Nothing Like The Smell Of Liberal Fear.

The environmentalist wacko movement seems to be in an uproar. That can only be GOOD for common sense projects such as THIS.

It isn’t a done deal by any means. Can’t wait to see liberal heads explode if approved. From The Daily Caller.com

 

Environmentalists regret blocking Keystone XL pipeline.

10:54 AM  11/05/2013 by Michael Bastasch
Environmentalists regret blocking Keystone XL pipeline

Be nice to beat these assholes for once. But, since the BECS still is dithering, I wouldn’t put much chance on it’s passage. IF it comes, it means the wackos didn’t have as big a bag of money for the sonofabitch.

We need this like last YEAR. Piss on the left, Obama. Just give the goddamn approval already, dickweed.

After a summer of lackluster protests and the failure to gain wide-ranging  public support for the campaign, prominent liberal columnist Jonathan Chait  called the Keystone opposition a “huge environmentalist mistake,” arguing that  the focus on the pipeline project came in 2011 after environmentalists had been  dealt a defeat on cap-and-trade policies.

Chait criticizes environmentalist leader Bill McKibben and others for putting  so much effort into fighting the pipeline that will do little to curb global  warming. The real effort to cut carbon dioxide emissions, Chait writes, comes  from the Environmental Protection Agency’s emissions limits on power plants.

“Even slight gradations in the strength of possible EPA plans matter more  than the whole fate of the Keystone pipeline,” Chait wrote last week. “And yet, McKibben and tens  of thousands of his followers are obsessed with a program that amounts to a  rounding error at the expense of a decision that really is the last chance to  stop unrestrained global warming.”

Chait’s argument got some push back from environmentalists, but the  liberal writer isn’t alone is venting frustration about the environmental  movement’s Keystone campaign.

“Architecturally, a keystone is the wedge-shaped piece at the crown of an  arch that locks the other pieces in place,” wrote four environmental activists  representing U.S. and Canadian groups. “Without the keystone, the building  blocks of an archway will tumble and fall, with no support system for the weight  of the arch. Much of the United States’ climate movement right now is structured  like an archway, with all of its blocks resting on a keystone — President  [Barack] Obama’s decision on the Keystone XL pipeline.”

“This is a dangerous place to be,” the activists added. “Once Barack Obama  makes his decision on the pipeline, be it approval or rejection, the keystone  will disappear. Without this piece, we could see the weight of the arch tumble  down, potentially losing throngs of newly inspired climate activists.”

Environmentalists have good reason to be worried about their stake in the  Keystone XL decision. The summer saw sparsely  attended protests against the pipeline. As the summer dragged on, the  protests failed to draw out activists specifically opposed to the pipeline, and  instead drew out more broadly anti-capitalist  activists.

The disillusionment among environmentalists has been accompanied by polls  that show strong public support for the pipeline, despite large sums of money  spent on ad campaigns to vilify the project. The latest poll by the Pew Research  Center found that 65 percent of Americans favor  building Keystone, while only 30 percent of the country opposed the project.

However, those who have been active in the anti-Keystone campaign argue that  it’s not about the actual impacts of vetoing the pipeline: It’s a symbolic  movement of standing up to the fossil-fuels industry.

“[I]n deciding to block Keystone, the president would finally signal a shift  in policy that matters, finally acknowledge that we have to keep most of the  carbon that’s still in the ground in that ground if we want our children and  grandchildren to live on a planet worth inhabiting,” writes McKibben, head of the environmental  group 350.org, which has taken a lead role against the pipeline.

One writer for the liberal site ThinkProgress even went so far as to compare  the anti-Keystone campaign with the civil rights movement.

“To make a sweeping analogy, dismissing the Keystone fight simply because  stopping Keystone won’t save the climate by itself, would be like dismissing the  civil rights movement’s use of protests or boycotts or civil disobedience. Each  individual action failed to achieve civil rights and yet somehow the movement  triumphed,” writes Joe Romm.

What’s Keystone’s status?

While liberals battled it out over the merits of opposing Keystone XL,  TransCanada silently completed the southern leg of the pipeline project to bring  oil from Cushing, Okla. to Gulf Coast refineries in Texas.

The southern leg of the pipeline, dubbed the Gulf Coast Pipeline Project, is  slated to go into service in mid-to-late 2013 and will be able to transport  700,000 barrels of oil per day from the booming oil regions in America’s  midwest.

“The Gulf Coast Pipeline Project is a critical infrastructure project for the  energy security of the United States and the American economy,” says TransCanada. “U.S. crude oil production  has been growing significantly in Oklahoma, North Dakota, Montana and Texas.  Producers do not have access to enough pipeline capacity to move this production  to the large refining market along the U.S. Gulf Coast. The Gulf Coast Project  will address this constraint, as will the Houston Lateral Project.”

The northern leg of the project, which would bring oil from tar sands oil  fields in Alberta, Canada down through Cushing, is still waiting for approval,  and it’s still unclear if the Obama administration intends to approve the  pipeline.

Over the summer, Obama declared that he would oppose the pipeline project if  it significantly added to U.S. carbon dioxide emissions — something the State  Department said wouldn’t happen in a report earlier this year.

Obama then downplayed  the economic benefits of the pipeline in an interview with The New York Times, and  declared that there was more the Canadian government could do to lower carbon  emissions from tar sands oil extraction.

“Republicans have said that this would be a big jobs generator,” Obama said.  “There is no evidence that that’s true. The most realistic estimates are this  might create maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the  pipeline, which might take a year or two, and then after that we’re talking  about somewhere between 50 and 100 jobs in an economy of 150 million working  people.

However, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy recently indicated that the  administration would approve the pipeline. A reporter with The Boston Globe  tweeted out that McCarthy was skeptical of environmentalist arguments against  the project, and made it seem like approval was likely:

EPA administrator Gina McCarthy didn’t buy the argument that blocking the  Keystone pipeline would prevent the extraction of tar sands oil.

— David Abel (@davabel) November 4, 2013

EPA administrator Gina McCarthy, at the Globe, sure made it seem likely that  the Obama administration will approve the Keystone pipeline.

— David Abel (@davabel) November 4, 2013

~

It is GREAT to see the leftist assholes eating EACH OTHER over this, in my opinion, MUCH-NEEDED project.

To get oil moved cheaper, safer, and as a result, lower our gasoline costs, this pipeline is a necessity. But, whenever things could get cheaper, leave it to the leftist morons to try to squash ANY common sense solutions.

If you EVER hear a liberal bitch about ANY form of energy, either it’s availability, or cost, PUNCH the asshat right in the mouth.

~

Clyde

 

Tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Nothing Like The Smell Of Liberal Fear.

  1. Garnet92 says:

    A great reminder of a problem that often doesn’t get enough consideration – is that of our energy independence – our dependence on foreign oil. I remember the gas lines of 1979 and that more than the price of gas is what worries me. Any kind of spark in the middle east could cause shutdowns, blockades, etc. and bring on another gas shortage – the pipeline would help to insulate the US from the loss of ME crude. Good one Clyde!

  2. And the lines of 1973, as well, Garnet – I was plowing snow that winter~!

    They are yak-yaking about environmental damage, yada yada yada and so forth. STOP THE TRAIN~!,,, with the hot box over a wooden bridge~!,,, What the ‘ell have they got in the hopper to replace fossil fuels??? They do a lot of talk about electric cars,, and hybrids. Where is the electricity coming from, to charge the batteries???
    Are there any tidal basin electric generating plants? Wind power is killing off the Avian population, including the Bald & Golden Eagles, as well as the predator hawks,,,
    How much Geothermal source electrical energy is being generated? NOT MUCH~!

    But try to tell them that over 80% of electricity is fossil fuel generated for home and industrial use, and that is what is used to charge the batteries in the Volt and the hybrids, and some poor libbieral will short circuit, like the robot Flo in the Progressive commercials.

    Take candy from a baby, and teach a liberal common sense. One is as easy as the other, and both are damn near impossible~!

    Great post, Clyde.

    • Clyde says:

      Good comment as well, GF. Whether or not the enviro-weenies like it or not, we STILL are a carbon-based economy. And WILL be for decades to come, given the dismal track record of the “alternatives”.

  3. Buck says:

    The environmentalist wackos are actually the result of a lifetime of luxury living and substandard education.
    They are actually cutting their own throats and won’t realize it until the flame of liberty flickers out and they are left in the darkness of another dark ages.
    They make lemmings look like a specie of pure genius’.

  4. Kathy says:

    If it’s good for the country and the American people, obama will be against it. He wants to keep us dependent on his buddies’ foreign oil.

    Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I thought all the flap about the pipeline was because of the risk of spills and they didn’t want it crossing particular grasslands in Nebraska, and other places. I don’t remember emissions being such a big deal.

    I’ve read other sources who say the pipeline would less risky in regard to spills, than the trucks and railcars that are currently transporting it from Canada to the US.

    The argument about oil always come back to alternative energy, electric cars and the like. People conveniently forget the other gozillion products that come from the petroleum industry.

  5. Clyde says:

    Kathy, the enviro weenies were against it just because they oppose anything resembling common sense solutions. The main concern with the routing of the Keystone XL was the proximity of the Oglala Aquifer, a HUGE source of water running through a large portion of Nebraska. The ONLY one opposing it on the specious grounds of “emissions” is the BECS.

  6. Hardnox says:

    Good post bro. Let us not forget that Zero’s buddy Warren Buffet owns the trains that fill the void between the two pipelines. Just sayin’.

    • Clyde says:

      Thanks, boss. I believe I made that connection several months ago, in a post at the old house. Indeed, Buffett is a HUGE Obama ass-kiss, and HE WILL tell Obama what HE wants in return for the support.