Gas prices up, and Obama is still fighting Keystone

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Senate tried to amend the highway bill today to fast track Keystone. 60 votes were necessary, and it failed 56-42. Obama was actually lobbying senators to vote against the measure.

I just can't understand this. It makes no sense as a matter of policy or politics.

It looks like the Senate killed it.  It's pretty  clear Americans don't want this piece of crap.

Didn't it already clear Congress once? 

Why is this pipe so contraversial? Increased supply of WTI for Midwest and Gulf refineries. Jobs, infrastructure.  Seems like this would be real popular with everyone. 

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

So why not in Canada?

Arguing with libs is so frustrating. Every time you prove them wrong, they just switch to a different argument. At some point, wouldnt you stop and think, damn, if this many of my points are wrong, maybe i should just stop?

[Dugout DickStone]

So why not in Canada?

Arguing with libs is so frustrating. Every time you prove them wrong, they just switch to a different argument. At some point, wouldnt you stop and think, damn, if this many of my points are wrong, maybe i should just stop?

I am not a lib.  Not even close.  Voted repub every election, did a brief stint in Federalist society even.

I think being favor of this pipeline just to bash Obama is stupid.  It's partisan and makes conservatives look stupid because we are lockstep on every issue instead of actually thinking things through.  The GOP candidates who are voting for it are doing so because they got rough ridin' paid to do so.

The pipeline won't lower fuel prices for us, won't increase our engery independence and will require stealing land from private citizens.  Not exactly true conservatism.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

So why not in Canada?

Arguing with libs is so frustrating. Every time you prove them wrong, they just switch to a different argument. At some point, wouldnt you stop and think, damn, if this many of my points are wrong, maybe i should just stop?

I am not a lib.  Not even close.  Voted repub every election, did a brief stint in Federalist society even.

I think being favor of this pipeline just to bash Obama is stupid.  It's partisan and makes conservatives look stupid because we are lockstep on every issue instead of actually thinking things through.  The GOP candidates who are voting for it are doing so because they got rough ridin' paid to do so.

The pipeline won't lower fuel prices for us, won't increase our engery independence and will require stealing land from private citizens.  Not exactly true conservatism.

Stealing land huh? Glad to hear you're a "conservative." Coulda fooled me.

The pipeline will create jobs, it will create revenue, both to the government and the private citizens' whose land is being stolen, and help facilitate production. Every little bit helps when it comes to deflating speculation.

No one can say just how beneficial it will be, but why not find out? Why does the government once again stand in the way of a private enterprise trying to make money and create jobs? Let me guess, as a conservative, you have bought in all the environmental hocum too?

[CHONGS]

good ole  bleeding-heart liberal limestone!  couldn't pull one over on k-s-u wildcats!

[Dugout DickStone]

So the gov won't use eminent domain to get part of the land/easements for this?  Care to wager?

[Dugout DickStone]

Let's find out?  Why not?

I mean, what's the worst that can happen?

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

So the gov won't use eminent domain to get part of the land/easements for this?  Care to wager?

Condemning an easement is not stealing. Compensation is provided. The vast majority of the landowners along the route will be quite happy to have the money and will never require eminent domain.

Eminent domain is a valid public function provided if it is for a valid public use. And interstate pipelines certainly qualify.

[ednksu]

So why not in Canada?

Arguing with libs is so frustrating. Every time you prove them wrong, they just switch to a different argument. At some point, wouldnt you stop and think, damn, if this many of my points are wrong, maybe i should just stop?

I am not a lib.  Not even close.  Voted repub every election, did a brief stint in Federalist society even.

I think being favor of this pipeline just to bash Obama is stupid.  It's partisan and makes conservatives look stupid because we are lockstep on every issue instead of actually thinking things through.  The GOP candidates who are voting for it are doing so because they got rough ridin' paid to do so.

The pipeline won't lower fuel prices for us, won't increase our engery independence and will require stealing land from private citizens.  Not exactly true conservatism.

Stealing land huh? Glad to hear you're a "conservative." Coulda fooled me.

The pipeline will create jobs, it will create revenue, both to the government and the private citizens' whose land is being stolen, and help facilitate production. Every little bit helps when it comes to deflating speculation.

No one can say just how beneficial it will be, but why not find out? Why does the government once again stand in the way of a private enterprise trying to make money and create jobs? Let me guess, as a conservative, you have bought in all the environmental hocum too?

JFC that is a scary world you want to create.  You are not a conservative, you're hopeless neocon.  You probably believe in the Kelo v. New London decision. 

So why not in Canada?

