No Longer Afraid To Critize: TransCanada Says Keystone XL Will Create Many Jobs, Despite Obama Comments

July 29, 2013

You cannot Hide the truth.

As the worm turns, it’s no longer a critism free zone, at least it the UK : TransCanada Corp. stands by its forecast that its controversial Keystone XL pipeline project will be a major job creator after U.S. president Barack Obama derided the claim in a weekend interview.

Not clear when our slumbering USA press will awake from their “Obama stupor”. Probably not until their death, will that ever happen. Much as the former Soviet press did …


State Dept report: Yeah, We Can’t Really Think of a Good Reason not to build the Keystone pipeline

March 2, 2013

The hoaxers have run dry … The hysteria has peaked. How many times do you have to tell them they are talking about a myth? Even $ billions of dollars for sciene projects cannot salvage what is not true, unless you rewrite the laws of physics.

Anybody else notice how global warming has turned our weather so cold. Anybody else wonder why sciene is predicting we are enetering a mini ice age. And how does that work, as CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere is going up and up.

TransCanada has only been waiting for the go-ahead for the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline for, oh, four or so years now, and the State Department has now several times concluded that the pipeline poses no real reason for environmental alarm — despite the vociferous protestations of its eco-critics. After having released an environmental impact review in 2011 that basically concluded that the project poses no real threats, State released another revised environmental impact review on Friday afternoon that… also basically concludes that the project poses no real threats. It very carefully avoids making any recommendations for specific action on the pipeline’s fate, but at least fails to highlight any reason why the project shouldn’t be built:

A draft State Department report concludes that building the Keystone XL pipeline would not speed up development of Canada’s oil sands, dealing a blow to environmentalists who claim Keystone would worsen climate change.

The report from the State Department does not take a firm position on whether the proposed Canada-to-Texas pipeline would be detrimental to the environment or exacerbate global warming.

But the draft also says that “approval or denial of the proposed project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands, or on the amount of heavy crude oil refined in the Gulf Coast area.”

To what I’m sure the department knew would be the eco-warriors’ chagrin, the 2,000 page report confirmed what the pipeline’s proponents have been arguing: Whether the pipeline is built or not won’t have much of an impact on climate change, because Canada is still going to develop those oil sands (since China will happily buy up the supplies if we won’t allow them to filter through our own markets), and the “implementation of the proposed Project in Canada would not likely result in significant adverse environmental effects.”

Well it’s nice to know they can’t find any impact on the non-existant global warming hoax. Hoaxers hardest hit …

Fits of outrage, even their stooge Obama was afraid to venture there.

The evidence is over whelming, IT’s a hoax. A government sponsored $30 billion dollar multi decades long Hoax.

The Friday-night-news-dump tactic was to little avail, however; the highly invested green lobbies have been on nonstop Keystone watch and quickly went into fits of outrageous outrage upon hearing the news, reports Politico:

The Sierra Club, one of many environmental groups hoping for a clear thumbs-down, said it was “outraged” by Friday’s outcome. …

“We’re mystified as to how the State Department can acknowledge the negative effects of the Earth’s dirtiest oil on our climate, but at the same time claim that the proposed pipeline will ‘not likely result in significant adverse environmental effects,” said Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune, one of dozens of activists who were arrested in an anti-Keystone protest last month after tying himself to the White House gate. “Whether this failure was willful or accidental, this report is nothing short of malpractice.” …

Greenpeace Executive Director Phil Radford warned that “letting corporations get rich off of environmental devastation will make Obama’s climate rhetoric look like the worst kind of greenwashing.”

Climate activist Bill McKibben, organizer of the mass White House sit-ins in 2011 and last month’s Keystone protests, called the report “Groundhog Day — we’re hearing the same rehashed arguments from the State [Department] about why a great threat to the climate is not a threat at all.”

Dang. If there’s one thing I just love about the green lobby, it’s that they always shy away from hyperbole and drama — they’ve really got a sense of perspective, you know?

Don’t get your hopes up, however, that we’ll be getting a final answer on the job- and economy-boosting project anytime soon; the administration is now saying we shouldn’t expect a decision until around the middle of the year. (Does anybody else remember when “we can’t wait for jobs” was a thing? Good times, those.)

Gas Prices Having An Effect On Obama Reelection

February 28, 2012

Now TransCanada has submitted another application for approval to theObama administration, and this time around Obama is hinting that it may just pass:

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney used the announcement to hammer Republicans, saying, “House Republicans forced a rejection of the company’s earlier application in January, by not allowing sufficient time for important review or even the identification of a complete pipeline route.”

“But as we made clear, the president’s decision in January in no way prejudged future applications. We will ensure any project receives the important assessment it deserves and will base a decision to provide a permit on the completion of that review,” Carney added.

Republicans remained cautious in their response, arguing the news that a new pipeline route is being considered raises fresh questions about the administration’s previous opposition.

