Senate Comes One Vote Shy of Passing Keystone Bill


In an unusual political twist, it is likely to be a Democrat who suffers most from the Senate’s failure to pass the House’s Keystone XL pipeline bill. Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana was already facing long odds in her runoff election with opponent Bill Cassidy, and the 59-41 vote – just missing the majority needed – will likely seal her fate in next month’s vote.

Conventional Washington wisdom doubted that the Senate would vote on the bill at all until next year, but Landrieu herself fought hard to push legislation through before her runoff. She had hoped that by championing a successful bill, she would be able to show her constituents that she was willing to go to bat for Louisiana’s oil industry. Cassidy, who enjoys a comfortable lead over the Democrat, issued a statement rife with criticism, saying that Landrieu didn’t have the congressional clout she claimed.

The failure of the bill to pass was also a defeat for Republicans, of course, but the difference is that they have next year’s session to fall back on. Only minutes after the failed vote, new Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell promised that the Keystone bill would be “an early item on the agenda” when the newly-reshaped Senate took power in January.

Landrieu’s support of the bill put her at odds with liberal Democrats, leftist environmental activists, and the White House itself. Obama and top White House officials spent much of the week hinting that he would veto the legislation if it passed, though his refusal to come right out and telegraph that move gave pipeline supporters room for hope. Obama, however, has steadfastly remained opposed to the bill, claiming that he would prefer to wait until the State Department finishes their project review. The review in question has been going on for nearly six years.

The Keystone XL is intended to serve as a pipeline between the tar sands of western Canada and the Texas Gulf Coast, and it has attracted supporters and opponents with equal ferocity. Supporters say it would represent a major step towards energy independence as well as a strengthened economic partnership between the U.S. and Canada. Opponents claim it would be an environmental disaster, spewing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and presenting a dangerous spill threat.

While liberals and conservatives in Washington play the politics game, the fact remains that the majority of Americans want to see the pipeline approved. Early investigations have already pointed out that construction of the pipeline would have no significant effects on carbon pollution, seeing as how the Alberta tar sands are to be extracted one way or the other. Furthermore, the project itself could potentially create nearly 2,000 construction jobs in states that could sorely use the employment. Hopefully, with a Republican majority and the aid of sensible, moderate Democrats, we can see this valuable project move forward in 2015.

  1. marla1 says

    Term Limits to rid America of Political leeches( career politicians) and white house Sewer Rats !!!!

    1. ihatelibs says

      then there would be , no more demonicrats

      1. Seldena says

        That would be a prayer God heard if there were no more liberals!!!

        1. Yadja says

          The fact that O misused the Bible to get sympathy for all these illegals is sacrilege enough to make St. Michael flare-up with fury along with all those Saints in heaven.

          What a piece of work this man O is, may he get what is coming to him.

      2. RLM357 says

        Don’t forget the Progressive DemocRATS I am All for TERM LIMITS ! Many have forgotten or betrayed their campaign promises for Term Limits.. The Establishment opposes Term Limits because of their private Cash Cow ! (Their Office) All Career Politicians are in it for the MONEY ! Altruists would serve for Free like Ron Paul does.

    2. ljcarolyne says

      That is what is needed. America is a fucked up country and needs to clean house.

    3. 58 Squarebird says

      Yes! Term limits for all! Bye Bye Bohner .. Bye Bye McConnell .. So long McCain .. Cya Graham!

      Be careful what you wish for .. It cuts both ways.

      1. Rick Rogers says

        Wow that sounds like a Perfect idea for me.. Yep Go TERM LIMITS.

  2. M.J. Marsalek says

    Make no mistake about it. The Keystone Senate vote fell short to protect Barack Obama from having to veto the bill. The Democrats determined that Mary Landreu was expendable and the Republicans determined Keystone would have a much better chance of passage and overriding Obama’s veto in the new Congress. No surprise here.

    1. ihatelibs says

      it will pass next year

      1. M.J. Marsalek says

        That’s kind of what I was saying. If the bill had passed in the Senate, it would have helped Mary Landrieu hold her seat and the GOP would have many fever votes to override Obama’s veto. In the meantime, many have moved on from Keystone opting instead to develop domestic energy reserves. Many more well paying jobs would be created, more economic activity would be generated and much more revenue would flow to the overspent and out of control government.

      2. Rick Rogers says

        And will be Vetoed.. And there are not enough votes in the House or Senate to override it.

        1. mac12sam12 says

          Obama will have to explain why he won’t sign something that would benefit every citizen. He doesn’t have Harry Reid to hide behind anymore.

          1. Rick Rogers says

            This Pipe benefits two americans.. The Koch Brothers. It is only being purposed because the Canadians Blocked the Shorter Route to the Pacific. The oil in this pipeline is Canadian oil that will be sold to other countries not the United States. and if your so Keen on the IDea.. I am sure there are a large number of people that will be willing to sell you their land so it can go thru YOUR backyard.

          2. Infantry Poke says

            Anyone that knows how to read a map knows the the proposed route of the Keystone pipeline will go right through the middle of North Dakota (Bakken Basin), S. Kansas (Mississippian), Oklahoma (Mississippian and Anadarko Basin) and then into Texas (Not to mention several other large shale formations near the proposed route of the pipeline). Do you know what all of those areas, that I just listed, have in common? They are loaded with oil and natural gas shale. So, it doesn’t take a genius to realize that the Keystone Pipeline would greatly help our oil and gas infrastructure and greatly assist those areas, with large quantities of oil and natural gas, in getting their product to the refineries. But, you are right, there will be absolutely no benefit to the United States (sarcasm). By the way I am in the oil and gas industry and come from a family of petroleum engineers, so I am not speaking out of my backside. Also, what is a safer way to transport oil? Pipeline or ship/rail road? I’m pretty sure you know the answer to that, but, in case you don’t, it is a pipeline. As previously stated by another poster Canada isn’t going to stop producing their tar sands region because there is no Keystone Pipeline they will just ship it else where, primarily to China. Rick, the only way any of this benefits China is if it ISN’T built. Canada is one of our closest allies, so a business venture of this magnitude could only strengthen our alliance with our friends to the north. Uh oh, however, I forgot that it is the policy of the obama administration to piss and defecate on our allies, while, at the same time, bowing and appeasing our enemies.

          3. Infantry Poke says


            Tyler J. Commander
            Petroleum Landman
            U.S. Army Infantry Veteran

          4. Rick Rogers says

            So when are you moving to buy a house along the Pipelines Route? Don’t you find it the least bit curious that the first choice for this pipeline was completely within the Borders of Canada all the way to the Pacific Coast… But the Canadian Voters Rejected it?

          5. Durango 35 says

            The pipeline to the Pacific will be build sooner or later, it is Chinese money. Do you know the Chinese have bought a large percent oil owner ship, excess of $40 billion to ensure reliable oil delivery, in oil sands.
            The Key stone is targeted to deliver heavy oil from the tar sands to the Texas refineries to replace oil import from Venezuela. It is a security measure for the USA.
            Secondly Canada is becoming the biggest oil exporter to the USA, about 30% of consumption. What is wrong to plan ahead for the future and make contingency plans for possible emergencies? It would be a shame if China acquires control of one of the larges energy sources in the world in a future emergence no oil available from this source.
            The Indian Nations who have land claims rejected it. As soon as the owner ship of land is established, the money pie will be cut construction going ahead.
            You have to update your the on the “Golden Rule” . He who has the gold makes the rule.

          6. Infantry Poke says

            Considering most of the states, that are on the proposed route, have been involved in oil and natural gas production for years, I doubt it will be very difficult to get enough surface area leased to build the pipeline.

            Tyler J. Commander
            Petroleum Landman
            U.S. Army Infantry Veteran

          7. mac12sam12 says

            Stop with the Kochs, they’re political donors and democrat alway receive more in donations, the last election they out raised republicans by 20%. Lower fuel prices would benefit every citizen, especially the poor. Oil companies pay a high price for land, so if they want my house, make me an offer.

          8. Durango 35 says

            Your blog is irrational.

  3. Dan says

    Libs always looking forward,(so they say), when we need to concentrate on the now. This country is virtually third world and rotting, yet they still keep running their uninformed mouths.

    1. Rick Rogers says

      well Dan we had 2 wars and a Drug plan that was put on “America’s Credit Card”, A banking crisis because of dishonest Bankers. As for the Rotting there have been bills introduced in the house a number of times to work ok the countries highway systems and Bridges and the Current House leadership won’t let it come to a floor vote.

      1. Dan says

        That is what I’m talking about. Hundreds of millions of State funds are poured into Maryland roads every year and water mains under Baltimore streets are bursting left and right. They’ve been down there for eighty to one hundred years. Engineers told the government overseers about this crisis over twenty years ago, still, too little too late.

      2. mac12sam12 says

        Obama said the first stimulus was for roads and bridges, ”shovel ready jobs” that weren’t so shovel ready. Instead the stimulus became a union payoff, rewards for donors (see Solyndra) and 1 $100 billion wasted on failed green energy companies half of which were in other countries.

      3. ipsd48 says

        the banking crisis was caused more by dishonest politicans than dishonest bankers

      4. Durango 35 says

        Which are Democrats, Reid, Pelosi and company. Thanks god by January they are in secondary positions.

        1. Rick Rogers says

          Sorry Durango.. not sure which congress your looking at but the House has been run by the Republicans for the last 5 years

          1. Durango 35 says

            You conveniently forget that the congress (republican controlled) writes the bills and the Senate (Democrat controlled) tables them, but in the Reid controlled Senate they ended up in the drawer (reportedly in the order of about 300 more or less). He decided which bills were tabled.
            Your white wash holds no water.

  4. fred says

    The Pipeline is a chance for Americans to ALL prosper from LOWER priced energy! The criminal born in kenya can’t have us happy and free for his diabolical plans to control us from cradle to grave, so of course he is opposed to it! That and the fact he’s a total idiot about anything to do with energy or the economy, probably also by design by his handlers as well! Time to send this “lifelong criminal” to jail and get on with building a prosperous country again! If anyone doubts the prosperity this might bring, imagine not having the Alaskan pipeline in place and know without it, we all would probably have been paying $5-6. a gallon for gas since it was built to the folks in the middle east with such a strong dislike for us and anything resembling political stability! I am probably way off, it could have been $10/gallon+ if the Alaskan pipeline were never built! I would love to see solar and other alternatives get developed also, this is what we need right now until they become more mainstream and usable.

    1. Rick Rogers says

      Sorry Fred but you been sold a bill of goods. That pipeline is going to be sued to send oil to the gulf of Mexico where it will be loaded on to tankers and sold to other countries. We not going to get any benefit for it. In fact the CEO of the Company that will be using it has said as much when he was interview. He also broke up the Claim that it would create jobs after its build they will employee 56 people to maintain it.. Not 5600 or 560… 56.

      1. fred says

        If you are correct Rick and it’s going to China, why in the world would they send it to Texas instead of piping it to Vancouver BC? Your argument makes absolutely no economic sense! It is going to the Gulf coast to be refined, end of story. You know the people involved want to refine the heavy tar sands, right? Products make more profit than crude, right? If you don’t understand the economics of this pipeline, I am at a loss to help, you my friend! maybe you were reading some propaganda coming from the WH!?

        1. Rick Rogers says

          Because Fred.. The Canadian People Voted down that short route that would have taken it straight to Canada to the Pacific.. If that is not a red flag I don’t know what is.. Why would they not want it running the shortest Route.

      2. mac12sam12 says

        Keystone will bring the price of oil down no matter where it’s shipped. Prices on oil is set by a global market, the more oil on the market the lower the cost. With lower oil prices the piece of everything goes down including food, goods and services. When people have extra money in their pockets they will put it into the economy which in turn will create jobs.

