I just watched this thing crash and burn on MSNBC.
It would not have made any difference anyway, as it is almost a certainty that the President would have vetoed it once it came to his desk.
You don't get the Chinese to buy into reducing fossil fuel emissions and then immediately sign off on a big oil pipeline project designed to transport some of the nastiest dirtiest oil on the planet across the country.
Here is more from the New York Times:
The battle over approving the pipeline, which will carry petroleum from the oil sands of Canada to the Gulf Coast of Texas, ultimately became a proxy war for the Louisiana Senate seat, where Ms. Landrieu and Republican Representative Bill Cassidy are locked in fight for votes in their oil-rich state ahead of the Dec. 6 runoff election.
Ms. Landrieu — who, if re-elected, will lose her coveted position as chairwoman of the energy committee when Republicans take the Senate majority next year — spent the past few days working furiously to round up Democratic support for her bill, which she had hoped would be her last, best chance of holding on to her Senate seat.
On Tuesday morning, she was at least one vote short of the filibuster-proof 60 votes she needed. And despite cajoling, persuading, browbeating, and making an impassioned plea to her colleagues during a closed-door lunch — which one attendee described as “civilized but pretty contentious” — Ms. Landrieu, who has so often bulldozed her way to success through sheer force of will, came up just short.
I feel badly for Senator Landrieu, I really do. However I really do not think the passage of this bill would have made one bit of difference in her runoff with Cassidy.
And to be honest I would rather lose another Senate seat than see this project go forward.
Halle-freaking-lujah!!
ReplyDeleteThey'll vote again once the new Repub1%can'ts take office.
DeleteOf course, Obama has nothing to lose now vetoing it until he is out of office.
Yea!!!! President Obama won't have to veto and get the continued ugly media coverage! No he can move on to the immigration issue!
ReplyDeleteCorrection 3:01 PM Last sentence - 'Now he can move on to the immigration issue!"
DeleteDrill Baby Drill
ReplyDeleteAttn Brown Nose Palin Troll
DeleteDon't skip over this post.
"Drill baby drill. Pump baby pump!"
--- Bristupid on 1st "date" with prospective trial daddy.
Palins are not energy experts; they only know about poppin them little bastards out.
BWAHAHAHAHA 4:16 PM You tell it like it is.
Delete"Drill Baby Drill" is Bristol Palin moaning with Trial Daddies.
DeleteIf the Canadians want a pipeline, why don't they build one across Canadian land. Oh no, they want the spills to happen here. And why should we do that. This pipeline will go to Texas so oil can be loaded onto tankers and shipped all over the world.
ReplyDeleteWhy in the world would anyone think this pipeline is a good deal.
But you can bet there will be another vote in January.
And POTUS VETO will follow along with gnashing of teeth by the do-nothings.
DeleteThere's lots of money at stake for the Koch brothers who own the TX refinery to process the oil prior to shipping to China. I also think they own some leases of the Canadian tar sands. Money on both ends.
DeleteI let out a little war whoop when I heard the news!!!
ReplyDeleteM from MD
Screw Senator Landreiu! She's exactly the kind of weak spine democrat I despise! They'd rather take on the opposition's own platform than stand up for what they supposedly believe in.
ReplyDeleteI hope she looses. She deserves it.
Yep, if I was a Louisiana voter I'd probably have to cast mine for Cassidy.
DeleteI so agree, hedgewytch!
DeleteLandrieu is a who're. Plain and simple.
DeleteDo you have to use misogenistic verbiage?
DeleteRaising a glass to bless the 41 senators who voted against the pipeline today!
ReplyDeleteBTW, the general Canadian populace is not for the pipeline either. Just Harper who is bought off by the Koch brothers and their minions.
Cue Sarah's Facebook outrage tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteOnly this might play as a favor for Cassidy. What is she to do?
Stay tuned.
