Congress, President Obama set for battle over 1,700-mile oil pipeline

Le Jimbo wrote:

<quoted text>hmmmmmmm more oil won't help prices..........are you rally that stupid?

No, I said another PIPELINE won't do anything about prices. The oil will come in one way or another. Simply piping it in instead of shipping it in on a tanker won't make any difference in the price of gas.

Eron wrote:

I'll buy that- it's not the point though. And there will be several hundred permanent jobs created after the pipeline in built- each 100-200 mile section will have an operations supervisor and a few maintenance workers for upkeep in every state that it goes through.
These will be skilled trades people who belong to a union.
<quoted text>

Still not worth the inevitable oil spills. Maybe if was 1 million permanent jobs and guaranteed to decrease the price of gas to $1/gal.

Inevitable? Please, the most serious incident with the Alaska pipeline came from an environmentalist blowing a hole in it. 16,000 bbl of oil flowed out before it was shut down. Maintenance mishaps on that particular pipeline are negligible. If that's all that happens 33 years from when this pipeline is finished, I would call that a success.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
Still not worth the inevitable oil spills. Maybe if was 1 million permanent jobs and guaranteed to decrease the price of gas to $1/gal.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>So let's go back to heating our homes with coal & wood, or don't you support creating all those jobs? We have plenty of coal & trees in this country, no need to import any more oil.

some people do.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>Still not worth the inevitable oil spills. Maybe if was 1 million permanent jobs and guaranteed to decrease the price of gas to $1/gal.

how many oil spills has that ALaska pipeline had? Don't we have gas pipelines in our country now? There are natural gas pipelines here in the county where I live. Have been since the 1930's. I haven't ever heard of a leak. Maybe we should just outlaw cars. It would save lives and then you lib retards could complain about candle wax or horse manure.

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
how many oil spills has that ALaska pipeline had? Don't we have gas pipelines in our country now? There are natural gas pipelines here in the county where I live. Have been since the 1930's. I haven't ever heard of a leak. Maybe we should just outlaw cars. It would save lives and then you lib retards could complain about candle wax or horse manure.

The Alaska pipe has had a lot of leaks.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
So let's go back to heating our homes with coal & wood, or don't you support creating all those jobs? We have plenty of coal & trees in this country, no need to import any more oil.

I have a fire going in my fireplace right now libtard! The smoke is billowing up through the sky as we speak!

GM Leads U.S. Automakers Securing Best Sales Year Since ‘08
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-04/g...

Any questions from the peanut gallery?

Why is "BIG OIL" always looked at as the enemy? What about the BIG taxes the federal and state put on the oil companies? Ask the gas station owners how much they make per gallon of gas. Companies are not the enemy. It's the establishment politicians that keep taking until nobody has anything left to give. Anything positive for this country Obama and his minons will try to defeat it. We have lost what America is really about. So if a person wants to be successful, he must want to run an evil corporation!

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
So let's go back to heating our homes with coal & wood, or don't you support creating all those jobs? We have plenty of coal & trees in this country, no need to import any more oil.

Intersting concept. I'm in, lets shut off all electricty and after 12 months, those that are left get to vote.

swampmudd wrote:

<quoted text>The Alaska pipe has had a lot of leaks.

really?? Not in the news much. Has it destroyed the environment? Why did Hillary ok this pipeline? How are we suppose to get any oil? Make it appear where we want it like magic? Liberals really are retards.

Sons of liberty wrote:

<quoted text>
Your a F'n moron and you always have been! Unemployment around 4-5% the ENTIRE 8 years! A housing crash caused by democrats ...

Amazing that you would believe absolutely anything put on Fox News, no matter how bizarre. Unemployment 4-5%????? What were you 5 years old and could not see the millions bush put out of work? Do you really think shutting down almost our entire industrial base resulted in no change to unemployment? Allowing 10s of millions of illegals in to the nation to flood the labor pool resulted in no change in wages? I suppose stagnant wages since the introduction of Reaganomics had no effect on the standard of living of those who work for a living? To believe such lies is very sad.

Don Joe wrote:

<quoted text>Amazing that you would believe absolutely anything put on Fox News, no matter how bizarre. Unemployment 4-5%????? What were you 5 years old and could not see the millions bush put out of work? Do you really think shutting down almost our entire industrial base resulted in no change to unemployment? Allowing 10s of millions of illegals in to the nation to flood the labor pool resulted in no change in wages? I suppose stagnant wages since the introduction of Reaganomics had no effect on the standard of living of those who work for a living? To believe such lies is very sad.

you may want to check the gov own records. We had record numbers of jobs while Bush was president. Maybe you were asleep when Clinton and the
Congress sold our industry to Mexico. It was called nafta.

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
really?? Not in the news much. Has it destroyed the environment? Why did Hillary ok this pipeline? How are we suppose to get any oil? Make it appear where we want it like magic? Liberals really are retards.

OIL pipelines are a perfect example of Murphy's law. What is the problem with rerouting the pipeline through an area that is not as environmentally sensative? OIL pipelines are a perfect example of Murphy's law. What is the problem with rerouting the pipeline through an area that is not as environmentally sensitive? An area that does not supply the water to six states. That is Nebraska’s main objection and it is a legitimate one. What I would like to know is, why are Canada and the USA building a pipe thousands of miles long to the Gulf Coast so that oil can be exported at a time when both countries are importing oil to satisfy their needs?

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
you may want to check the gov own records. We had record numbers of jobs while Bush was president. Maybe you were asleep when Clinton and the
Congress sold our industry to Mexico. It was called nafta.

You mean the Bush deal that Clinton went along with. You are right. Democrats must stop being bipartisan and going along with Republicans ideas. Great example of what happens when Democrats accept Republican plans.

frank wrote:

GM Leads U.S. Automakers Securing Best Sales Year Since ‘08
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-04/g...
Any questions from the peanut gallery?

No question about it....Obama really did the right thing, bailing out GM and Chrysler......

Don Joe wrote:

<quoted text>
Amazing that you would believe absolutely anything put on Fox News, no matter how bizarre. Unemployment 4-5%????? What were you 5 years old and could not see the millions bush put out of work? Do you really think shutting down almost our entire industrial base resulted in no change to unemployment? Allowing 10s of millions of illegals in to the nation to flood the labor pool resulted in no change in wages? I suppose stagnant wages since the introduction of Reaganomics had no effect on the standard of living of those who work for a living? To believe such lies is very sad.

I see your still clinging to that flawed income inequality study of Piketty & Saez.

You do know that that their study omitted transfer payments, don't you?

Isn't that an odd omission? A study of income that doesn't include the $ trillions of government money designed to increase the income of the poor?

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
you may want to check the gov own records. We had record numbers of jobs while Bush was president. Maybe you were asleep when Clinton and the
Congress sold our industry to Mexico. It was called nafta.

Bush "job creation" numbers were high for two reasons. 1. The run away housing market that eventually crashed the economy. 2. He started counting part time jobs at Mickey Dee's as new jobs. At the same time one third of all our manufacturing jobs moved offshore. After Bush took office unemployment went up. Why? The low paying jobs he was creating could not keep up with the high paying jobs he was losing. Median income remained flat or fell. Only a small handful of the richest increased their income. But they increased their income by many times what they had been making. In fact they made so much more money that while median income was falling, average income was going up. That condition still exists today but that should not surprise anyone because we are still operating under the same economics that Bush installed.

swampmudd wrote:

<quoted text>OIL pipelines are a perfect example of Murphy's law. What is the problem with rerouting the pipeline through an area that is not as environmentally sensative? OIL pipelines are a perfect example of Murphy's law. What is the problem with rerouting the pipeline through an area that is not as environmentally sensitive? An area that does not supply the water to six states. That is Nebraska’s main objection and it is a legitimate one. What I would like to know is, why are Canada and the USA building a pipe thousands of miles long to the Gulf Coast so that oil can be exported at a time when both countries are importing oil to satisfy their needs?

Absurd.

