Oil Transported Through Keystone Will Be Consumed in the US

[Dot Com]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

^ that







Ravi

 

[Siete]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

now you're catching on.

 

[Dot Com]

You guys ever seen timbits?

is that Canuck cereal?

 

[Dot Com]

my problem?

my bitch is YOU living in Canada and telling Americans what is and isn't good for them. You campaign against a hydro line IN Canada and campaign FOR chemically diluted asphalt passing through MY country... blanket brush your hypocrisy... it's your really big one.

 

[tinydancer]

I'll believe the vast amounts of reports saying the same thing President Obama is saying over the self-serving, lone comment from an oil corporation executive, thank you very much.

Because that "vast amount" comes from the likes of Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz.
It doesnt matter. The oil will be sold to highest bidder for the most money. The way things should work.

Then it serves no public benefit to the U.S. So there shouldn't be eminent domain. Let them pay for the land themselves instead of getting a government handout.

oil and gas leases are the backbone of American oil . The landowners actually get compensated for the use of their land. That $$ helps our economy. But if you're Canada our "going in the right direction" Republicans will be MORE than happy to give you all you need for free. Land owners get screwed out of their land and the economy suffers.... Republicans,moving right along IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I have a real problem with eminent domain north and south. I don't like it at all. Not at all.

Here's your problem Seite you just blanket brush us. Where I can find how to work the pipeline as soon as it crosses some one's land that doesn't want it there I have a freaking problem.

Really big one as a matter of fact. I'm not there yet and I don't like it.

my problem?

my bitch is YOU living in Canada and telling Americans what is and isn't good for them. You campaign against a hydro line IN Canada and campaign FOR chemically diluted asphalt passing through MY country... blanket brush your hypocrisy... it's your really big one.

I'm dual baby. I'm a citizen of both worlds.

Now get back to me asshole and let me know how you feel about Keystone I and Keystone II and the southern leg of Keystone XL.

Got a problem with canadian crude get up off your ass and riot.

Tell you what. You don't like the shit you've been importing all these years why don't you get away from your computer bitch, back off all and everything called electric and go primitive..

Go fuck that canuck oil. Start pumping water. Get rid of all your toys. Sit in the dark with candles.

Tell me how you like it. I've done it. But you tell me again you don't want canadian crude I've got not a problem with it but you have to convince the rest of your country asshole.

Go fuck yourself Siete. You can't make a decent argument so you resort to I DONT WANT YOUR DIRTY OIL.
:lmbo:

But you're still posting aren't you supposed to be tending to your windmill.

 

[tinydancer]

You don't want dirty oil. Step away from the computer.

 

[SwimExpert]

There is no reason whatsoever to oppose the northern leg. Just political bullshit.

Red herring. Since conservationism is clearly not your motivation, what is the reason you do support the project?

Tell you what Seite why don't you go on any North Dakotan website and ask them how badly they want the Keystone XL northern line and try to tell them they are fucked in the head.

Apparently you can't keep your conversations straight.

Better yet, you just tell Heidi Heitkamp she's full of shit for backing the Keystone as well.

So what, is she god? Why the fuck do I care what a Democratic Senator says?

By all means knock yourself out. As far as opposing the project being abandoned I just think it would be the ultimate retarded left wing piece of bullshit ever.

So, you think it's "retarded" and "left wing" for American foreign policy to preserve discounted oil prices for the heartland of our country? That's a very odd thing to say. But I suppose it makes sense from a Canadian point of view.

I have my hands full up and coming with Bipole III. I just comment on this board regarding Keystone because in passing I hate lies and liars.

I have to give you credit in that you have indeed generally stuck to describing factual matters. But you also have been clearly aiming to encourage people to reach false conclusions. For example, you keep hammering on about TransCanada being a shipping company, and that they don't own the oil. That is a fact. But you keep using it as a retort to people who mistrust TransCanada's CEO's comments. Your goal is clearly for people to accept the CEO's comments as being reliable, which according to your own premises is impossible.