Canada would basically have to go through a sovereign country in order to go west to the coast.  The reservations there want NO part of the pipeline and are fighting tooth and nail to stop it.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Stealing land huh? Glad to hear you're a "conservative." Coulda fooled me.

The pipeline will create jobs, it will create revenue, both to the government and the private citizens' whose land is being stolen, and help facilitate production. Every little bit helps when it comes to deflating speculation.

No one can say just how beneficial it will be, but why not find out? Why does the government once again stand in the way of a private enterprise trying to make money and create jobs? Let me guess, as a conservative, you have bought in all the environmental hocum too?

JFC that is a scary world you want to create.  You are not a conservative, you're hopeless neocon.  You probably believe in the Kelo v. New London decision. 

First, can you please define "neo con"? Seems to have a very elastic definition.

Second, just because I agree with the constitutional power of eminent domain does not mean that I agree with Kelo's asinine distortion of this power from "public use" to "public interest." Kelo authorized the condemnation of "blighted" property from one private owner to a developer for the sole "public interest" of increasing tax revenue. This was, of course, outrageous, and you can thank the libs plus one squishy moderate on the SC for that decision. This is a far cry from things such as highways, pipelines, etc which are both necessary and often necessitate the use of eminent domain by their very nature.

Sheesh. Invoking Kelo and talking about stealing land when we're talking about condemning a pipeline easement. Bunch of gd'd neocons on this board.

[ednksu]

Sheesh. Invoking Kelo and talking about stealing land when we're talking about condemning a pipeline easement. Bunch of gd'd neocons on this board.

this sentence makes no ideological sense. 

[CHONGS]

god the morons

[Dugout DickStone]

So the gov won't use eminent domain to get part of the land/easements for this?  Care to wager?

Condemning an easement is not stealing. Compensation is provided. The vast majority of the landowners along the route will be quite happy to have the money and will never require eminent domain.

Eminent domain is a valid public function provided if it is for a valid public use. And interstate pipelines certainly qualify.

Condemning private land that's not blighted or rundown.

Eminent domain is the government taking a citizen's land away from them and giving it to another private interest.  So you don't mind the most aggressive gov't action outside of the draft as long as it's the GOP pushing for it.

GOP who have taken millions from the very people who will get the land.

[Dugout DickStone]

Ps.  If you believe a public highway is the same as Keystone pipeline for Trans then let's close thread.  Because there is no point.

This should be a darling conservative issue against this thing but our elected reps are being paid by the people who want it so I am going to lose.  To quote Dax, "it's sad really"and the reason I gave up on any real political activity.

To the richest go the spoils, while betraying real conservatism.

[CHONGS]

Ps.  If you believe a public highway is the same as Keystone pipeline for Trans then let's close thread.  Because there is no point.

This should be a darling conservative issue against this thing but our elected reps are being paid by the people who want it so I am going to lose.  To quote Dax, "it's sad really"and the reason I gave up on any real political activity.

To the richest go the spoils, while betraying real conservatism.

WHATVES YOU CANT TRICK ME LIMELIBRUL

[ednksu]

Ps.  If you believe a public highway is the same as Keystone pipeline for Trans then let's close thread.  Because there is no point.

This should be a darling conservative issue against this thing but our elected reps are being paid by the people who want it so I am going to lose.  To quote Dax, "it's sad really"and the reason I gave up on any real political activity.

To the richest go the spoils, while betraying real conservatism.

booooooom!!!! that just happened

[06wildcat]

Ps.  If you believe a public highway is the same as Keystone pipeline for Trans then let's close thread.  Because there is no point.

This should be a darling conservative issue against this thing but our elected reps are being paid by the people who want it so I am going to lose.  To quote Dax, "it's sad really"and the reason I gave up on any real political activity.

To the richest go the spoils, while betraying real conservatism.

It's really funny to see the GOP tear at the seams between social/fiscal factions. The fiscal faction eyed the social faction as a bunch of rubes needed to win elections, and that worked for a couple decades. Now the social faction has taken over, demanding ideological purity in the party that leads to herp and derp that is in no way consistent with a small, limited government.

I do love the irony of social conservatives proclaiming their love of a smaller government though.

[ednksu]

Ps.  If you believe a public highway is the same as Keystone pipeline for Trans then let's close thread.  Because there is no point.

This should be a darling conservative issue against this thing but our elected reps are being paid by the people who want it so I am going to lose.  To quote Dax, "it's sad really"and the reason I gave up on any real political activity.

To the richest go the spoils, while betraying real conservatism.

