Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pipeline delay would give Obama political cover on Keystone
National Post ^ | 11-9-11 | Kelly McParland

Posted on 11/09/2011 8:18:09 AM PST by Driftwood1

The inevitable appears about to take place: The Obama administration is said to be considering a manoeuvre that would save it from having to render a decision on the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Alberta until after the presidential election next year.

The [external] Los Angeles Times reports:

The Obama administration is considering a move that could delay a decision on the controversial Keystone XL pipeline by requiring sponsors to reduce the project’s environmental risks before it can be approved, according to people with knowledge of the deliberations.

The step might put off a decision until after the 2012 election and be a way for the White House to at least temporarily avoid antagonizing either the unions that support the pipeline or the environmental activists who oppose it as President Obama gears up for his campaign.

You could see this coming. While the anti-Keystone crowd couldn’t muster a case strong enough to override the benefits the U.S. would get from a secure, reliable source of oil from a friendly, democratic country (which just happens to be right next door), they could create considerable noise and political embarrassment. That is, after all, what the environmental movement specializes in. It doesn’t need to be able to justify it’s claims if it can evoke enough sympathy for its agenda among well-meaning voters who respond positively to campaigns heavy in emotion and light on practical realities.

(Excerpt) Read more at nationalpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; block; delay; energy; keystonepipeline; keystonexl; litigate; obama; oil; pipeline; stall
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
We knew this was coming.
1 posted on 11/09/2011 8:18:17 AM PST by Driftwood1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1

It’s his history: Vote: Present.


2 posted on 11/09/2011 8:21:08 AM PST by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1

What a back bencher! Leading from his rear again, I see.


3 posted on 11/09/2011 8:28:28 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1

Delaying the Keystone XL pipeline expansions means we buy more oil from OPEC.


4 posted on 11/09/2011 8:32:20 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1

No. Delay it until it dies. Just like he delayed oil development in the Gulf of Mexico until most of the drilling rigs had left for foreign opportunities.

This pipeline is already to go. But they can’t afford to KEEP it ready to go. The supplies and the workers will all go elsewhere. What, they’re going to sit there on their hands, and on expensive supplies, for a whole year and then risk having even further delays if the wrong people get elected again? Cowardly RINOs have proved just as bad as Communist Democrats in the past.

So, China will end up getting this oil, just like they’re getting the oil off of Cuba while we sit on our hands down there, too.


5 posted on 11/09/2011 8:37:01 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

A perfect issue for the Republicans. They should be screaming about all of the jobs Obama is costing the country by not moving forward with this project. They should be telling the voters he is trying to keep gas prices over $3.00 per gallon. Crank up the PR machine and force him to either tick off the green segment of his base or make the rest of the American people angry. Instead the Republicans are silent, preferring to let the left control the agenda and the message.

Why the Republicans refuse to play offense is beyond me. It isn’t as though they are great on defense.


6 posted on 11/09/2011 8:39:28 AM PST by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1

Hey all of you unemployed...look at Obama and his stalling of 50,000 jobs any of you could have....I honestly think this is an issue the republicans could beat him with....ask “why President Obama are you stallion on something that could really create real jobs?”


7 posted on 11/09/2011 8:44:35 AM PST by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South

‘zackly.


8 posted on 11/09/2011 8:45:13 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1

OIL SHIPPED BY TRAIN INSTEAD.

Meanwhile, oil is being shipped from N. Dakota and Canada by rail. The increase in freight care loadings with crude oil is unprecedented in modern times. This much crude oil has not been shipped by train since the days of John Rockefeller.

Much if not most of the oil is being shipped on the Burlington Northern the majority of which is owned by none other than Warren Buffet. Do you think there is any connection here?

A train wreck of oil carrying freight cars in a unit train would be a disaster of proportions to make a pipeline leak look like mere child’s play. Train wrecks have no safety shut-off valves and they also create lots of sparks. Trains run through the heart of most populated areas, their traditional routes to serve populations for transportation. Pipelines, on the other hand, seldom transit population centers, the righ-of-way is just too expensive so they instead stick to less expensive and less populated areas.

Stranded oil is commanding a freight rate of $14 to $15 per barrell... an incredible profit margin for freight trains.


9 posted on 11/09/2011 8:50:11 AM PST by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1

When enviros get pitted against the average Joe trying to survive (i.e. ‘social justice’) they lose EVERY TIME.

Best tactic we got in our arsenal.


10 posted on 11/09/2011 8:54:17 AM PST by Free Vulcan (Vote Republican! You can vote Democrat when you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1; All
Prediction:

Hussein will put this pipeline proposal into a piece of horsecrap legislation. The Republicans will not pass said legislation, then Hussein and the media will decry how the Republicans are blocking energy independence.

The fact that Hussein could have approved this months ago will NEVER be reported.

11 posted on 11/09/2011 8:55:09 AM PST by Recovering_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1
...by requiring sponsors to reduce the project’s environmental risks....

What? the safest method of transporting oil isn't safe enough?

(expletive deleted)!

12 posted on 11/09/2011 8:57:29 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Delaying the Keystone XL pipeline expansions means we buy more oil from OPEC.

And the Chinese will buy more from Canada.

13 posted on 11/09/2011 8:59:18 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101
A train wreck of oil carrying freight cars in a unit train would be a disaster of proportions to make a pipeline leak look like mere child’s play.

So, so true. Nebraska's legislature is working on a bill to prohibit the pipeline from passing through the state on the grounds it would contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer in the event of a leak. Well, maybe it would, say an area the size of acres not the entire aquifer which is ten of thousands of square miles or more in area. Groundwater is not some huge underground lake and is not subject to contamination like surface water is, and you'd think the people of Nebraska would have elected representatives smart enough to know the difference.

But its more likely the representatives have bought into the environmentalists arguments about local impacts when what they really want to stop is mining of the crude oil in the tar sands of northern Alberta.

14 posted on 11/09/2011 8:59:51 AM PST by CedarDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

Unfortunately for the Bamster, the Canadians might blow his cover by opting to negotiate for infrastructure to sell their oil to China instead. They may force his hand before November.


15 posted on 11/09/2011 9:12:54 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1
Deciding against this project, or delaying until it's too late - either way, this will be one of Obama's worst acts as president and it's consequences will hurt us long after he's left office.


16 posted on 11/09/2011 9:30:21 AM PST by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave

There is glaring evidence that you intelligence is not required to be a representative... only an agenda, a machine, a willingness to be a pimp, a mouth and conniving.

All it takes to elect them is just over 50% of the population being stupid enough to be taken in.

See my tagline.


17 posted on 11/09/2011 10:52:35 AM PST by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Driftwood1
"Pipeline delay would give Obama political cover on Keystone"

One of the few things that Obama could do to help his reelection is to agree to sign the OK on the Keystone pipe line. The resulting jobs and economic activity are one of the few things that could impact the national unemployment rate immediately.

Therefore, I am glad that Obama will stand in the way, the next President will sign it and start a snowball effect of creating more jobs, a LOT more jobs!

18 posted on 11/09/2011 10:56:25 AM PST by 2001convSVT (Going Galt as fast as I can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Obama's War on Oil

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/05/04/obamas-war-on-oil/

If you want the lower gas prices, lower oil prices, and lower energy prices necessary for a booming economy, you are going to have to get yourselves another President.

19 posted on 11/09/2011 3:41:43 PM PST by WOBBLY BOB (See ya later, debt inflator ! Gone in 4 (2012))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WOBBLY BOB
If you want the lower gas prices, lower oil prices, and lower energy prices necessary for a booming economy, you are going to have to get yourselves another President.

Your proposition is accept.

20 posted on 11/09/2011 5:04:22 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson