Obama's Epic Failures

mac · Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:55 pm Post subject:

Techno claims:

isobars · Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935

keycocker · Joined: 10 Jul 2005 Posts: 3598

For those new here the above post is a lie Iso repeated for the first time about five years ago.
Oreilly loved Obama and recently changed his mind. Hilarious.
It refers to a single factual statement Oreilly made about Obama, defending him from guys like Iso long ago. I think it wa the birth certificate.
Then he stopped doing that the next day when the boss complained.
At that time he was concerned that so many conservatives believed in so much HS that we would look stupid to educated people.

keycocker · Joined: 10 Jul 2005 Posts: 3598

I have to speak to someone who supports the pipeline on its merits.
It seems to be all about hating Obama.
The original filing by the Canadians could not suggest any substantial benefit for our country.
Unlike all other sources, that doc held the Ruth or its authors could wind up in jail.
Could someone explain why the Canadians diverting their oil from northern refineries for the American market so they can ship it out from La. to higher paying foreign markets is good for our country?
I fear that the good of our country is no longer a consideration to talk radio conservatives. Hating Obama is all they have left to think with.

MalibuGuru · Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9300

Without a doubt, that oil is coming out of the ground. It will go to China if it doesn't go to us. China will continue to destroy the environment and build their military.

Why shouldn't we grow the economy, get more oil, and protect the environment?

pueno · Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 2807

isobars · Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935

swchandler · Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588

techno900, did you ever ask yourself how Steyer personally benefits from a decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline? Isn't it a bit curious why big donors from the left don't seem to have the ulterior motives to profit from the Keystone XL pipeline like the Republican donors?

Regarding the Keystone XL pipeline, why should the average American support such an endeavor? It won't result in cheaper gas prices or produce any other tangible outcomes with widespread benefits, so why is it so important project to rally behind? Is such a project really an infrastructure improvement? I think not, because it doesn't increase commerce that regular Americans can benefit from like roads, bridges, airports, and water projects.

From a purely economical and jobs perspective, I'm inclined to think that shipping the oil by rail could make more sense when it comes to creating real American and Canadian jobs. Wasn't it NW30 that posted an industry article about that? Just the demand for new tanker cars would represent a boon to the railway related manufacturing and steel industries. I like the idea of railroads, because at least that kind of investment offers a flexible kind of infrastructure that could serve other purposes.

MalibuGuru · Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9300

Steyer is, or was until recently, a major investor in Kinder Morgan, which is building a competitor to the Keystone pipeline. He is also an egotist who wants to control the left.

Unbelievable that he is so hypocritical, yet gets a free ride. Classic oligarch.

And, Buffet owns the railroads, so it is easy to see why he's opposed to a more efficient way to transport oil.

swchandler · Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588

Come on Bard, you're conveniently ignoring my main point. What tangible benefits will average Americans see with the Keystone XL pipeline? Can't think of any?

The Keystone XL pipeline is a smoke and mirrors ruse being promoted by the oil industry so that it can profit refining crude oil for export. It's pretty simple to see what's going on.