        1. Rick Rogers says

          no it won’t the oil market does not work that way. The oil benefits no one in this country and the only reason that that route is being discussed is because the Canadians Rejected the pipeline using the Shortest Route.. Shorter by about half. The only ones that benefit are the Oil Barons and I don’t see them standing in line to “share the Wealth”

          1. ipsd48 says

            Canadians have no say in the route of a pipeline in THIS country. Try again

          2. Rick Rogers says

            ok then what about the Americans in this country do we get a say.. IT should be a red flag to you that the Canadians voted down the short route whinch when thru their country but want to run it thru ours.. take a look

          3. Rick Rogers says

            Don’t need to try again it was right the first time. The FIRST Shortest route for the pipeline was completely thru Canada and ended at the Pacific coast. The Canadian People voted against that idea. So your already to accept Canada’s Sloppy seconds.

  5. Wayne Thorson says

    How would you like that pipe line in your back yard? Make the oil companies pay those people relocation fees to pay for their moving expenses where there is no pipe line in their back yard. I know I sure wouldn’t want it in mine. It makes more sense to me that they would build a pipe line to pipe water to those desert places that is lacking in water.

    1. Deborah Henderson says

      Just a comment related to your comment. For many years I have worked for a coal company that mined coal in a residential area of Alabama for a 5 years. Once that area had been “surfaced mined” out we reclaimed the land (leaving it better than we received it). We were then going to move to another area to mine and received all kinds of protestors (not in my back yard, enviromentalist etc etc.). Many town meetings were held for people to ask questions and protest, The attorney for the residents of the subdivision we would be closest too (when the new mine started) got up to make his arguments about the new mine and its location and the effect on the subdivision. One of the town council members had him specify where he (the attorney) lived and he did so. At that point, the mayor told him that the previous mine had been 200 yard from his backdoor for 5 years. He never knew we were there. So the attorney and towns people had egg on their face). The new mine was started needless to say.

      The pipe line may sound horrible in context of land viewing but it does not mean that it will be. The people whose land it crosses will be compensated…………they will say it was not much (and that depends on the amount of land used) but they HAVE TO BE paid Market Value (for the area they live in) most people think their “stuff” is worth more than it is because it is their’s and holds emotional value.

      1. Wayne Thorson says

        Talk about comparing apples to oranges. You just did a good job of it.

        1. Durango 35 says

          Wayne, Deborah’s comparison is a good one, you are talking about the effect of development on an area. Pipe line are not strips of expose dirt and garbage when finish. They are filled in, replanted and when mature only noticeable from the right of way markers.
          If people are against it, all they have to do is cut their energy uses, stop to use petroleum based products and do not use government services paid for by the tax payer. The oil industry, the workers dependent of the worker and local businesses all pay taxes. Do you know the multiplier effect of each dollar earned?
          If, oil products can not be sold they do not produce profit, no development justification.
          In my home town in Europe we had a Russian build pipeline next to the village.

          1. Wayne Thorson says

            I bet that pipe line isn’t going in your backyard.

          2. Durango 35 says

            I have lived with pipelines in “my backyard”. You did not read my comment. To clarify: It was a typical farm village to small to have a school, church or stores maybe 150 people all told.
            I worked in the oilfields at the time about 1954 -1956. We had pipeline construction galore. I also worked on pipelines when I arrived in Canada, the only good paying job neside the radar station in the north.

          3. Wayne Thorson says

            Like I said. I bet that pipe line isn’t going in your backyard.

  6. Mark Clemens says

    A.lot of stuff in the story is inaccurate. The pipeline will not give us energy independence. The majority oil is coming from Canada, then once it reaches the Gulf, the oil will be exported to China. The project will create around 20-35 thousand jobs that will only last about 7 years (excavating jobs, pipe fitters). All jobs should be welcome. Plus they need people to run the line. All jobs should be created.
    I don’t see how any greenhouse gases could happen, unless the pipe breaks. If it holds liquid it will contain gases. It’s my understanding greenhouse gases don’t happen, until you BURN (use) the fuel. I don’t see why the Keystone Pipe line can’t be rerouted in case of a spill. The project is only on paper, can’t they draw a new line?

