• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Petroleum producers plan presidential protest

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
CUSHING, Okla. -- The President is scheduled to speak in Payne County this Thursday morning. It may be rural Oklahoma, but when it comes to pipelines, it's the Capitol. The President is expected to talk about energy, though many in that industry are not impressed.
They are even planning to protest his visit, calling it a political ploy more than a genuine interest.
Mike Cantrell with the Domestic Energy Producers Alliance says, "For the last three years he's been anti-fossil fuels."
Mickey Thompson, an energy industry expert and political analyst, says, "He calls our industry an industry of the past and they'd like us to go away."
The President is expected to mention his support for a pipeline running from Payne County to the gulf; it's the southern end of the “Keystone XL Pipeline.”
Industry experts say while his support for the southern end is welcome, it's not needed.
They build pipelines in the country all the time without needing presidential approval.
The President's "green light" is only needed for approximately 50 feet on the northern end of the pipeline; that segment would cross the Canadian border.
So far the President has delayed that project.


Petroleum producers plan presidential protest - KFOR


So Barry says he is an "all of the above kind of guy" eh? Well, people that actually do the job of keep our lights on, and our cars full of gas say 'yeah, not so much...'

Good for them.


j-mac
 
Who's Barry?
 
Interesting, although keystone wouldn't exactly cure our "dependence" as some would suggest, it seems like a no-brainer from most people's perspective. The republicans will milk this one for all it's worth.
 
Last edited:
hate to say this barrack obama has no control over gas prices,just like bush had no control.congress has some effect but the only realmeffect obama has is by threatening iran cause speculators frightened and causing prices to increase.
 
I don't sympathize with any company who uses eminent domain. So as far as I am concerned "Keystone XL Pipeline" can eat a dick.
 
Barry Sotoro, aka Barrack Obama.


j-mac

As this term comes from the birther silliness, can I conclude you're a birther?

Otherwise, it's just silly, like calling Bush Shrub.
 
I don't sympathize with any company who uses eminent domain. So as far as I am concerned "Keystone XL Pipeline" can eat a dick.
I honestly didn't think of that previously, I wonder why it hasn't been more commonly reported in the media..
 
It is sometimes mentioned in my state.I think Unfortunately the governor of my state supports "Keystone XL Pipeline" ,so she won't side with the land owners whom the company is trying take property from.

NYT did a token mention of it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/u...omain-fight-over-pipeline.html?pagewanted=all
Domain laws have got to be one of the more reprehensible laws on the books for me personally, If Obama was smart he would use that as an argument against the project instead of environmental concerns, he'd probably win a little more sympathy.
 
As this term comes from the birther silliness, can I conclude you're a birther?


Don't be foolish...Just a tongue in cheek joust....

Otherwise, it's just silly, like calling Bush Shrub.


I'll go back and take a look at what I can find, but I don't recall you EVER telling a lib to not use that term....

j-mac
 
Domain laws have got to be one of the more reprehensible laws on the books for me personally, If Obama was smart he would use that as an argument against the project instead of environmental concerns, he'd probably win a little more sympathy.
He probably could win more sympathy. There is some support to change eminent domain laws to ban private companies from using eminent domain.
House tries to rewrite eminent domain rules - CBS News
 
Don't be foolish...Just a tongue in cheek joust....




I'll go back and take a look at what I can find, but I don't recall you EVER telling a lib to not use that term....

j-mac


There's a lot you don't j. But a few liberals saw me much like you against them. A couple got banned (taking the Hitler thing too far).

But that's another time and place. I don't read everything, and largely seek those I disagree with, as that is where the debate is.
 
Interesting, although keystone wouldn't exactly cure our "dependence" as some would suggest, it seems like a no-brainer from most people's perspective. The republicans will milk this one for all it's worth.

It would create jobs. Seems worth it to me.
 
It would create jobs. Seems worth it to me.
I don't think its worth it if a company is basically allowed to take property through eminent domain.
 
I don't think its worth it if a company is basically allowed to take property through eminent domain.

They're not taking the property. The land owner still keeps the property. It's just got a pipeline running under it.

IMO, it's very selfish of any landowner to oppose having this pipeline run through his property.
 
Last edited:
They're not taking the property. The land owner still keeps the property. It's just got a pipeline running under it.

IMO, it's very selfish of any landowner to oppose having this pipeline run through his property.

Gee those selfish owners and their property rights. What the hell do you think a property right IS exactly? Landowners have the right to be selfish, its their land.
 
Gee those selfish owners and their property rights. What the hell do you think a property right IS exactly? Landowners have the right to be selfish, its their land.


I am not a huge fan of eminent domain, as carried out under the Kelo decision, however, this is far from that in my understanding. For instance, what if these owners were having their land used for a school, or a highway? Would a more traditional use then be ok?


j-mac
 
They're not taking the property. The land owner still keeps the property. It's just got a pipeline running under it.

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/u...-fight-over-pipeline.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
A Canadian company has been threatening to confiscate private land from South Dakota to the Gulf of Mexico, and is already suing many who have refused to allow the Keystone XL pipeline on their property even though the controversial project has yet to receive federal approval.


IMO, it's very selfish of any landowner to oppose having this pipeline run through his property

No its not.Its his property.IF he doesn't want it on or underneath his property then that is his right. Its like say its very selfish of you if you don't let me sleep on your porch or park my car in your driveway.
 
I am not a huge fan of eminent domain, as carried out under the Kelo decision, however, this is far from that in my understanding. For instance, what if these owners were having their land used for a school, or a highway? Would a more traditional use then be ok?


j-mac


A highway is okay a school is not. Besides that were not talking about a highway or school.This a privately owned company wanting to take land so it can build something for private use.This Amounts to a walmart,Sears, Kmart, Home Depot or some other privately own company trying to take your land to build a parking lot. Worst of all this is a foreign privately owned company using eminent domain to try to take land from American land owners.
 
I don't sympathize with any company who uses eminent domain. So as far as I am concerned "Keystone XL Pipeline" can eat a dick.

How else could they build the pipeline down the middle of the country?
 
A highway is okay a school is not. Besides that were not talking about a highway or school.This a privately owned company wanting to take land so it can build something for private use.This Amounts to a walmart,Sears, Kmart, Home Depot or some other privately own company trying to take your land to build a parking lot. Worst of all this is a foreign privately owned company using eminent domain to try to take land from American land owners.

How do long high voltage electric lines get built?
 
How else could they build the pipeline down the middle of the country?

If they can't get the necessary property without trying to forcefully take property then that's just too bad. Private property rights outweigh a private company's need to build a pipeline.
 
A highway is okay a school is not. Besides that were not talking about a highway or school.This a privately owned company wanting to take land so it can build something for private use.This Amounts to a walmart,Sears, Kmart, Home Depot or some other privately own company trying to take your land to build a parking lot. Worst of all this is a foreign privately owned company using eminent domain to try to take land from American land owners.

I have to disagree with you on this one. The pipeline is about making us less dependent on mid east oil and I am for it. Eminent domain is precisely for this sort of thing and I don't see a pipeline underground a huge problem. I had a house on the outskirts of town once that Avista built a gas pipe line through with eminent domain. They tore down everyones fences, dug up trees and put their pipeline in. Then they rebuilt the fences, replanted trees and seeded new lawns. All in all I was very satisfied with their work.
 
Back
Top Bottom