And that's what you and others are in your opposition to the Keystone.

That makes no sense. Opposition to Keystone is not a lie. How can it be a lie? That's like saying that someone's favorite food is a lie. It's a matter of perspective.

I have not once lied about anything on this matter. I oppose the XL project. The reason I oppose the XL project is because it will increase oil prices in parts of the United States, while offering no significant benefits. The extremely few jobs that will be created are not even close to being worth the price our country would pay. There is absolutely no lie therein.

You actually take very little of the brunt of what I do. I'm pretty vicious against those that lie in the world of conservation. Actually I am lethal.

Well I'm just shaking in my little pink cowboy boots.

You have clearly crossed the threshold of rational discussion and emotional lashing out. You've become positively hostile and threatening, while offering no substance. Such is the pattern for people who are no longer able to defend their position with facts and logic.

I believe in posters you see like Dot Com because I really believe that he cares about the environment.

I may think his loyalties misplaced but I believe when he tells me truthfully that he cares about what is going on with the tar sands and the environmental impact it has on the globe.

You don't care at all.

This is really an interesting new front you are trying to insert. Not once anywhere have I voiced any objection to the XL project based on environmental concerns. I'm not entirely sure why you are trying to beat on that strawman. But whatever the reason, it's tantamount to you lying.

 

[SwimExpert]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

There's the 35 permanent jobs. Not worth it, but there's that.

 

[tinydancer]

You guys ever seen timbits?

is that Canuck cereal?

Just timbits.

 

[tinydancer]

There is no reason whatsoever to oppose the northern leg. Just political bullshit.

Red herring. Since conservationism is clearly not your motivation, what is the reason you do support the project?

Tell you what Seite why don't you go on any North Dakotan website and ask them how badly they want the Keystone XL northern line and try to tell them they are fucked in the head.

Apparently you can't keep your conversations straight.

Better yet, you just tell Heidi Heitkamp she's full of shit for backing the Keystone as well.

So what, is she god? Why the fuck do I care what a Democratic Senator says?

By all means knock yourself out. As far as opposing the project being abandoned I just think it would be the ultimate retarded left wing piece of bullshit ever.

So, you think it's "retarded" and "left wing" for American foreign policy to preserve discounted oil prices for the heartland of our country? That's a very odd thing to say. But I suppose it makes sense from a Canadian point of view.

I have my hands full up and coming with Bipole III. I just comment on this board regarding Keystone because in passing I hate lies and liars.

Red herring. Since conservationism is clearly not your motivation, what is the reason you do support the project?

I'm a conservationist and I believe pipelines are the safest way for crude to travel.

I've stated this time and time again.

My creds are solid in the world of water purity and conservation. Yours?

Where do you want to go from here?

 

[tinydancer]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

There's the 35 permanent jobs. Not worth it, but there's that.

Why don't you you smarmy bitch tell every man that was an Oklahoman working on the southern leg that $134,000 in a short time was just a temp job that sucked?

 

[Ravi]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

There's the 35 permanent jobs. Not worth it, but there's that.

Or 50, which is laughable. I'd like a "conservative" to explain how this benefits the US.

 

[tinydancer]

There is no reason whatsoever to oppose the northern leg. Just political bullshit.

Red herring. Since conservationism is clearly not your motivation, what is the reason you do support the project?

Tell you what Seite why don't you go on any North Dakotan website and ask them how badly they want the Keystone XL northern line and try to tell them they are fucked in the head.

Apparently you can't keep your conversations straight.

Better yet, you just tell Heidi Heitkamp she's full of shit for backing the Keystone as well.

So what, is she god? Why the fuck do I care what a Democratic Senator says?

By all means knock yourself out. As far as opposing the project being abandoned I just think it would be the ultimate retarded left wing piece of bullshit ever.

So, you think it's "retarded" and "left wing" for American foreign policy to preserve discounted oil prices for the heartland of our country? That's a very odd thing to say. But I suppose it makes sense from a Canadian point of view.

I have my hands full up and coming with Bipole III. I just comment on this board regarding Keystone because in passing I hate lies and liars.

I have to give you credit in that you have indeed generally stuck to describing factual matters. But you also have been clearly aiming to encourage people to reach false conclusions. For example, you keep hammering on about TransCanada being a shipping company, and that they don't own the oil. That is a fact. But you keep using it as a retort to people who mistrust TransCanada's CEO's comments. Your goal is clearly for people to accept the CEO's comments as being reliable, which according to your own premises is impossible.

And that's what you and others are in your opposition to the Keystone.

That makes no sense. Opposition to Keystone is not a lie. How can it be a lie? That's like saying that someone's favorite food is a lie. It's a matter of perspective.

I have not once lied about anything on this matter. I oppose the XL project. The reason I oppose the XL project is because it will increase oil prices in parts of the United States, while offering no significant benefits. The extremely few jobs that will be created are not even close to being worth the price our country would pay. There is absolutely no lie therein.

You actually take very little of the brunt of what I do. I'm pretty vicious against those that lie in the world of conservation. Actually I am lethal.

Well I'm just shaking in my little pink cowboy boots.

You have clearly crossed the threshold of rational discussion and emotional lashing out. You've become positively hostile and threatening, while offering no substance. Such is the pattern for people who are no longer able to defend their position with facts and logic.

I believe in posters you see like Dot Com because I really believe that he cares about the environment.

I may think his loyalties misplaced but I believe when he tells me truthfully that he cares about what is going on with the tar sands and the environmental impact it has on the globe.

You don't care at all.

This is really an interesting new front you are trying to insert. Not once anywhere have I voiced any objection to the XL project based on environmental concerns. I'm not entirely sure why you are trying to beat on that strawman. But whatever the reason, it's tantamount to you lying.

But I'm not talking to you. Not at all . I've not addressed you except for the last post.

 

[tinydancer]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

There's the 35 permanent jobs. Not worth it, but there's that.

Or 50, which is laughable. I'd like a "conservative" to explain how this benefits the US.

No brainer. We've been your number one supplier since 2004.

What else do you want Ravi? We supply you with oil.

 

[Ravi]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

There's the 35 permanent jobs. Not worth it, but there's that.

Or 50, which is laughable. I'd like a "conservative" to explain how this benefits the US.

No brainer. We've been your number one supplier since 2004.

What else do you want Ravi? We supply you with oil.

How does that benefit the US to be beholden to Canada?

 

[SwimExpert]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

There's the 35 permanent jobs. Not worth it, but there's that.

Why don't you you smarmy bitch tell every man that was an Oklahoman working on the southern leg that $134,000 in a short time was just a temp job that sucked?

You really should be more careful when posting your pictures online.

 

[tinydancer]

On second thought, screw Canada. What is in it for the US?

There's the 35 permanent jobs. Not worth it, but there's that.

Or 50, which is laughable. I'd like a "conservative" to explain how this benefits the US.

I'll let your state department explain it to you. By the way you don't pay a dime for the pipeline. Just like you didn't pay for the other.

Do you trust your own government ravi? Or is your government stupid?

You and Siete are smarter than your own State Department are you?

Media Note
Office of the Spokesman
Washington, DC
March 14, 2008


Keystone Pipeline Presidential Permit
On March 14, the Department of State issued a Presidential Permit authorizing TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP to construct, operate and maintain facilities related to the Keystone crude oil pipeline project. The Keystone pipeline will extend 1,300 miles from the Canadian border through the U.S. Midwest. When fully operational, the Keystone pipeline is anticipated to increase U.S. oil imports from Canada by an amount equivalent to as much as 4.5 percent of total U.S. daily imports.

Canada is the United States' largest supplier of oil, natural gas, and electricity. The Department has determined that issuance of the permit to TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP is in the national interest, in part, because it increases U.S. market access to crude oil supplies from a stable and reliable trading partner, Canada, that is in close proximity to the United States.


Canadian oil represents a safe, secure supply for the North American market. In 2004, Canada became the largest supplier of crude oil to the United States. In 2006, Canada supplied the United States with 2.3 million barrels of oil per day (mbd), equivalent to 17% of total U.S. imports.

The permit was signed in the State Department’s Treaty Room by the Undersecretary of State for Economics, Energy and Agriculture Affairs, Reuben Jeffery III, who also serves as the Department’s International Energy Coordinator. Canadian Ambassador Michael Wilson witnessed the signature. The United States and Canada have a wide array of bilateral and multilateral mechanisms to discuss energy and the environment, and will continue to address the importance of mitigating greenhouse gases from all sources of energy production.

Prior to making its determination to issue the permit to TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP, the Department completed an environmental review of the entire project. All public documents related to the Department’s decision regarding TransCanada Keystone LP’s application can be downloaded at www.keystonepipeline.state.gov.

2008/192

Released on March 14, 2008

Keystone Pipeline Presidential Permit

 

[SwimExpert]

No brainer. We've been your number one supplier since 2004.

And we've been getting a discount since 2006. What benefit is there to us to eliminate that discount?

 

[tinydancer]

I'll believe the vast amounts of reports saying the same thing President Obama is saying over the self-serving, lone comment from an oil corporation executive, thank you very much.

Because that "vast amount" comes from the likes of Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz.
It doesnt matter. The oil will be sold to highest bidder for the most money. The way things should work.

Then it serves no public benefit to the U.S. So there shouldn't be eminent domain. Let them pay for the land themselves instead of getting a government handout.

oil and gas leases are the backbone of American oil . The landowners actually get compensated for the use of their land. That $$ helps our economy. But if you're Canada our "going in the right direction" Republicans will be MORE than happy to give you all you need for free. Land owners get screwed out of their land and the economy suffers.... Republicans,moving right along IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

You are one fucked up bitch. You can't stay on topic if your life depended on it.

 

[Siete]

Because that "vast amount" comes from the likes of Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz.
It doesnt matter. The oil will be sold to highest bidder for the most money. The way things should work.

Then it serves no public benefit to the U.S. So there shouldn't be eminent domain. Let them pay for the land themselves instead of getting a government handout.

oil and gas leases are the backbone of American oil . The landowners actually get compensated for the use of their land. That $$ helps our economy. But if you're Canada our "going in the right direction" Republicans will be MORE than happy to give you all you need for free. Land owners get screwed out of their land and the economy suffers.... Republicans,moving right along IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I have a real problem with eminent domain north and south. I don't like it at all. Not at all.

Here's your problem Seite you just blanket brush us. Where I can find how to work the pipeline as soon as it crosses some one's land that doesn't want it there I have a freaking problem.

Really big one as a matter of fact. I'm not there yet and I don't like it.

my problem?

my bitch is YOU living in Canada and telling Americans what is and isn't good for them. You campaign against a hydro line IN Canada and campaign FOR chemically diluted asphalt passing through MY country... blanket brush your hypocrisy... it's your really big one.

I'm dual baby. I'm a citizen of both worlds.

Now get back to me asshole and let me know how you feel about Keystone I and Keystone II and the southern leg of Keystone XL.

Got a problem with canadian crude get up off your ass and riot.

Tell you what. You don't like the shit you've been importing all these years why don't you get away from your computer bitch, back off all and everything called electric and go primitive..

Go fuck that canuck oil. Start pumping water. Get rid of all your toys. Sit in the dark with candles.

Tell me how you like it. I've done it. But you tell me again you don't want canadian crude I've got not a problem with it but you have to convince the rest of your country asshole.

Go fuck yourself Siete. You can't make a decent argument so you resort to I DONT WANT YOUR DIRTY OIL.
:lmbo:

But you're still posting aren't you supposed to be tending to your windmill.

being dual doesn't cut any ice with me ... you LIVE in Canada.

see how that works?