    1. fred says

      I’m sorry you are just not correct, Mark! The pipeline is all about getting the heavy tar sand oil to refineries on the gulf coast, any other fantasy is just wrong! Sure, some finished products will be exported, that is not a doubt, it is that the oil from the pipeline will be a benefit for us in lowering our energy costs, any other fantasy is just wrong, sorry!

      1. Florio Vino says

        YOU ARE SO RIGHT,WAYNE! There`s only benefit to be derived from this for our People! Mebbe` put some of Obama`s MINIONS to work, instead of Jail!

      2. Durango 35 says

        Mark you are right. The Refineries build to handle heavy Venezuela oil will refine the Canadian Oil. The shift of USA is towards Canada, away from hostile OPEC members. Presently oil can not be exported from the USA. The claim the oil goes to China is an other line of bull sh*t..
        The northern pipeline crossing British Columbia is build to transport Alberta oil to the coast for shipment to China (via the pacific route). The shipping distance is about half compare to the route from the southern states (from the Atlantic or Gulf of Mexico).
        Why would Canada use a pipe longer, more expansive route and expose constructions and operation decision to the laws and political discord of an other countries law?
        The importance for the USA is it is an other source of a steady oil supply in case of an emergency.
        Since the USA is the major producer and exporter of petroleum distillates in the world it is also another income stream from export goods. Refineries also employ labor and engineers.

      3. DCW16 says

        Earth to Fred . . . Oil Sands oil . . . has less carbon content than either California Heavy Oil or Venezuela heavy oil which is refined on the Gulf Coast today . . . therefore it is lighter oil. There is no tar in Ft. McMurray . . . the Tar Pits are in California . . . yes !

    2. jondarmes says

      It doesn’t matter if it is exported or not. Oil is a fungible product. Any substantial increase in production will equal a decrease in prices.

    3. DCW16 says

      Mark . . . the Canadian oil replaces oil coming from Venezuela and Saudi Arabia today.
      Will some be exported . . . probably . . . but so will Diesel Fuel, Avaition Fuel and other products.
      The oil is coming on Warren Buffets railway today . . . set to DOUBLE next year . . . are trains safer than pipelines? Not a chance . . .

  7. FloridaJim says

    That was a scam designed to lose and give cover for those who felt it necessary. We should all learn what frauds we have elected who pull stunt like this thinking we are “stupid” as Gruber has said 25 times.

    1. Arizona Don says

      Well some of the voters are very stupid, after all they voted for obama twice didn’t they? That’s all the proof I need!

  8. adrianvance says

    So we wait a month… So what? The Democrats have locked themselves into a really bad position.

    Google “Two Minute Conservative” for facts, ideas and more.

  9. daveveselenak says

    Naturally the communist party USA voted down a capialistic project that is good for America!

  10. Seldena says

    Tom Steyer , George Soros bought this with their millions! They do not want to hurt them making money off the rails transporting this oil. They want no jobs for Americans,etc. So , democrats listen to these two men and ignore the will of the people. They hate Americans and it shows! Never vote for another Communist Democrat again!!

  11. Arizona Don says

    To little to late. Who thinks the voters are dumb enough to say well you tried so we’ll vote for you now. Not even close, they are saying why did you not start your fight 4 or 5 years ago. Why wait until you need our vote to try to earn it. Total and completely phony! Like most if not all progressives. She does not deserve to stay in office.

  12. Shauna says

    Landrieu is finished……She had plenty of time to support this and she didn’t….This was just another desperate attempt to help her win this election….These people make me sick to my stomach…This could have been up and running years ago..Using issues to help re election, rather then what is good for the people should never be allowed back in office again. disgusting..

  13. Fred Hedrick says

    “The Keystone Pipeline (Phase I), delivering oil from Hardisty, Alberta 3,456-kilometre (2,147 mi) to the junction at Steele City, Nebraska and on to refineries at Wood River, Illinois and Patoka, Illinois, completed in June 2010.[2]
    The Keystone-Cushing extension (Phase II), running 480-kilometre (300 mi) from Steele City to storage and distribution facilities at Cushing, Oklahoma,[8] completed in February 2011.[3]
    The Gulf Coast Extension (Phase III), running 784-kilometre (487 mi) from Cushing to refineries at Port Arthur, Texas was completed in January 2014,[4][5] and a lateral pipeline to refineries at Houston, Texas and a terminal will be completed in mid-2015.[6]
    The proposed Keystone XL Pipeline (Phase IV), which would essentially duplicate the Phase I pipeline between Hardisty, Alberta, and Steele City, Nebraska,[9] with a shorter route and a larger-diameter pipe. It would run through Baker, Montana, where American-produced light crude oil from the Williston Basin (Bakken formation) of Montana and North Dakota would be added[7] to the Keystone’s current throughput of synthetic crude oil (syncrude) and diluted bitumen (dilbit) from the oil sands of Canada.
    The first two phases have the capacity to deliver up to 590,000 barrels per day (94,000 m3/d) of oil into the Mid-West refineries.[8] Phase III has capacity to deliver up to 700,000 barrels per day (110,000 m3/d) to the Texas refineries.[10] By comparison, U.S. oil production was about 9,000,000 barrels per day (1,400,000 m3/d) in early November, 2014;[11] and in the preceding twelve months through August 2014, the US imported an average of about 7.5 million barrels of oil per day.[12]”
    The claim of the pipeline doing nothing but transporting oil to the Gulf States for shipping overseas, was a “concern” raised by Democrats.
    See the entire article for all the facts.
    It is also not just a “fossil fuels” based problem. Here is an excerpt from an article from a study by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation:
    “Significant land disturbance is a major source of CO2 emissions. Human disturbance has much more impact on forests than natural disturbances such as fires or hurricanes. When forested land is converted to agriculture or development, soils are typically ploughed, graded, compacted or excavated, and then often left exposed to erosion. Natural disturbances, other than landslides, rarely cause deep damage to soil structure. Some of the CO2 given off from forest disturbance comes from decay, but the biggest source is from the disturbed soil. Although they accumulate carbon much more slowly than trees, forest soils ultimately become storehouses for enormous amounts of carbon, over twice as much as is stored in the wood of the trees.
    When forest soils are disturbed, they can lose carbon rapidly from the fast decay of organic material. In parts of the Pacific Northwest, a clear-cut replanted with conifer seedlings can continue to emit CO2 for as long as 20 years. Even though the young trees are sequestering carbon, the accelerated rate of soil decay caused by disturbance gives off carbon at a higher rate than the young trees can take up.
    While some land must be cleared in order to build, too often everything is stripped off leaving only bare soil. Although it is possible to save many mature trees during development, it is cheaper to get the trees out of the way by stripping the site. A land use study of upstate New York showed a 30 % increase in land development between 1982 and 1997, but only a 2.6 % growth in population during the same period. The study was appropriately titled Sprawl Without Growth.
    There is ultimately a high price for poor development practices, a price that ends up being paid for by the community and taxpayers rather than the developer. Once the trees are gone, the many benefits, or ecosystem services, which they provided, are also gone. These benefits include reduced storm run-off, clean water, clean air and natural cooling, as well as carbon sequestration. The adverse impacts of the cleared land include increased run-off, which can overload stormwater systems, soil erosion, water pollution, and, of course, adding more CO2 to the atmosphere.
    Saving trees and planting additional trees are vital for water resource management alone, but along with the use of Smart Growth and green infrastructure for developments, could ultimately lead to better communities where trees can make a much greater contribution to improving the environment.”
    For the entire article, go here:

    1. DCW16 says

      And CO2 does what? It makes trees grow . . . 1/40 thousandth of the atmosphere.

      We know that no gas molecule of the open system, as our atmosphere is, can possibly control temperature.

