canada can hold off making other firm commitments.


    You mean Canada's Enbridge pipeline? The whole thing is mired in hot water, which is fine because it's our curious Canadian un-doing way of doing things.

    Now our news is saying that your admin has currently nixed the Keystone pipeline for now, but not at all for the interesting but odd reasons you stated in your first post.

    The Obama decision is widely seen here as political, as I mentioned above. Not surprising if the Canadian media takes the White House talking points as truth.



    ROFL, that's what you think, not what you know. That you think the Obama decision is widely seen as political says quite a bit about subjective myopia, which is common when you are inside the box instead of outside of it looking in. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 4:01 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.

    An absolutely ridiculous reading of the message. I am just asking if Canada can hold off making other firm commitments.


    You mean Canada's Enbridge pipeline? The whole thing is mired in hot water, which is fine because it's our curious Canadian un-doing way of doing things.

    Now our news is saying that your admin has currently nixed the Keystone pipeline for now, but not at all for the interesting but odd reasons you stated in your first post.

    The Obama decision is widely seen here as political, as I mentioned above. Not surprising if the Canadian media takes the White House talking points as truth.

    ROFL, that's what you think, not what you know. That you think the Obama decision is widely seen as political says quite a bit about subjective myopia, which is common when you are inside the box instead of outside of it looking in. icon_wink.gif

    I'm far from myopic and frequently look at media from outside the US. Have not looked at Canadian media on this issue. Later when I get a chance, I'll look at the reporting from CBC, CTV, and Global, and will check out the reporting and editorials in the Globe and Mail, and Sun.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 4:27 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.

    An absolutely ridiculous reading of the message. I am just asking if Canada can hold off making other firm commitments.


    You mean Canada's Enbridge pipeline? The whole thing is mired in hot water, which is fine because it's our curious Canadian un-doing way of doing things.

    Now our news is saying that your admin has currently nixed the Keystone pipeline for now, but not at all for the interesting but odd reasons you stated in your first post.

    The Obama decision is widely seen here as political, as I mentioned above. Not surprising if the Canadian media takes the White House talking points as truth.



    ROFL, that's what you think, not what you know. That you think the Obama decision is widely seen as political says quite a bit about subjective myopia, which is common when you are inside the box instead of outside of it looking in. icon_wink.gif


    Great post.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 4:32 PM GMT
    As reported by the CBC on 1/12/12, the 55 First Nations of BC formed an "unbroken wall of opposition" to the pipeline.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 4:36 PM GMT
    It makes far more sense for us to pipe our oil to our own western ports and sell to Asia.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 4:41 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.

    An absolutely ridiculous reading of the message. I am just asking if Canada can hold off making other firm commitments.


    You mean Canada's Enbridge pipeline? The whole thing is mired in hot water, which is fine because it's our curious Canadian un-doing way of doing things.

    Now our news is saying that your admin has currently nixed the Keystone pipeline for now, but not at all for the interesting but odd reasons you stated in your first post.






    Interesting but odd reasons for sure !! Especially since a major union was for the pipeline because of the jobs, and by the way, the amount and length of the jobs wouldn't even be 1% of the total unemployed at this time.

    The primary reason for turning this down is over this oil being the absolutely worst polluting dirty oil there is to burn and over the danger of pipeline breaks in sensitive areas, one of them being an important watershed area.


    SoCal, DO THE GOOGLE on this to verify the facts and when picking the long list of articles on the subject, pass by the biased bullshit from FOX BIASED NEWS. Get the facts before you put this kind of bullshit in writing .
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 4:48 PM GMT
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.



    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "wishing that a foreign government -----to interfere in the internal politics of the US">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That would be Israeli Lobby AIPAC pushing us toward war with Iran, But I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn that the Neo Cons are pushing for this pipeline too, just saying, because we shouldn't take our eyes off where the real interference from foreign governments is coming from on many a front.


    Now whine about this fact for a while SoCal and FreedomGeezer, Do the GOOGLE and you'll find I am right again. Doncha just hate it !!! LOL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 5:02 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    meninlove said
    socalfitness said
    webster11111 saidLet me get this right. You are asking and wishing that a foreign government, our best ally at that, to interfere in the internal politics of the US? Talk about making the US subserviant to a foreign power and undermining the Republic.

    An absolutely ridiculous reading of the message. I am just asking if Canada can hold off making other firm commitments.


    You mean Canada's Enbridge pipeline? The whole thing is mired in hot water, which is fine because it's our curious Canadian un-doing way of doing things.

    Now our news is saying that your admin has currently nixed the Keystone pipeline for now, but not at all for the interesting but odd reasons you stated in your first post.

    The Obama decision is widely seen here as political, as I mentioned above. Not surprising if the Canadian media takes the White House talking points as truth.

    ROFL, that's what you think, not what you know. That you think the Obama decision is widely seen as political says quite a bit about subjective myopia, which is common when you are inside the box instead of outside of it looking in. icon_wink.gif

    I'm far from myopic and frequently look at media from outside the US. Have not looked at Canadian media on this issue. Later when I get a chance, I'll look at the reporting from CBC, CTV, and Global, and will check out the reporting and editorials in the Globe and Mail, and Sun.

    Just as an aside, whatever the Canadian reaction, this will be a huge election issue in the US. Whatever the gas prices are, Obama will take a hit, but if the prices go to $5 this summer, a real possibility according to US News and LA Times, the impact to Obama will be significant. Even though other factors will be in play, such as the situation with Iran, the decision will be seen as against our interests, which has its political impact.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2012 6:09 PM GMT
    The pipeline will not significantly reduce our independence on foreign oil, will not significantly increase jobs (4,200 temp jobs at best) and has a huge potential ti cause grave environmental damage.

    Obama made the right decision.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 12:38 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidThe pipeline will not significantly reduce our independence on foreign oil, will not significantly increase jobs (4,200 temp jobs at best) and has a huge potential ti cause grave environmental damage.

    Obama made the right decision.



    Well, one of the stalling points up here with the pipeline to the west coast (for Asia) is that some of the companies involved want up to 100,000 MIGRANT workers because they will work for very poor wages and in onerous conditions. So much for jobs for Canadians.

    It's dirty little not-so-secret secret.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 12:40 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    "a huge potential to cause grave environmental damage."

    and SB said,
    "Incorrect."

    I'm very curious as to how there is no potential for environmental damage. Care to enlighten us all?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 12:54 AM GMT
    meninlove said Christian73 said
    "a huge potential to cause grave environmental damage."

    and SB said,
    "Incorrect."

    I'm very curious as to how there is no potential for environmental damage. Care to enlighten us all?




    He cannot enlighten us on that subject, because its just a FOX biased NEWS talking point.



    As for jobs and energy from the amount invested, there are plenty of inovative technology that could be put to use if the intransigent republicans weren't blocking alternative system development. A lot could be done with changing over to Natural gas since there is supposed to be 300 year supply. How about investing in Hydrogen power.

    But no ---- god sent some damn far right congressman to tell us in Washington that God won't allow us to destroy the world, because he said the great flood was the last time and God has given us an endless supply of oil. So Repubs lets just stick with the status quo and rather than lead the world we'll be the last to make the change over. DAMN FOOLS !!!

    Thank goodness Obama made this decision. the results aren't worth the risk.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 1:11 AM GMT
    Reallifedad, the rejection of your pipeline is likely temporary, until after a thorough assessment has been done (which hadn't happened). We think it likely the pipeline to the US could very well go ahead, depending on the safety guarantees and risk management strategies, with an approval in March.

    icon_wink.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 1:28 AM GMT
    Yes, let's go ahead with this pipeline before fully studying the possible effects on the environment, drinking water, etc. Hell, why not allow drilling to commence everywhere and get government completely out of the way?

    Obviously we know from experience we can fully trust the fossil fuel industry to provide accurate and unbiased information--obviously these corporations have America's best interest at heart and can regulate themselves. They’re not interested in cutting corners or maximizing profits and minimizing costs. It’s not like they spend hundreds of millions of dollars influencing politicians like the powerful and almighty environmental lobby—those tree huggers are some of the most powerful people in America… hell the world!


    Not everything should be viewed through the lens of business/economics--that's all some of you seem to care about! And I'm sure some of you self-described "independents" would bitch about something if Obama went through with this plan anyway.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 1:37 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    conscienti1984 saidYes, let's go ahead with this pipeline before fully studying the possible effects on the environment, drinking water, etc. Hell, why not allow drilling to commence everywhere and get government completely out of the way?



    This is what really makes me shake my head with you liberals.... You don't know what you are talking about!!!

    The EPA has already approved the pipeline.

    The Obama admin has been "studying" this for 3 years.

    Mr. Obama is lying when he says there hasn't been enough time to study this.

    lol, SB, you're the same person who did nothing but dump on the EPA as being useless and untrustable lazies. (remember the spill on the East coast from the underwater well?) Are you surprised to find some Liberals felt the same way?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 1:46 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    conscienti1984 saidYes, let's go ahead with this pipeline before fully studying the possible effects on the environment, drinking water, etc. Hell, why not allow drilling to commence everywhere and get government completely out of the way?



    This is what really makes me shake my head with you liberals.... You don't know what you are talking about!!!

    The EPA has already approved the pipeline.

    The Obama admin has been "studying" this for 3 years.

    Mr. Obama is lying when he says there hasn't been enough time to study this.


    Source?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 1:47 AM GMT
    I find THIS very interesting.. and its ORIGIN is Canadian!

    EPA urged to disregard oilsands emissions in Keystone decision: letters

    http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/urged+disregard+oilsands+emissions+Keystone+decision+letters/6015341/story.html

    OTTAWA — The Alberta government has acknowledged that the Obama administration had accurate information about environmental impacts of oilsands development, but unsuccessfully urged it to disregard the industry's footprint on the planet's climate in an evaluation of the Keystone XL pipeline project, newly released correspondence has revealed.

    The letters, exchanged between Alberta Environment, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Canada's U.S. Ambassador Gary Doer, reveal new aspects of a Canadian lobbying campaign to persuade the Americans to exclude climate change from its final decision about the expansion of TransCanada's proposed Keystone pipeline expansion project. The proposed expansion would link the oilsands industry with refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas.

    Cont.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2012 1:51 AM GMT
    conscienti1984 said
    southbeach1500 said
    conscienti1984 saidYes, let's go ahead with this pipeline before fully studying the possible effects on the environment, drinking water, etc. Hell, why not allow drilling to commence everywhere and get government completely out of the way?



    This is what really makes me shake my head with you liberals.... You don't know what you are talking about!!!

    The EPA has already approved the pipeline.

    The Obama admin has been "studying" this for 3 years.

    Mr. Obama is lying when he says there hasn't been enough time to study this.


    Source?
    The EPA has NOT "approved" this nor has the EPA for Nebraska with the route.