Hi, I'm Randy Thompson

[Carla_Danger]

As you prepare to take a vote on Keystone XL, I want to remind you what is at stake for those of us along the proposed pipeline route. When the political pundits move on to another debate, our families will still be here defending our property rights and clean water.

TransCanada has no legal route for their pipeline in Nebraska. Citizens took Gov. Heineman to court for violating our state constitution and we won.

The Governor is now trying to get the decision overturned by the Nebraska Supreme Court, but that does not magically give TransCanada their route back. Today, they have no route and over 115 landowners are refusing to sign with TransCanada in order to protect their water and property rights.

As a Nebraskan, I urge you to vote against the Keystone XL bill—and instead vote in favor of American landowners.

You can vote against the Keystone XL bill and still support the pipeline. I certainly don’t agree with President Obama on everything he does, but I stand with him today on his decision to delay Keystone XL until all legal issues are resolved—and I ask you to do the same.

American landowners are fighting tooth and nail to protect our constitutionally-protected property rights against a foreign corporation who wants to take our land. TransCanada disregards our American dream, and a vote for this pipeline bill would do the same.

Nebraska Rancher Randy Thompson 8217 s Open Letter to Senate on Keystone XL Vote Bold Nebraska

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Coincidence?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I will stand for individual property rights over business property rights until all legal issues are settled.

 

[g5000]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

As you prepare to take a vote on Keystone XL, I want to remind you what is at stake for those of us along the proposed pipeline route. When the political pundits move on to another debate, our families will still be here defending our property rights and clean water.

TransCanada has no legal route for their pipeline in Nebraska. Citizens took Gov. Heineman to court for violating our state constitution and we won.

The Governor is now trying to get the decision overturned by the Nebraska Supreme Court, but that does not magically give TransCanada their route back. Today, they have no route and over 115 landowners are refusing to sign with TransCanada in order to protect their water and property rights.

As a Nebraskan, I urge you to vote against the Keystone XL bill—and instead vote in favor of American landowners.

You can vote against the Keystone XL bill and still support the pipeline. I certainly don’t agree with President Obama on everything he does, but I stand with him today on his decision to delay Keystone XL until all legal issues are resolved—and I ask you to do the same.

American landowners are fighting tooth and nail to protect our constitutionally-protected property rights against a foreign corporation who wants to take our land. TransCanada disregards our American dream, and a vote for this pipeline bill would do the same.

Nebraska Rancher Randy Thompson 8217 s Open Letter to Senate on Keystone XL Vote Bold Nebraska

Hypocritical RWs were in favor of land RENTER Bundy screwing over the taxpayers by refusing to pay his bills but they're in favor of the Republicans stealing land that is OWNED by American citizens.

Where are the phony little "militia" types now? Why aren't they fighting for the rights of these people?

 

[g5000]

It's the railroads vs. ranchers war all over again. We know how that turned out.

 

[martybegan]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

Its funny that this is the first time we are hearing about all this crap, and yet there are tens of thousands of existing miles of pipeline crossing tens of thousands of miles of land, some of it private property that has been condemned.

This guy will also fight you if you want to force him to construct a wetland to protect the snot-nosed bugger lizard on his property, I wonder how many environmentalists would support him then.

 

[g5000]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

Its funny that this is the first time we are hearing about all this crap, and yet there are tens of thousands of existing miles of pipeline crossing tens of thousands of miles of land, some of it private property that has been condemned.

This guy will also fight you if you want to force him to construct a wetland to protect the snot-nosed bugger lizard on his property, I wonder how many environmentalists would support him then.

Not all of us have forgotten or forgiven Kelo v. New London.

As for constructing a wetland, you have it backwards. Hippies are about keeping wetlands from being destroyed.

 

[mdk]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

This sums up my position rather nicely. Cheers!

 

[Carla_Danger]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

I'm on both sides. I agree with the fricking hippies, and the landowning cowboy.

 

[Carla_Danger]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

What about Native American's? Do you support their land owning rights?

 

[g5000]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

What about Native American's?

The Native American claim is a bogus one. The pipeline is not crossing their lands.

 

[martybegan]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

Its funny that this is the first time we are hearing about all this crap, and yet there are tens of thousands of existing miles of pipeline crossing tens of thousands of miles of land, some of it private property that has been condemned.

This guy will also fight you if you want to force him to construct a wetland to protect the snot-nosed bugger lizard on his property, I wonder how many environmentalists would support him then.

Not all of us have forgotten or forgiven Kelo v. New London.

As for constructing a wetland, you have it backwards. Hippies are about keeping wetlands from being destroyed.

Then i guess we get to build no more railroads, power lines, or anything else that involves long distances and crossing private property, because of one SC decision.

How about we give the land held already for these things and go back to the stone age?

 

[martybegan]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

This sums up my position rather nicely. Cheers!

So basically you support nothing ever getting done involving massive public works.

 

[g5000]

The Native American claim dredges up claims to land which the Indians lost a long, long time ago. They are using the pipeline to rehash an argument that was settled a very long time ago.

 

[g5000]

Then i guess we get to build no more railroads, power lines, or anything else that involves long distances and crossing private property, because of one SC decision.

How about we give the land held already for these things and go back to the stone age?

Like I said, this is the railroads vs. ranchers war all over again.

I suggest TransCanada make a better financial offer to the ranchers instead of using force.

 

[Carla_Danger]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

What about Native American's?

The Native American claim is a bogus one. The pipeline is not crossing their lands.

They certainly think it is.

 

[martybegan]

Then i guess we get to build no more railroads, power lines, or anything else that involves long distances and crossing private property, because of one SC decision.

How about we give the land held already for these things and go back to the stone age?

Like I said, this is the railroads vs. ranchers war all over again.

I suggest TransCanada make a better financial offer to the ranchers instead of using force.

Usually force happens only after a "better offer" is given. Some of these guys see the writing on the wall and ask for money 10x the value of the land in question.

Why would a company want to go through the cost of litigation (which it can't recover) unless the requested price is either so crazy to make litigation worth it, or really just a screen for someone who refuses to negotiate at all?

 

[martybegan]

The Native American claim dredges up claims to land which the Indians lost a long, long time ago. They are using the pipeline to rehash an argument that was settled a very long time ago.

it would be like the dutch reclaiming NY, or the Spanish reclaiming Florida.

 

[mdk]

I fully support the Keystone pipeline, but I absolutely oppose forcing landowners to let the pipeline cross their lands.

No fricking hippie is ever going to convince me that Keystone XL is a bad thing. But a landowning cowboy can.

This sums up my position rather nicely. Cheers!

So basically you support nothing ever getting done involving massive public works.

Not hardly. Taking land from a private citizen and handing it over to a corporation; domestic or foreign, is not a just reason to invoke eminent domain in my opinion.

Back in the 90's the mayor of Pittsburgh proposed redeveloping the 5th and Forbes corridor downtown by the use of eminent domain. It went over like stone furniture. Eminent domain is for highways and bridges not Tiffany's.

I support the pipeline but if these folks want the pipe to not cross their land then they should not be forced to do so.