“It’s good news that progress is continuing on a project that would create tens of thousands of American jobs and keep Canada from selling NorthAmerican energy to the Chinese, but it also makes the Obama administration’s refusal to approve it even more disturbing,” said MichaelSteel, a spokesman for Speaker John Boehner (Ohio).

Setting all partisan politics aside, I really hope the Obama administration does sign off on the pipeline, if only for the sake of ending the ridiculous and unnecessary government sandbagging.

Keystone a Key Ingredient Missing from Obama’s Economic Recovery Recipe

January 29, 2012

Can you spot the Obama double talking and lies?

America was built on affordable energy and food. Those two items  left extra income for other things … Like the rest of our economy. And those two items are inflating the most, but not included in the Government’s inflation index. Ever wonder why???

Green energy, read high cost, ridiculously expensive and scarce energy for America, let the world use plain old  oil and gas.

Despite the fact that America has much more oil and gas to supply us for 100s of years. What did you think the whole global warming scam was built on???  Ever been to east Colorado? You know, over the Rocky’s and out in the lains? Oil sands, walk anywhere and watch the ground squish up around your shoes. Oil sands, the same ones actually that reach all the way up to Alberta Canada, what Keystone is all about.

Drive up energy and food costs, drive up the cost for every American, and drive down our economy.

Nicolas Loris at Heritage writes this must read article:

Read the rest of this entry »

Democrat Warren Buffet Profits from Keystone XL Denial

January 24, 2012

And there she sits, Warren Buffet’s secetary, in the wife’s box, up front big time, trying to incite Obama’s class war.

But there are some problems … Here’s a big one.

The Buffet owned railroad can replace the ‘pipeline oil’ until at least 2030, of course at higher cost.

Big-time Democratic donor Warren Buffet, a billionaire railroad tycoon, will reap a major cash infusion after President Barack Obama canceled construction of TransCanada’s oil pipeline from Alberta, Canada to the Texas’ Gulf Coast.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that, “Warren Buffett’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration’s decision to reject TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.”

Apparently, Mr. Buffet expanded his railroad in anticipation of Obama’s decision to cancel the Keystone pipeline. Now, his railroad can supposedly handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, as disclosed by an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.

Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffet’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in interview that, “whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul … since “Keystone XL doesn’t happen, we’re ready to haul.”

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, “the State Department denied TransCanada a permit on Jan. 18, saying there was not enough time to study the proposal by Feb. 21, a deadline Congress imposed on President Barack Obama. Calgary-based TransCanada has said it intends to re-apply with a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region of Nebraska, something the Obama administration encouraged.”

To read the entire article from the San Francisco Chronicle, link here: Buffett’s Burlington Northern Among Pipeline Winners

My, my, more Obama crony capitalism.

Congress has legal clout on Keystone pipeline: study

January 21, 2012

We often forget, our government is composed of three co-equal branches of government. The very thing that prevents a dictatorial president like Obama from ceasing power  over everything.. This means that in many cases the responsibilities and duties of the branches, in several places overlap.

The Congress has the constitutional right to legislate permits for cross-border oil pipelines like TransCanada’s Keystone XL, according to a new legal analysis released late on Friday.

The study by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service could give a boost to Republicans drafting legislation to overturn a decision this week by President Barack Obama to put the $7 billion Alberta-to-Texas project on ice.

Historically, U.S. presidents have made executive decisions on pipelines that cross borders. But Congress had the power all along to weigh in on the permits, said the study, done by four legislative attorneys with the CRS.

“If Congress chose to assert its authority in the area of border-crossing facilities, this would likely be considered within its Constitutionally enumerated authority to regulate foreign commerce,” the study said.

Read more at …

Keystone Madness: The cynicism is breathtaking

January 21, 2012

Our global warming hoax president:

It’s the economy, stupid … Obama’s 2012 Bid Doomed by His Own Policies

All of the piracy debate also overshadows a far greater base issue — the allowance of blatant bribery in American federal policies.

President Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is an act of national insanity. It isn’t often that a president makes a decision that has no redeeming virtues and — beyond the symbolism — won’t even advance the goals of the groups that demanded it. All it tells us is that Obama is so obsessed with his re-election that, through some sort of political calculus, he believes that placating his environmental supporters will improve his chances.

Aside from the political and public relations victory, environmentalists won’t get much. Stopping the pipeline won’t halt the development of tar sands, to which the Canadian government is committed; therefore, there will be little effect on global warming emissions. Indeed, Obama’s decision might add to them. If Canada builds a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific for export to Asia, moving all that oil across the ocean by tanker will create extra emissions. There will also be the risk of added spills.

Now consider how Obama’s decision hurts the United States. For starters, it insults and antagonizes a strong ally; getting future Canadian cooperation on other issues will be harder. Next, it threatens a large source of relatively secure oil that, combined with new discoveries in the United States, could reduce (though not eliminate) our dependence on insecure foreign oil.

The jobs president PUNTs

Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: