“However many jobs might be generated by a Keystone pipeline,” he said, “they’re going to be a lot fewer than the jobs that are created by extending the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance.”
Four more years of this???
So using his logic, we need MORE people on unemployment insurance to create more jobs? This man is an imbecile!
Actually, mathematically, stopping the extensions of unemployment insurance will cause more unemployed people to stop looking for jobs. They fall out of the unemployment calculation and TA DA! unemployment numbers go down!
This country can’t afford four more years of this moron. But the mindless drones will REGURGITATE (this is for you cory) these dumbed down talking points, rather than see the truth that this man is accurately labeled the obAMATEUR!
Pathetic.
Blogs For Victory 
This drivel from the Community-Agitator-In-Chief is what the acronym AYFKM? was invented for.
d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
Psalm 109:8
soon
Say neo, did you see this? Obama celebrates Hanukkah at White House…2 weeks early … lights all the candles … Says ‘We Never Need an Excuse For a Good Party’… And he’s going to get the Jewish Vote?
What .A.Boob!
boobs are good
more like an ass (donkey)
So Obama cut $500 billion from medicare to get his Obamacare passed, and now wants to extend a payroll cut, further suffocating SS of the funds needed to keep that program going – the question is: Why does Obama want to get the economy moving on the backs of seniors?
Furthermore, if this is Obama;s BIG idea to get the economy moving, then we are in BIG trouble. Where are the bold initiatives needed to put this country on a better financial footing? What Obama is doing is just more of the same weak political, poll tested policies that doing nothing to resolve our problems, while his cronies (think: Corzine) continue to raid the treasury. This Hope and Change thing has really worked out well
Let’s use their talking points against them Cluster (in this case):
“I’d much rather not get a tiny payroll tax cut than jeopardize Social Security and Medicare”.
Yep, SS is going broke we already have passed the point where we are paying out more in SS than we are taking in SS taxes. And this MORON, is going to reduce that?
It goes to show you that the Democrats have no interest in “saving” Social Security and Medicare and rather play politics than any real reform.
The current shortfall due to the tax break or holiday will be paid out of the general fund.
Is “the general fund” Obama’s secret stash?
Or is it a magical vault filled with choc’let coins guarded by unicorns that fart jelly-beans.
um James……social security is ALREADY being paid out of the general funds, and in that pot of general funds is a big fat IOU for $15 trillion.
Are any other sources you can think of?
Of course, Cluster and the Cap’n, you don’t understand.
You fill up the general fund by printing more money!
Sheesh! You would make terrible Liberals.
maybe if they spent wisely they wouldnt have such a problem with SS eh…like the 1/4 bn they spent on…penis pumps…for Sr Citizens…hmmm…once upon a time it was pretty well acknowledged that that kind of a…problem…was the natural effect of aging…boy were people so fooled for the last 3500 years or so…
gets a real purpose for the term…dirty ole man though…dont it!!
Uh, tommy-boy (james), current shortfall? Is this the shortfall due to we are already paying more than we take in or the ADDITIONAL short fall for the measley $3.00 /day in vote buying money for each working individual oh excuse me obAMATEUR’s tax cut?
Are you that easily bought off?
Leadership by example there bagni?
nanu nanu dork from ork
This man is an imbecile! – Obamba
a dangerous one.
Another Bill Ayers Connection? Obama’s Anti-Capitalism Speech in Osawatomie May Not Have Been By Chance
Osawatomie was also the name given to the Weather Underground’s publication.
Ah, the whimpering simpering baggy whines about the use of screen names.
We could “find” him? How? Google “posturing infantile twit”?
And who could possibly CARE?
He’s never posted an idea beyond his silly cardboard spaceship persona, and never will.
However, back in the general direction of the thread…
Why are we building a pipeline to carry crude oil across the country to outmoded and sometimes failing refineries, so the finished product can be carried back the same way to markets in the north?
Given the volume of oil we expect to get from the tar sands, and even more from the Dakota fields, why aren’t we building new state-of-the art refineries up north, limiting the distance the crude has to travel, and then transporting the finished products of gasoline and oil east and west to markets in the northern part of the country?
Ama, there you go again, thinking and being logical!
Don’t you know that it is only emotions that obAMATEUR is trying to inspire?!?
Because that would make sense, and probably create a lot of well paying jobs for evil Big Oil, lessening peoples dependence on the generosity of the Democrats. Seriously Amazona, you need to think these things through.
check the date……
“US appears to have built its last refinery
Jun 12, 2001 02:00 AM
No new refineries have been built in the US in the past 25 years. And petroleum industry experts say anyone would have to be crazy to launch such an effort — even though present refineries are running at nearly 100 % of capacity and local gasoline shortages are beginning to crop up.
Why does the industry appear to have built its last refinery?
Three reasons: Refineries are not particularly profitable, environmentalists fight planning and construction every step of the way and government red-tape makes the task all but impossible. The last refinery built in the US was in Garyville, Louisiana, and it started up in 1976.
Energy proposed building a refinery near Portsmouth, Virginia, in the late 1970s, environmental groups and local residents fought the plan — and it took almost nine years of battles in court and before federal and state regulators before the company cancelled the project in 1984.
Industry officials estimate the cost of building a new refinery at between $ 2 bn and $ 4 bn — at a time the industry must devote close to $ 20 bn over the next decade to reducing the sulphur content in gasoline and other fuels — and approval could mean having to collect up to 800 different permits. As if those hurdles weren’t enough, the industry’s long-term rate of return on capital is just 5 % — less than could be realized by simply buying US Treasury bonds.
“I’m sure that at some point in the last 20 years someone has considered building a new refinery,” says James Halloran, an energy analyst with National City Corp. “But they quickly came to their senses,” he adds.”
Source: Investor’s Business Daily
OT..sarcasm
( a sad sad day for America)
After the rally, Mumia Abu-Jamal’s supporters walked to a nearby abortion clinic, where they ate a buffet dinner served by members of Teachers Union Local 121, drank regional wines and were entertained by local hip-hop and new age musicians. A poetry reading followed, and several office buildings were set ablaze in honor of Abu-Jamal escaping the death penalty for his cold-blooded murder of a police officer.
oh, no, neo—-are you saying that government interfererence intervention has made it nearly impossible to build new refineries?
Say it ain’t so!
Well, that and eco-nazi hysteria.
But now that Obamanomics have knocked T bill returns down close to zero, and much of the work to reduce sulfur content is done, it seems that the biggest remaining obstacles are the government and the eco-nazis.
Is this your read on it?
And the overall arching progressive agenda of green energy due to their irrational and emotional hysteria surrounding “global warming”. As Chris Hayes of MSNBC (think Rachel Maddow in drag), recently said – “The less oil we take out of the ground, the better”. No doubt this statement was declared to send a tingle up the legs of progressives, but it also reveals a disturbing ignorance of current energy realities, and a real lack of regard for the plight of so many unemployed Americans.
By the way I thought Newt had another great night last night, and is clearly the most rational, clear thinking conservative on that stage.
We need to be diligent though because the progressives on MSNBC have really put their finger on the pulse of the most pressing issue facing America & the planet – gay rights in third world countries, and thanks to Hillary’s “brilliant” speech and Obama’s deft policies, gay rights should now take precedence over those other miniscule problems those third world countries face like poverty, starvation, and corruption.
you tell em Newt
Newt Gingrich: Palestinians are an ‘Invented’ People, Peace Process ‘Delusional’
Gingrich keeps blasting them out of the park. Mitt Romney claims he should be president, because, unlike Newt, Romney is not a “career politician.” “Let’s be candid,” Newt replies. “The only reason you didn’t become a career politician is that you lost to Ted Kennedy in 1994.” Wham
Michelle Obama Secret Affair Rumors Surface
Gateway Pundit ^ | September 10,2011 | Jim Hoft
Maybe this explains all of those extravagant vacations?
It’s a good thing her last name is not Cain or this story would be making major headlines by now. America’s Conservative News reported:
The Globe magazine just released a bombshell and is reporting that Michelle Obama is having a “steamy secret affair” with a Secret Service Agent. According to The Globe, rumors started to circulate that Obama may be having an affair after her recent admission to NBC’s Al Roker that she frequently “sneaks out” of the White House; and the ever increasing time she is spending away from the White House may be a cover to hide “a sizzling affair she’s carrying on with a Secret Service agent.”
Rut Ro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1_jZnNT9e8&feature=player_embedded
I think the chemtrails have finally gotten to this guy. But I think it’s interesting how he basically admits to infidelity by claiming that a strong black man with just one woman in his life is suspicious.
Wow.
blowzo
he admitted nothing but he may have had pre marital sex with other women.
now back to the content of what he said Obomba’s infidelity with a man.
But we’re not talking about a “strong black man”. We are talking about a whiny, effete, half-black man with no woman in his life EVER, all the way through high school and three colleges and a kinda-career in the heart of the black community in Chicago—-a man with rumors of homosexual activities. No high school prom, no canoodling under the bleachers at high school football games, no mention of any girlfriend, no old flames talking about what a sweetheart he was.
And we are talking about a spoiled woman with a strong sense of entitlement who, based on things like wearing expensive clothes to soup kitchens and taking extravagant vacations on OPM, evidently doesn’t feel that rules ought to apply to her.
Wow.
If anything makes this sound suspicious, it is the use of the word “sizzling”. I have a feeling the only time the word “sizzling” can be used in the same context as Michelle Obama, it is related to bacon or french fries.
But the fooling around thing? Any woman married to the gender-neutral persona projected by Obama would be fair game for a real man. The baggy-ass mom jeans alone would have sent her prowling for something better—–anything better.
This was discussed on one of the talking head shows yesterday, and some Leftist I’d never heard of actually said (I’m not making this up), “Newt may be historically correct, but what he said is offensive.” Of course, the fact that the Left finds the truth to be offensive is nothing new.
Newt’s comment about the Palestinians being an invented people was discussed on one of the talking head shows yesterday, and some Leftist I’d never heard of actually said (I’m not making this up), “Newt may be historically correct, but what he said is offensive.” Of course, the fact that the Left finds the truth to be offensive is nothing new.
Is “correct but offensive” the replacement for “fake but accurate”?
ama
seems so LOL
Amy said, “If anything makes this sound suspicious, it is the use of the word “sizzling”. I have a feeling the only time the word “sizzling” can be used in the same context as Michelle Obama, it is related to bacon or french fries.”
And, “But we’re not talking about a “strong black man”. We are talking about a whiny, effete, half-black man with no woman in his life EVER, all the way through high school and three colleges and a kinda-career in the heart of the black community in Chicago—-a man with rumors of homosexual activities.”
And, “Any woman married to the gender-neutral persona projected by Obama would be fair game for a real man.”
Tsk, tsk, Amy. Talking about personalities again, I see. Looks like you’ve chosen silly inane nonsense over anything that might demand addressing actual, specific, points or policies. Again. That’s the other thing about being a conservative. Apparently you have to be a hypocrite, too. Maybe that’s why you like Newt.
Amy said, “But the thing about being a conservative is that it is hard NOT to try to solve problems rationally, instead of blaming other people.”
Yeah, well, the other thing about being a conservative is that it’s too hard to be informed. There is a new refinery being planned for North Dakota. The existing one is being expanded. New rail lines are being built to move oil to refineries in nearby states. But I’m sure you know all that.
watsonduke
“being planned”
Im sure you know that
I didn’t know all that. Thank you for finally adding something of value to the discourse.
So what watty!
We have had several nuclear plants being “planned” across the country. If they were built as is, then they would be outdated before any of them are turned on.
There are plans for several refineries to be built but getting them approved by the left is next to impossible.
Do keep up with the mindless talking points though. It is very amusing.
waspduke
funny you seemed to forget about the context of both articles.
One the first lady possibly being a HO
and the POtuS having a HOMOsexual liaison.
herman are you watching?
I understand the context, Clown. So I guess that makes it okay for Amy to turn her back on her own standards. That makes her a hypocrite. I know it’s a big word that you don’t understand.
By the way, Clown, the wife and I went to Subway the other day and got subs for the two of us for under ten bucks. I’m thinking you ought to give it a try. That way you could take the other ten bucks you normally spend on subs and buy two more foot-long sandwiches. Then you could split them in half giving you four six-inch subs (2+2=4). You could then give them to four nearby homeless children who are hungry. Yeah, we all saw on 60 Minutes how you treat your children in Florida. You must be so proud.
all 20 of them on welfare? from 1 woman and 20 dogs?
why dont YOU feed them with all that money you saved at subway watstooge?
silly watstooge
You could then give them to four nearby homeless children who are hungry.
There are NO hungry children “nearby” in the burbs.
ill leave that for you trailer park dwellers.
Two double roast beef subs please.
Somehow I knew you wouldn’t care about anyone but yourself, Clown.
I care about your friends waspstooge
waspstooge
I’ll compare donations with you any day.
I was skimming the new Occidental College magazine (Summer 2010) and saw they found a new photo of the young Obama. I also went through the class notes and found that Hasan Chandoo has been in touch with my old girlfriend Caroline Grauman-Boss and her friend Susan (Keselenko) Coll over the years.
I expect that this will give additional credibility to my statements that I knew the young Obama and can affirm that he was a Marxist socialist in 1980-1981. Obama and I used to be part of a strong, committed group of revolutionaries. The only difference, as far as I can tell, is that I aged out of that obnoxious ideology in my mid-20s.
Perry Slams Obama Over Downed Drone: “This President Is The Problem” December 10th, 2011
“The idea this president now, with Iran getting one of our predator drones in their possession, and he had opportunities — he had two choices. Actually, he had three. He chose the worse. And those two opportunities he had was to either retrieve that drone or to destroy it. And he did the worst of the three. And he did absolutely nothing. And the Russians and the Chinese will have our highly technical equipment now.
This president is the problem, not something Newt Gingrich said.”
Could be fake. Hard to believe a for-profit contractor would build a real secret thing designed to fly into enemy territory without a self-destruct function.
Doesn’t look at all like a predator drone. More like a stealth drone. So at least on that point, Perry is an idiot. Again. Google the images. Perry didn’t.
You obviously aren’t a subscriber to any of the cool military stuff sites. I got a video of this drone a couple years ago, when it was still going through tests. In all fairness, that doesn’t negate the fact that Perry is an idiot.
It is difficult to believe that the thing doesn’t have a fail-safe, self-destruct mechanism, but, with this current national security crew, nothing surprises me any more. It could well be that is has a self-destruct mechanism and ObiOne’s elves just don’t know how to activate it.
Spook the RQ 170 does have a destruct mechanism. From what i have been able to gather the operator was ordered not to activate it. Go figure.
The RQ-170 Sentinel, nick-named The Beast of Kandahar, is an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) developed by Lockheed Martin.
Perry is still an idiot but somehow posters on this site still manage to exceed his lowest marks.
U.S. Debt Has Increased $48,994 Per SECOND Since Obama Took Office
Palestinian Hip-Hop Group Comparing Israelis to Nazis Performs for Oregon Public High School Students
U.S. Post Office in Maryland Kicks Out Christmas Carolers
neo, please give the source of the above statement. I’d like to keep it in a file.
Obama Espoused Radical Views in College [advocated communist revolution!]
Steve Malzberg – WOR News Talk Radio 710 ^ | February 12, 2010 | Ronald Kessler
Dr. John C. Drew, a grant writing consultant in Laguna Niguel, Calif., tells Newsmax he met Obama in 1980 when Obama was a sophomore at Occidental College in Los Angeles. Drew had just graduated from Occidental and was attending graduate school at Cornell University.
During Christmas break, Drew says he was at Grauman-Boss’ home in Palo Alto when Obama came over with Mohammed Hasan Chandoo, his roommate from Pakistan.
“Barack [Obama] and Hasan showed up at the house in a BMW, and then we went to a restaurant together,” Drew says. “We had a nice meal, and then we came back to the house and smoked cigarettes and drank and argued politics.”
For the next several hours, they discussed Marxism.
“He [Obama] was arguing a straightforward Marxist-Leninist class-struggle point of view, which anticipated that there would be a revolution of the working class, led by revolutionaries, who would overthrow the capitalist system and institute a new socialist government that would redistribute the wealth,” says Drew, who says he himself was then a Marxist.
“The idea was basically that wealthy people were exploiting others,” Drew says. “That this was the secret of their wealth, that they weren’t paying others enough for their work, and they were using and taking advantage of other people. He was convinced that a revolution would take place, and it would be a good thing.”
Drew concluded that Obama thought of himself as “part of an intelligent, radical vanguard that was leading the way towards this revolution and towards this new society.” …”
Referring to Obama’s quote from “Dreams of My Father” that he associated with Marxist professors, Drew says, “What he’s not saying is that he was in 100 percent total agreement with those Marxist professors. When you understand that, Obama’s later associations and policies make more sense, including why he was taken in by Rev. Wright’s ideology.”
SSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTT
waspstooge
“You must be so proud.” yup I am
60 Minutes’ story on homeless children in Florida spurs $1 million in donations
Alicia Shepard by Alicia Shepard Published Dec. 9, 2011 4:17 pm Updated Dec. 9, 2011 4:20 pm
“60 Minutes” doesn’t often do updates unless it re-airs an old story. But it will this weekend because of the overwhelming response to its story on homeless kids living in vehicles in Florida.
Since the piece aired Nov. 27, offers of cash, housing and even scholarships have poured in. The children in the story “didn’t ask for anything,” “60 Minutes” Correspondent Scott Pelley will say this Sunday, according to a transcript. “But since our broadcast, viewers have sent in or promised more than $1 million to help homeless families in Central Florida.”
Three colleges also offered two children in the story, Arielle and Austin Metzger, full scholarships, and all the parents in the story have been offered jobs, according to “60 Minutes.” One of the schools is Stetson University; Arielle
Well if they are homeless, then they are unemployed – just what the obAMATEUR needs to create jobs!
His plan is working!!!!
His plan is working!!!!
Cloward-Piven Strategy
yup
So I guess that makes it okay for Amy to turn her back on her own standards. That makes her a hypocrite. – watson
Once again an over emotional liberal misses the mark. Amazona derides liberals watson because they ONLY talk about personality and scandal, and rarely dive into actual substance. Amazona primarily talks about policies, so I give her a pass on the few occasions she does speak of personality. I feel sorry for watson though, because watching his ideology fail epically right in front of his eyes can’t be easy. Lashing out is really all he has left.
By the way, Clown, the wife and I went to Subway the other day – watson
So you chose to frequent the establishment of a wealthy corporation that pays their workers minimum wage so that you can eat cheap? What kind of liberal are you?
Again. That’s the other thing about being a liberal. Apparently you have to be a hypocrite, too. Maybe that’s why you like slic willy, and ded kennedydrunk
fixed
But wattle, the only way to respond to a post which is about a personality is by referring to a personality. Someone called Barry a “strong black man”——that false statement could either go unchallenged, or be addressed on the same grounds.
Just what “points or policies” would be relevant to the claim that Barry is a “strong black man” or to his wife’s affair?
When talking about politics, talk about policy and ideology and agenda. When talking about people, talk about people. Too bad you don’t know the difference.
Romney: Islam Is a Peace-Loving Religion
geee mitt how did you miss this?
http://thereligionofpeace.com/
a cave in tora bora?
Cluster,
What’s really sad about the whole issue is that, because the MSM is so biased toward the Leftist position on global warming/climate change, the best Conservatives can hope for is to stall the debate until nature finally removes all doubt. And by most calculations, we’re about 4 years away from that point. In the meantime, however, hundreds of billions, if not trillions, have been and will be wasted that could have otherwise been used for much more worthwhile purposes.
I agree Spook – I think climate change will be a thing of the past in about 5 years. But in the meantime, a lot of well intentioned liberals will get really rich.
More unsupported hysteria over fracking
Washington Examiner ^ | 12/08/11 | Masthead Editorial
Hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) is the process used by the energy industry to extract immense deposits of oil and natural gas from deep geologic formations that only a few years ago were unreachable. It involves injecting a solution of water and chemicals far underground, typically thousands of feet below groundwater supplies. Fracking was first used in Oklahoma in the 1940s and in the years since has been employed in more than a million oil and gas wells across the nation. There is not a single independently documented instance of groundwater contamination by fracking anywhere in the country, a fact that was confirmed as recently as May by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson during congressional testimony. So why did the EPA announce Thursday in a draft report that chemicals “likely” associated with fracking were found at a drilling site near Pavilion, Wyo.? Big Green activists who are determined to stop fracking will loudly proclaim from every media rooftop in coming days that there is now “proof” that fracking endangers drinking water across America. Here’s what these ideologically blinded zealots won’t tell you:
The next two sentences in the EPA announcement quoted in the opening paragraph state: “EPA also re-tested private and public drinking water wells in the community. The samples were consistent with chemicals identified in earlier EPA results released in 2010 and are generally below established health and safety standards.” By “below,” the EPA means that chemicals in the groundwater do not exceed acceptable health and safety standards.
As for the chemicals “likely” associated with fracking, they could have from multiple sources. For example, Energy in Depth, an industry research group that supports fracking, notes that the U.S. Geological Survey found that water quality in the area is unusually variable because of the geology’s “highly variable lithology [i.e. general geologic characteristics], permeability, and recharge conditions.” The area has also in recent years featured unusually high levels of pesticides and significant drainage problems, according to the USGS.
But don’t expect such facts to deter Big Green propagandists – and their allies in the liberal mainstream media — from spreading mountains of misinformation, as well as wild-eyed predictions of doom if fracking is not instantly banned. Some of them have already started, as seen in a headline published a few weeks ago: “EPA finds compound used in fracking in Wyoming aquifer.” That unsupported assertion appears over a story published on its website by Pro Publica, a New York-based outfit that describes its purpose as “using the moral force of investigative journalism to spur reform through the sustained spotlighting of wrongdoing.” Funny, we thought credible journalists gathered all of the facts before assigning blame. The facts remain as they were stated by Jackson in May: The EPA has not yet documented a single case in which fracking caused groundwater contamination.
Not only is the Kyoto Protocol technically flawed, the so-called science behind it is utter twaddle. Never mind complicated things like non-linear mathematics or, indeed, mathematics of any sort. The alarmists can’t possibly know how to predict the future of Earth’s climate because they can’t explain its past.
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/12/09/dont-pretend-we-know-what-causes-climate-change
Climate conference approves landmark deal
DURBAN, South Africa (AP) — A U.N. climate conference reached a hard-fought agreement Sunday on a far-reaching program meant to set a new course for the global fight against climate change
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AF_CLIMATE_CONFERENCE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-12-10-20-42-38
Amy said, “When talking about politics, talk about policy and ideology and agenda. When talking about people, talk about people. Too bad you don’t know the difference.”
No, Amy, that doesn’t wash. You’re being hypocritical. You know it. We all know it. If you were intellectually honest, you wouldn’t have jumped in to denigrate the first lady, who isn’t even an elected official–something you claim to abhor. I do congratulate you, however, on at least responding; usually you’re never heard from again when your dishonesty is laid bare.
And cluster, it was touching of you to come to Amy’s defense. But you have such a fertile imagination. You make sweeping assumptions that are backed up by nothing. I guess it makes it easier for you that way.
I “abhor” denigrating an elected official?
Quote me, please.
You just keep stretching to find ways to justify your spite and malice, you just keep finding excuses for name-calling and insults, as these are all you can bring to any discussion.
Do you plan to ever actually discuss anything relevant on this blog, or are you admitting that your only role here is that of attack dog?
Well, actually you take great pleasure in denigrating people; you just criticize others for doing so.
As for contributing, I pointed out in this thread, in response to your question, that companies are in fact planning to build and/or expand refineries in North Dakota.
Your dependence on insults and personal attacks means you are facing having your posts deleted, which has happened to others who have also used this blog as nothing but a means of attacking and insulting others. That is not its purpose. A very occasional and insignificant fact does not offset the overwhelming body of hostility and name-calling. //Moderator
And cluster, it was touching of you to come to Amy’s defense. – watson
I didn’t come to anyone’s defense, and I hardly think anyone would need to be defended from the likes of you. I was just pointing out that little thing called…..reality. A concept liberals usually ignore when talking politics.
Certain vulgarities are not allowed on the blog. //Moderator
Actually what Beck did was call Newton a big government progressive. Then he questioned why TEA Partiers would support one big government progressive but not the other.
6963j
yup just ask bwany fwank, LS, or barry.
6913j
“Oh how sweet”.
UGH!!
““EPA finds compound used in fracking in Wyoming aquifer.””
This could technically be true. Water is a compound used in fracking.
I know. I am penitent. I am shamed. Mea culpa.
But the thing about being a conservative is that it is hard NOT to try to solve problems rationally, instead of blaming other people.
NIMBY. Canadians don’t want this crap spewed into THEIR environment. It’s bad enough that they’re having to lie to their citizens just to extract this stuff.
But Texas…whew, have you ever smelled the air in west Texas? I just worked in Odessa last week…MAN, what a fracking stench.
So fracking has a stench? Do elaborate.
And what lies are the Canadians being fed, “just to extract this stuff”?
And who said anything about Canada building refineries? I was talking about US-built refineries right here in this country.
Do you think North Dakota is in Canada? Or do you just qualify anything “up north” as Canadian?
I often drive I-80 through Wyoming, right past the big refinery at Sinclair, and have never smelled anything. But if a refinery is going to emit odor, it is far more likely than an old, outdated, and nearly worn out refinery will be less efficient than a new one built with new technology.
This is what passes for intellectual commentary on the far Left—-an old refinery emits bad odors so let’s keep using it instead of building a new and more efficient one, the “logic” being that refineries smell bad.
When cars put out too many emissions we developed new technology to reduce the emissions, we didn’t just say “old cars stink so let’s not build new cars”.
Of course freakzo wasn’t in charge.
You’re ok with Canada destroying Wyoming’s water supply for profit?
This is what passes for intellectual commentary on the far Right — I can’t personally smell it so it must not be bad. If liberals hate it, it must be FANTASTIC.
blowzo
“destroying”
ROTFLMAO drama queen.
Pavilion is not “Wyoming”. Pavilion is a small town IN Wyoming.
The EPA has suggested that fracking might be related to the poor water quality in the area.
Nothing has been proved.
Thank you for illustrating, once again, how easily you Pseudo-Lefty hysterics are led.
And that is just from your first shrill sentence. The next two are simply stupid, albeit other peeks into the hyper-emotional murk that seems to make up the Pseudo-Liberal “mind”.
You said that on your trip to Odessa the smell was “fracking awful”. Was that a statement that the air smelled bad because of fracking? If so, please explain how this might have happened, and why the only objections to fracking have been claims (so far unsubstantiated) of fracking affecting groundwater.
Or were you just indulging in some more of your frightfully clumsy attempts at humor?
MY comment on lack of odor was specific to the lack of odors around the refineries at Sinclair.
Fracking—refining. Do you think they are one and the same? You seem to have trouble keeping track of the differences.
that’s funny, now that you’re gone it doesn’t smell bad at all. I wonder ….
So paying people not to work will generate more jobs? Who knew? So let’s get this ball rolling! Let’s pay more people MORE money!
Just curious, though—-what jobs, exactly, are generated by paying people not to work?
So temporary small cuts in payroll taxes will encourage employers to add employees?
Employers ARE employers because they are smart enough to have their own businesses, and they are smart enough not to make big decisions like hiring people when the threat of raising their taxes looms on the horizon, threatened by every Lib in Congress and the White House. And hiring someone, even one person, represents an investment of time and money by the employer, hardly offset by a small and temporary savings in payroll taxes—-a saving that will be gobbled up by raising the taxes on the additional revenue this employee is supposed to generate.
Barry’s utter cluelessness about how an economy works shines through his every comment. And it’s not just him. This isn’t one of those embarrassing blurts of his true ideology that happen when he goes off-script. This is how his entire administration thinks, and this is what his minders tell him to say.
greed is the root of all evil…or a lot of it anyways…
unemployed people must seek a means to survive…they create jobs….they discover opportuunities that exist and exploit them…it is a natural behavior…people have been doing it for centuries…
but those folks who are guaranteed year after year of unemployment benefits…they dont do that…they get hungry and they go get food stamps…they dont do anything but what it takes to survive unemployment…and they dont endanger thier “right” to get public funding…free money is not the answer to our perdicament…only motivation and inspiration…lose unemployment compensation…and you get both in return…thats what our constitution guarantee’s…the right to pursue happiness….not the right to OPM…(other peoples money)
Besides, sooner or later, YOU RUN OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY (hat tip to Margaret Thatcher).
However, back in the general direction of the thread…
Why are we building a pipeline to carry crude oil across the country to outmoded and sometimes failing refineries, so the finished product can be carried back the same way to markets in the north?
