Obama breaking out the veto pen today for Keystone

[Sumner 1868]

At this point I'd like him to sign it just to get Democratic activists to shut up about a cause célèbre that (A) isn't especially popular among voters

Conformity over principle?

[Boston Bread]

The GOP wouldn't give up their principles if it was unpopular, Obama must stand firm. Shut it down!

[AggregateDemand]

It was your party who refused to compromise with Obama to begin with. Have you forgotten the past 6 years?

Democrats blocked drilling and fracking initiatives during the entirety of the Bush presidency. When Obama took office, they stopped the economic decline, in part, with fracking.

Now Obama is blocking the Keystone Pipeline. Same inane, unthinking sh*t from the Democratic Party, different day.

[Maxwell]

Now the Republicans have forced his hand and proved that he would rather get donations from the Sierra Club than money for the economy.

The economy will be fine minus those 50 permanent jobs + whatever cleanup jobs come up after spills.

Considering the big Democratic job creating idea - road jobs and infrastructure - creates very few permanent jobs as well, it seems a rather silly thing to harp on.

[Boston Bread]

At least roads and infrastructure will result in net economic benefits!

[All Along The Watchtower]

Now the Republicans have forced his hand and proved that he would rather get donations from the Sierra Club than money for the economy.

The economy will be fine minus those 50 permanent jobs + whatever cleanup jobs come up after spills.

Considering the big Democratic job creating idea - road jobs and infrastructure - creates very few permanent jobs as well, it seems a rather silly thing to harp on.

Yeah it's not like investments in infrastructure are important or are even needed in this county. 

[bedstuy]

From what I've heard, I think it makes sense to approve the Keystone XL. 

That said, Republicans act like this is some enormous issue and the pipeline would save the economy.  It terms of the economy, it's meaningless.  For both sides, it's clearly more symbolic than anything. 

So, why not use this issue to compromise?  Liberals give in on the Keystone and in exchange, we get the Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank or improvements to the Clean Air Act.  That would make sense, no?

Agreed.

However, I think Obama's made it quite clear he's done compromising.

Obama has always been willing to compromise, but Republicans hate compromise.  That's the pattern we've established.  Remember during the primaries where Republicans wouldn't trade $1 in tax increases for $10 in spending cuts? 

And, what's the deal with this Republican mindset. 

"OK, we don't want to maintain our infrastructure or improve the economy, but we're crazy about it when it coincides with shilling for the oil industry!"  That's really the compromise, isn't it?  They want the government to do nothing to hurt Obama and discredit the idea of government as a positive force, but they'll compromise that idea if an oil company tells them to.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Too bad he's in the pocket of the EPA, instead of the American worker.

[Sumner 1868]

Too bad he's in the pocket of the EPA, instead of the American worker.

I'm sure the EPA pays lots of secret salaries.

[MaxQue]

As opposed to all the spills that are happening when the oil is transported via other means?

Much of that oil won't be economical to squeeze out of Alberta's soil without this pipeline.

With the current price, it's not economical with or without that pipeline. Tar sands are expensive.

[Maxwell]

Now the Republicans have forced his hand and proved that he would rather get donations from the Sierra Club than money for the economy.

The economy will be fine minus those 50 permanent jobs + whatever cleanup jobs come up after spills.

Considering the big Democratic job creating idea - road jobs and infrastructure - creates very few permanent jobs as well, it seems a rather silly thing to harp on.

Yeah it's not like investments in infrastructure are important or are even needed in this county. 

Oh, was I saying the contrary??

[Mr. Illini]

Too bad he's in the pocket of the EPA, instead of the American worker.

Obama is in the pockets of a government organization that is publicly funded, while Republicans are not in the pockets of oil conglomerates who would benefit from the construction of this pipeline.

[SWE]

Too bad he's in the pocket of the EPA, instead of the American worker.

EPA: MOST POWERFUL LOBBYING GROUP IN WASHINGTON

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Now the Republicans have forced his hand and proved that he would rather get donations from the Sierra Club than money for the economy.

The economy will be fine minus those 50 permanent jobs + whatever cleanup jobs come up after spills.

Considering the big Democratic job creating idea - road jobs and infrastructure - creates very few permanent jobs as well, it seems a rather silly thing to harp on.

in both cases potential jobs created need to be weighed against potential jobs lost through taxes and takings.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I enjoy laughing at the liberal "Keystone won't create jobs and a spill might happen, so don't do it!" argument. By that logic, no construction project should ever be approved because an accident might occur and big job gains won't happen. This is just so absurd it's not even funny, and shows the environmentalists have nothing left.

Obama should ratify the pipeline tomorrow. He's had six years to look at it, every investigation has said that a properly working pipeline is not going to have a significantly bad effect on the environment, and the Nebraska Courts are done with it. It's time to suck it to the dumb environmental groups and get building.