Well, the dirty tar sands product is still being sent to Asia but at least it is through Canada and to their ports in Vancouver, although quite a bit of it is currently shipped to a Koch Brother refinery in Montana and then sent by rail and truck to our west coast ports, I'm all for letting this be Canada's problem mainly and leave us out of it.
ReplyDeleteIt completely infuriates me when I hear the rightwing talking points about the project reported as factual 'news' in the media.
ReplyDeleteTonight I heard one TV report that said the pipeline would create jobs totaling from 4,000 (according to critics) to 40,000 (according to supporters). Cornell University's Global Labor Institute, which is a non-partisan source, has analyzed the information from TransCanada itself and come up with statistics that SHOULD make this project dead before it starts, and even says that it may kill more jobs than it creates.
The media has totally failed the American public on this pipeline story, and no one outside of progressive blogs (and maybe some MSNBC shows) is telling the country the truth about the REAL positives (a handful of permanent jobs) and negatives ( where to begin?).
The Cornell report includes this information about the study from The Perryman Group, which was contracted by TransCanada. The report bases its projections on a period of ONE HUNDRED YEARS of pipeline operation!!!
"The Perryman report uses an unusually long time frame—100 years—to make the employment and economic impacts of the project look more impressive. Perryman combines the results over all years of construction and operation for 100 years. "
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/CU_KeystoneXL_FIN_090811_v2.pdf
I agree. Her Senate seat is lost with or without this vote. And I'm glad our environment is protected at least until January. Some GOPidiot said it would produce "millions" of jobs eventually. They lie.
ReplyDeleteEarlier I had said that Koch Refineries (Flint Hills) were refining coal tar sands in Montana but in actuality they are the largest refiner of tar sands but in Minnesota.
ReplyDeleteHere is the article that discusses.
http://priceofoil.org/2013/12/13/refinery-report-new-online-tool-tracks-tar-sands-flows-north-america/
YESSSSSSSSS!!!!!
ReplyDeleteTurns out, even the CEO of the KXL admitted, that AT THE MOST there would be FIFTY new, permanent, jobs created in the US.
I'm not impressed w/Landreiu either! She is an embarrassment to Democrats!
ReplyDeleteSorry to lose a Senate seat, but that's one seat for six years. The Ogala Aquifer, threatened by the pipeline, was formed billions of years ago and supplies 30% of the groundwater used for irrigation in the US and supplies drinking water to over 80% of the people who live in the High Plains.
ReplyDeleteDINOs are bad, demented Dixiecrats are worse. Hopefully LA will have a viable candidate next time.
ReplyDeleteHurray !!!
ReplyDeleteBut look at all the jobs we lost, of course that doesn't include all the jobs that would have been created for the clean up of all the spills, plus guarding it from terrorists.
CEO of TransCanada Concedes just 50 permanent jobs from Keystone XL Pipeline
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/17/1345441/-CEO-of-TransCanada-Concedes-just-50-permanent-jobs-from-Keystone-XL-Pipeline?detail=email#
I am sure this is not over yet, the rethugs are famous for beating a dead horse-they will just add it to their list of things to do-impeachment, repeal obamacare, impeachment, keystone, investigate bengahzi, repeal obamacare !!!!
War on Christmas comes early this year===>
ReplyDeleteKeystone XL oil pipeline fails to pass.
Let's cheer up all of the Kochsuckers by sharing Amazon Reviews of Granny Grifter's "book" from a year ago. I laughed until I hurt again. Just as I did last year. Here's the link:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/cr/0062292889/ref=aw_cr_R2AIQXSKMD3BOD?sort=rd
And Here's a RANDOM (snicker) review to get you started:
By Melissa Marshall - November 16, 2013
"For those of you who call her Governor; she is not. She is the quitter and this book is whiny, petulant, and "poor, pitiful me". What a waste of $ for anyone..."
And another: (a personal fave)
"If you read only one book this year... Learn to read faster!"
By Geoffrey Sea - November 23, 2013
But seriously, if there were not a War on Christmas, why would the legions of Santa Claus impersonators require the Salvation Army? Why would Glen Beck be warning of a mistletoe gap? Why would the libtards be trying to replace the coal in Christmas stockings with windmills?
You can't put a windmill in a Christmas stocking WITHOUT PRODUCING A GIANT HOLE! Why don't they teach that at Harvard? If we are going to replace the coal in Christmas stockings, it should be with NUCLEAR ENERGY!
Yes, my friends (and I don't mean imaginary friends like John McCain did), there is a war on Christmas. Yer darn tootin'. Al Gore is the mastermind, with funding from the Clinton Library, and I suspect the Federal Reserve is behind it, too, because I see Christmas trees falling faster than trees can possibly fall, if you get my winkin', blinkin' and nod.
I hear that they are printing that "Happy Holiday" propaganda in Brooklyn and other Muslim countries, where they claim that a Christmas ham isn't kosher, and pretty soon they'll make boughs of holly illegal, along with assault rifles at Christmas Mass.
So I say we fight 'em, because we're Americans, and it's not like Jesus celebrated Hanukkah or Kwanzaa, even if he did go out to a Chinese restaurant on Christmas Eve. I mean, they had laws back then, and values.
And of course Sarah Palin is the pinnacle of western civilization, she can see Russia from her house. If she were any further northwest, she'd be the tentacle of western civilization.
153 of 190 people found this review helpful
Hundreds more. Some funny folks, them libruls are. Great satire!
O/T c4p. I don't even know what this is about, but THIS is who they are. NUTS. Veiled threats, that's the palinistas!
ReplyDeleteiizthatiiz • an hour ago
My friendly warning emailed to Greta:
Good Evening Greta,
Was shocked to see Philip Bump on your panel yesterday. Admittedly you were out of studio interviewing W, but still .. it's your show and the panel guests your producers book reflect on you.
Philip Bump made his bones writing smear pieces against Governor Sarah Palin while at The Atlantic. He still does for the WaPo. It's the only reason The Post hired him.
I always thought you were friendly toward the Governor, so it is difficult to understand why you would further enable the career of hitman.
I urge you not to book Bump again as a guest. Of course you are free to book any guest you wish, but I must caution you there will be consequences if Bump makes another appearance on your show, or any other Fox News programs. As you were away from studio for this segment, your getting the benefit of the doubt. But if Bump makes another segment, we can only assume that you are working against the Governor.
The Palin blogs and groups will turn on you if Bump continues to appear. They can be a vocal group. Please don't put yourself, or them in that position.
Kind Regards,
XXXXXXX
Whatever, Now the product will be hauled by truck or rail. My opinion is that a pipeline is a better alternative. The world runs on oil, and will continue to run on oil until a more economic source of power is developed. Get used to it. The Alaska pipeline has been tranporting oil for more than 30 years with a very small number of negative events, so thats something to consider.
ReplyDeleteDo you understand tar sands?
DeleteMaybe you could enlighten me.
DeleteAnd did you see that smug, smarmy fuck Hoeven smirking while Markey talked? Hoeven: North Dakota's Shame. This is what you get when you send a banker to the senate. Just another banker, a servant of the stinking North Dakota oil industry. Here, check out what's going on, that no MSM will report:
ReplyDeletehttp://thecontributor.com/your-state/ND
BTW: You can enter any state on this site.
Grey Lensman
I don't get why WE are supposed to pay $3 BILLION dollars to build a pipeline so that Canada can sell oil to China.
ReplyDeleteShouldn't Canada pay the full cost of the pipeline? Shouldn't they also pay an easement for it to cross the entire length of the United States from the border to Louisiana for the entire time it exists? They absolutely should be required to use U.S. workers, but I understand there won't be near as many jobs created as the Republicans claim. Big surprise.