Given the volume of oil we expect to get from the tar sands, and even more from the Dakota fields, why aren’t we building new state-of-the art refineries up north, limiting the distance the crude has to travel, and then transporting the finished products of gasoline and oil east and west to markets in the northern part of the country?
This is priceless commentary on Obama’s lecture yesterday – courtesy of Charles Krauthammer:
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Well, as we just heard, yes. He talked about how we got here. He gave a nice historical rundown except that he left out a critical three years – his presidency. It’s as if it didn’t exist. It’s as if we jumped from ’08 to today. This speech was intended to say that “Everything that’s happened in the last three years has nothing to do with my administration or its policies – economic stagnation, debt, high unemployment. It is a result of the malice of the rich,” and he talked about that at length.
This is a classic example of how little it takes to stir the erogenous zones of liberals. You give them a speech with social justice, a little bit of class war, you wrap it up in the patina of intellectualism in what is essentially a speech that exonerates anything he’s done and obviously not done and says all of our problems today are the result of the plutocrats. That’s why he’s more a Hugo Chavez than he is a Teddy Roosevelt in this speech.
FEEEE, FIIIIIII, FOOOO, FUUUUMMMMM!!! Look out ObAMATEUR!!! Here we come!!!
Up is down, left is right, right is wrong. We are waiting for politics and politicians to save us from ourselves?
According to Cornell University’s Global Labor Institute, the project will create no more than 2,500 to 4,650 temporary direct construction jobs for two years and that the company’s claim that Keystone XL will create 20,000 direct U.S. construction and manufacturing jobs is unsubstantiated.
Furthermore, the claim that this oil will come from a friendly nation to benefit the United States is bogus. The oil will be sold on the open market to the highest bidder — most likely China.
Aw, heck. Let’s do it anyway, just to annoy the eco-nazis.
“Cornell Global Labor Institute”; now there’s a name that just inspires a boatload of confidence. I wonder how many of their experts have ever been outside their ivory tower and worked in the real world. And, of course, their conclusions couldn’t possibly be wrong, could they?
..the project will create no more than 2,500 to 4,650 temporary direct construction jobs for two years – bozo
Since when do liberals care about the length of employment? In December 2009, McDonalds hired thousands of temporary workers and liberals championed the “job growth”. Also the 2009 stimulus and the current “jobs bill” allocates money only for temporary employment, but maybe bozo didn’t know that.
Amy said, “But the thing about being a conservative is that it is hard NOT to try to solve problems rationally, instead of blaming other people.”
Yeah, well, the other thing about being a conservative is that it’s too hard to be informed. There is a new refinery being planned for North Dakota. The existing one is being expanded. New rail lines are being built to move oil to refineries in nearby states. But I’m sure you know all that.
You’re ok with Canada destroying Wyoming’s water supply for profit? – bozo
I love the smell of irrational and overly emotional liberals in the morning!
Free markets don’t work Sunny says so.
Matt – can we get a thread on the debate? Or at least the one coming up on Thursday?
Obama’s statements show him to be supremely confident of re-election. He obviously feels he can say anything and his syncophants in the media will say nothing. He feels he has the delusional, the unions and the the minorities in his camp. No wonder he has abandoned the working middle class.
Criticizing this man is counterproductive as that will only produce excuses – racism or anti-ecoism or financial heartlessness. He can only be beaten by encouraging him to make even more outrageous statements. Only then will some of the delusional will come to see that “the emperor has no clothes”.
A few years ago a friend suggested that Obama was “insane”. At the time I thought this was overly harsh and unsupported by any evidence.
Well Obama himself has given us the evidence! The very definition of insane: loss of contact with reality.
The man lives in two universes. In one he’s as mad as a hatter.
GMB you can’t be serious
I don’t honestly know about this Sunny. Sometimes I want to accuse her of being our “Sunny” and sometimes I have to just laugh at this person. Sometimes she says something that makes half a sense and them will immieadtely contradict herself.
As far as being serious, what do you think?
scummy isnt THAT smart….LOL
Another explosion in Iran. This time at a factory that specialise in produding high grade metal alloys that used in centerfuges.
Lots of accidents in Iran these days.
http://forum.internet-haganah.com/showthread.php?423-Iran-7-killed-in-steel-factory-blast-It-was-an-accident-honest