[Panda Express]

I support this veto not because I care about whether or not some dumb pipeline that isn't needed and won't do anything to the economy is built, but because it makes the Republicans go bonkers.

[Gass3268]

I'd be fine with the pipeline if it was also in a major transportation infrastructure spending bill that includes high speed rail and fixing bridges.

[The Other Castro]

The partisanship in this thread is delicious

[SPC]

Leftists when gas is ~$4/gallon: "[Insert drilling/pipeline project here] will take several years to have an effect on the supply of oil."

Leftists when gas is ~$2/gallon: "There is no need for [Insert drilling/pipeline project here] since gas prices are low at the moment."

[Frodo]

Make him veto it every single day for the rest of his term.

The public is behind it. He hasn't given any legitimate reason why he's against it. This is a joke.

^^^^^^^^^^

This.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This 'longstanding process' has been going on for about seven years now.  So enough with the stalling.  It is long past time to make a decision on it.  

[Sumner 1868]

Funny how the Tea Party crowd talks about "infrastructure." How many federal infrastructural projects have they opposed in the 40 years? I've truly lost count.

[Boston Bread]

It's time to suck it to the dumb environmental groups and get building.

It's ironic that you call the opposition to Keystone dumb, considering the scientists who study these projects are against it.

[The Mikado]

I don't particularly care about Keystone one way or the other, but it would be foolish for Obama to accept it without getting something in return. This is the perfect thing to hold hostage for Republican cooperation on some other issue.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

It's time to suck it to the dumb environmental groups and get building.

It's ironic that you call the opposition to Keystone dumb, considering the scientists who study these projects are against it.

Sure, I'd prefer to eliminate oil one day and be totally on renewables, but that's a LONG ways off.
 
Look, the environmentalists have no actual evidence, backed up by a study, that says that Keystone would significantly harm the environment in any situation that doesn't involve a spill, and I've already addressed why the "it's risky" argument is a ridiculous strawman. The pipeline is no longer being investigated by Nebraska Courts. We've had six years to study its possible effects - and it's clearly not the automatic, guaranteed environment ruiner that the far-left would like it to be.

Look I get that it's not some masterful economy saver and I'd like to see serious regulation of any exporting, but neither of those are big enough concerns for any sensible person to be against the pipeline. It's time for Obama to just tell the Sierra Group, and leftist Senators, and everyone else who opposes it to just give up because there aren't even the beginnings of a logical argument against the pipeline.

Obama likes to think that republicans get nothing after their big victory last year. That's not how things should work. Republicans won big, so they have earned the right to get some of their ideas passed, and it should start with this pipeline. Obama's Veto today shows that, at least on this issue, he only cares about ultra-liberal Chris Murphy, Elizabeth Warren, Jeanne Shaheen, and their allies, and doesn't care about what's popular among the people, which is the Keystone Pipeline.

[politicus]

You are very cynical about this. Avoiding unnecessary risks is common sense - and this is an unnecessary risk.

"- It will spill. The State Department’s review of the project clearly says Keystone XL will spill oil. Not may, but will. The existing Keystone pipeline has already leaked 14 times since it began operating in June 2010, including one leak that dumped 21,000 gallons of tar-sands crude. Keystone XL would carry up to 35 million gallons of oil every day — so any leak has the potential to be massive.

- It will threaten vast pristine landscapes, rivers and wildlife. Running between Alberta, Canada and the Gulf Coast of Texas, Keystone XL will cross nearly 1,750 water bodies, like rivers and steams, and risk contaminating the Ogallala Aquifer (the drinking water source for millions of people). It would also cut through the heart of prime wildlife habitat, including homes for at least 20 imperiled species.

- It will expand the destruction of Canada’s boreal forests. Tar sands oil is the dirtiest oil on Earth. Producing oil from sand has terrible impacts on the environment, including the destruction of tens of thousands of acres of boreal forest, pollution of hundreds of millions of gallons of water — each barrel of oil from tar sands requires three barrels of water to produce.

- It will dramatically deepen our addiction to climate-killing fossil fuels. Greenhouse gas emissions from tar-sands development are two to three times higher than those from conventional oil and gas operations. That’s exactly the wrong direction for reversing global warming. Scientists tell us we must reduce atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide to 350 parts per million or less. Today, it’s 391 ppm, and Keystone XL would certainly drive that up and worsen the devastating effects of global warming — from rising oceans to melting glaciers to extreme and dangerous weather events – that we’re already seeing around the world."

http://www.care2.com/causes/5-reasons-keystone-xl-pipeline-is-a-bad-idea.html#ixzz3SjjRYAev