It's really funny to see the GOP tear at the seams between social/fiscal factions. The fiscal faction eyed the social faction as a bunch of rubes needed to win elections, and that worked for a couple decades. Now the social faction has taken over, demanding ideological purity in the party that leads to herp and derp that is in no way consistent with a small, limited government.

I do love the irony of social conservatives proclaiming their love of a smaller government though.

You should subscribe to the B Goldwater school of being a rough ridin' COMMUNIST ABORTION MONGER MUSLIM LOVER

[Dugout DickStone]

Ps.  If you believe a public highway is the same as Keystone pipeline for Trans then let's close thread.  Because there is no point.

This should be a darling conservative issue against this thing but our elected reps are being paid by the people who want it so I am going to lose.  To quote Dax, "it's sad really"and the reason I gave up on any real political activity.

To the richest go the spoils, while betraying real conservatism.

It's really funny to see the GOP tear at the seams between social/fiscal factions. The fiscal faction eyed the social faction as a bunch of rubes needed to win elections, and that worked for a couple decades. Now the social faction has taken over, demanding ideological purity in the party that leads to herp and derp that is in no way consistent with a small, limited government.

I do love the irony of social conservatives proclaiming their love of a smaller government though.

It's not funny to me.  It took the people who were right, and knew what the constitution requires, out of the game and made us fight about dinosaurs and birth control.  And made us beholden to those who are only concerned about what happens in other people's bedrooms.

Why did start posting in the birther room.  Ug

[LickNeckey]

It is a better place because of it.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

So why not in Canada?

Arguing with libs is so frustrating. Every time you prove them wrong, they just switch to a different argument. At some point, wouldnt you stop and think, damn, if this many of my points are wrong, maybe i should just stop?

I
I am not a lib.  Not even close.  Voted repub every election, did a brief stint in Federalist society even.

I think being favor of this pipeline just to bash Obama is stupid.  It's partisan and makes conservatives look stupid because we are lockstep on every issue instead of actually thinking things through.  The GOP candidates who are voting for it are doing so because they got rough ridin' paid to do so.

The pipeline won't lower fuel prices for us, won't increase our engery independence and will require stealing land from private citizens.  Not exactly true conservatism.

I'm sorry, but wtf are you talking about here?

 I'm not certain, but I believe the easements were already purchased via private negs (4-6 yrs ago, before B.O. unilaterally rejected it then lied and said they could have it if they rerouted it) and regardless eminent domain is a state issue and its a pipe buried in the ground.  . . None of those are real issues here either way.

Second, what on earth is the federal government doing blocking this at all? More ad hoc anti business bullshit rationalized with post hoc bullshit excuses.

Third, Many of the jobs would directly benefit Kansas and consequently the economy benefits would benefit KS, in addition to providing more WTI crude for our WTI refineries.

Fourth, the gas prices argument is a red herring that everyone on this board followed down a rabbit hole. Regardless of the veracity of that argument, Why does the pipeline have to lower gas prices to be a legitimate project?

Fifth, there hasn't been one logical argument against this project, ever made, ever. The only people making this a partisan issue are the dem's.


In sum, remove your head from your bad person, please.

[Dugout DickStone]

So why not in Canada?

Arguing with libs is so frustrating. Every time you prove them wrong, they just switch to a different argument. At some point, wouldnt you stop and think, damn, if this many of my points are wrong, maybe i should just stop?

I
I am not a lib.  Not even close.  Voted repub every election, did a brief stint in Federalist society even.

I think being favor of this pipeline just to bash Obama is stupid.  It's partisan and makes conservatives look stupid because we are lockstep on every issue instead of actually thinking things through.  The GOP candidates who are voting for it are doing so because they got rough ridin' paid to do so.

The pipeline won't lower fuel prices for us, won't increase our engery independence and will require stealing land from private citizens.  Not exactly true conservatism.

I'm sorry, but wtf are you talking about here?

 I'm not certain, but I believe the easements were already purchased via private negs (4-6 yrs ago, before B.O. unilaterally rejected it then lied and said they could have it if they rerouted it) and regardless eminent domain is a state issue and its a pipe buried in the ground.  . . None of those are real issues here either way.

Second, what on earth is the federal government doing blocking this at all? More ad hoc anti business bullshit rationalized with post hoc bullshit excuses.

Third, Many of the jobs would directly benefit Kansas and consequently the economy benefits would benefit KS, in addition to providing more WTI crude for our WTI refineries.

Fourth, the gas prices argument is a red herring that everyone on this board followed down a rabbit hole. Regardless of the veracity of that argument, Why does the pipeline have to lower gas prices to be a legitimate project?