Environmentalists will declare any and all routes sensitive.

"Obama and his comrades complain further that Keystone XL would jeopardize the Ogallala Aquifer, a sort of underground Great Lake that runs from South Dakota to Texas. Here again, Democrats might have a point if Keystone XL were the first pipeline to traverse the aquifer. However, as the map below confirms, this is a bit like worrying about the growth of America’s welfare state: Too late!"

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/286075...

Don Joe wrote:

<quoted text>
Amazing that you would believe absolutely anything put on Fox News, no matter how bizarre. Unemployment 4-5%????? What were you 5 years old and could not see the millions bush put out of work? To believe such lies is very sad.

It is you who are 5 years old, and obviously a born liar and a communist. To belch such lies is very sad.

The 2006 midterm Pelosi/Reid democrat-controlled House and Senate (110th congress) were the DEATH KNELL. The Pelosi/Reid democrat cabal sabotaged Bush's presidency for political gain, overrode his budgets, and spent us into oblivion.

George Bush and the GOP-controlled congress brought us back from the dot-com bust and 9/11, creating the DHS and rebuilding the intel infrastructure that Clinton decimated.

Under Bush and the GOP we had all-time record-high employment, record-high government revenues, a record 52 consecutive months of job growth, 6.8 million new jobs, the DOW near 14,000, the deficit reduced to $161 billion, GDP growth at 3.5%, and unemployment at a nominal 4.2 - 4.5%.

GDP grew about 29.7% from 2003 to 2008, and income tax revenues grew nearly 56% during that same time.....ALL-TIME RECORDS.

What happened after the Pelosi/Reid democrat cabal took control of the House AND Senate after the 2006 midterms (110th congress)?

Let's see....

Since the democrats took control after the 2006 midterms (Jan 3rd, 2007), the Pelosi/Reid controlled 110th congress have looted the treasury for nearly $6 trillion and increased the deficit by $1.26 trillion, or 776%.(The republican congress had reduced the deficit from a high of $412 billion in FY 2004 to $319b in FY 2005, to $248b in FY 2006, and ultimately to $161b in FY 2007).

Those same democrats also increased the National Debt from $8.67 trillion to $14.56 trillion -- an increase of $5.89 trillion or 68% AND increased the Debt Limit from $8.965 trillion to $14.29 trillion -- an increase of $5.33 trillion or 59.4%.....while losing 6.8 million jobs.

And who could forget that those same democrats turned the projected $800 billion SURPLUS over the ten-year period FY 2008-2017 into a $9.7 trillion DEFICIT -- a $10.5 trillion worsening of the budget outlook.

IN ADDITION to creating record debt and record deficits, they've delivered record poverty, record welfare, record food stamp enrollment, record home foreclosures, record-low housing values, record-low business startups, record-low private-sector pay, record-high goverment-pay, record-high underemployment, record-high inflation, record-high economic stagnation, record-high bank closures, and doubled unemployment. Along with backroom deals, bribes, government takeovers of our economy, thousands of ruinous new taxes and regulations, billions in payoffs to state unions and union pensions, the ruination of our healthcare system, made a mockery of congress, and utterly crippled business, confidence, and prosperity in America.
________

Changes in number of jobs:

• When Republicans controlled House and Senate, Jan 2003 to Jan 2007:
+6,801,000

• When Democrats controlled House and Senate, Jan 2007 to present (May, 2010):
-6,497,000
________

• When Congress/Senate were split, Jan 2001 to Jan 2003:
-2,203,000

• When Republicans controlled House and Senate, Jan 1995 to Jan 2001:
+16,107,000

Source: St. Louis Fed/FRED, Hoven's Index for June 30, 2010
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/06/g...
________

Pelosi Censors Republicans -- by Rep. John Carter - 07/16/2009
http://www.sodahead.com/fun/pelosi-censors-re...
________

Democrat fiscal damage incarnate, in 5 consecutive posts....
http://www.topix.net/forum/us/politics/T9BKF6...

Wanna talk about Clinton, Frank, Dodd, and Cuomo now?