Fifth, there hasn't been one logical argument against this project, ever made, ever. The only people making this a partisan issue are the dem's.


In sum, remove your head from your bad person, please.

Link that they have all the easements they need?

It will raise gas prices for a large portion of America.  Are you saying that isn't a logical argument against it?  (Because that would show you are an idiot)

[Rage Against the McKee]

Second, what on earth is the federal government doing blocking this at all? More ad hoc anti business bullshit rationalized with post hoc bullshit excuses.

I agree with this. The pipeline should have been killed when Nebraska killed it. The federal government shouldn't have been given the opportunity to intervene.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

So why not in Canada?

Arguing with libs is so frustrating. Every time you prove them wrong, they just switch to a different argument. At some point, wouldnt you stop and think, damn, if this many of my points are wrong, maybe i should just stop?

I
I am not a lib.  Not even close.  Voted repub every election, did a brief stint in Federalist society even.

I think being favor of this pipeline just to bash Obama is stupid.  It's partisan and makes conservatives look stupid because we are lockstep on every issue instead of actually thinking things through.  The GOP candidates who are voting for it are doing so because they got rough ridin' paid to do so.

The pipeline won't lower fuel prices for us, won't increase our engery independence and will require stealing land from private citizens.  Not exactly true conservatism.

I'm sorry, but wtf are you talking about here?

 I'm not certain, but I believe the easements were already purchased via private negs (4-6 yrs ago, before B.O. unilaterally rejected it then lied and said they could have it if they rerouted it) and regardless eminent domain is a state issue and its a pipe buried in the ground.  . . None of those are real issues here either way.

Second, what on earth is the federal government doing blocking this at all? More ad hoc anti business bullshit rationalized with post hoc bullshit excuses.

Third, Many of the jobs would directly benefit Kansas and consequently the economy benefits would benefit KS, in addition to providing more WTI crude for our WTI refineries.

Fourth, the gas prices argument is a red herring that everyone on this board followed down a rabbit hole. Regardless of the veracity of that argument, Why does the pipeline have to lower gas prices to be a legitimate project?

Fifth, there hasn't been one logical argument against this project, ever made, ever. The only people making this a partisan issue are the dem's.


In sum, remove your head from your bad person, please.

Link that they have all the easements they need?

It will raise gas prices for a large portion of America.  Are you saying that isn't a logical argument against it?  (Because that would show you are an idiot)

1.  I personally know a someone that sold an easement already.  I assume you can look at the public land records where the easements are recorded if you don't believe me.  As with everything else said in opposition of this pipe, the eminent domain argument appears completely made up and yet another post-hoc rationalization (remember, this started as an "environmental" argument and only later evolved into all this other crap).  I haven't seen that anywhere.  Regardless, it certainly passes Constitutional muster as set forth in City of New London, and a fair price would be paid for the inconvenience of not being able to use an 80 foot swath of land for 1 growing season.

2.  The gas prices will go up argument fails logic and common sense.  What it doesn't fail is the post-hoc rationalization test.  Even if you actually believe that bullshit, it has nothing to do with the purpose of the pipe, which is to bring a commodity to market more efficiently and quickly.  Has anyone on this board even ever heard of the Bakken Oil play?  It's created more jobs and wealth in this country in the last 4 years than any other project/technology/govt boondoggle/etc.

For god sakes, the pipe isn't a rough ridin' straw from Canada to Texas.  There will be places of input and output all along the way (including North Dakota).  I can't believe the people on this board are so rough ridin' obtuse.  The oil won't be "bypassing" any midwest refinery that has excess capacity to refine WTI, any statement otherwise is a lie.  In case you haven't noticed, and judging by this article you obviously haven't, the spread between WTI and Brent Crude is about $15 /bbl.  The basic input for gasoline is therefore roughly 15% higher if the oil is purchased from the ME right now.  Bringing more supply to market, will in fact drive down the price p/bbl and therefore the price of gas.  Duh.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Second, what on earth is the federal government doing blocking this at all? More ad hoc anti business bullshit rationalized with post hoc bullshit excuses.

I agree with this. The pipeline should have been killed when Nebraska killed it. The federal government shouldn't have been given the opportunity to intervene.

San legitimate Health, Safety and Welfare concerns, which there were none, the State has no right to interfere with private property rights and the ability of private parties to contract. 

Regardless, Nebraska never killed it.  Just another misrepresentation, lie, half-truth, post-hoc rationalization offered up as justification for a completely irrational decision.