      We know that there are two very different mechanisms that drive dynamics of CO2 exchange between air-waterand air-biomass and therefore there is no such thing as global levels of CO2. Levels of CO2 above the water mass, covering 70% of the Earth surface is controlled by solubility of CO2 in water which is solely driven by temperature; while levels of CO2 above the biomass that covers most of the land surfaces is solely driven and controlled by photosynthesis.

      We know that every single molecule of CO2 is surrounded by 2500 molecules that are NOT CO2 and therefore one has to offer some explanation as to what those 2500 ‘other or NOT-CO2’ molecules are doing while 1 molecule among them is receiving and ‘back radiating’ all that heat energy.

      Right now the oil is riding on a train pulled by a diesel locomotive, a pipeline is 1000 times safer and emission free. It will also replace the tankers coming from Venezuela and Saudi Arabia . . . sources of Confict Oil. It a WIN/WIN for all . . .

  14. jondarmes says

    There are still way too many liberals in congress. That’s all democrats, independents, and some republicans.

  15. 7papa7 says

    That should change in January. If they get the 15 democrats then they can overturn an obama veto.

    1. rich1103 says

      Don’t you ass’s get it WE THE PEOPLE VOTED FOR OBAMA not once but twice. We know you don’t give a damn about WE THE PEOPLE but watch your back we still rule.

      1. 7papa7 says

        We the people through out the democrats and took back the senate and increased our numbers in the house. Obama’s agenda was tuned down because of the number of people who finally had their eyes opened. Like your leader said elections have consequences. It is the congress ONLY that can legally make laws and it is the congress ONLY that controls the funding. People said STOP obama.

      2. DCW16 says

        I believe if “we the people” were to vote today . . . the outcome would be a little different.

        Remember the ole sayin: Fool me ONCE, Fool me TWICE . . . I must be an American !

  16. Yadja says

    It will pass soon as the new Congress is in place. They will get all the Bills off Reid’s desk and my guess is pass most of them with the Blessings of the Dems including this one. If O vetoes it they can just override his veto.

    This is one thing I feel sure will get passed. I also hope that our Federal Immigration Laws that are on the books will also start being in place one again and that the Border is secured and we do pass some legislation that is sensible where illegals are concerned. However; I can not see those who have been here and waited for so long standing silent while those illegals who recently ran across get the goodies they have waited for.

    I don’t have faith the Republicans will do anything to O or his misuse of Executive Orders to write law or the EPA that is also guilty of passing laws and enforcing them, Legislative Law which is against the law, we will see, but I know this much there will be some friction for both parties come the presidential elections and personally I see nobody, with exception of Perry and Scott Walker I would even consider.

    If an Independent or Libertarian runs I am backing them. I don’t want Democrats and Republicans anymore. They both stink.

  17. TOM P O'DONNELL says


  18. TOM P O'DONNELL says


  19. Doris C says

    Maybe a major oil spill with the pipeline would not be an important issue if we have americans doing the building. Not Chinese and not Mexicans but AMERICANS only with help from Canadians of course.

  20. RLM357 says

    Does anyone realize that this Pipeline goes from Canada to our Southern Border? It involves undermining personal property the likes of which are vacant land and Personal Houses and Yard Property? The owners of which have no say in the matter? If your house is in the way…Too bad. If your Yard is, likewise? It goes. We already have a buried or sub-terranious Pipe line. Consider the Danger involved and the potential Pollution issue, should it leak or explode? Who really benefits? Do WE? Or does Big Oil? If it would guarantee lower prices perhaps it might be of some benefit. I would rather that we see More Refineries processing OUR OIL. Do we really need this huge endeavor? Will their be Tap lines allowed from it, for local busineses? Emplyment is a nice consideration, if true. I was for this venure and am now undecided due to the aforementioned unanswered questions. What about Our Oil under Montana and North Dakota which is more than the Saudi’s and the entire Mid East have. Prevent Diagonal Drilling to tap Oil Fields from other’s owned properties. This has frequently occurred in the West. Have all Land Contracts contain Minea Rights to prevent this stealing of reserves ! This would allow the Land Owner the Right to enter into an Oil Lease and prevent Big Oilfrom Diaganal Drilling. If it were an Gold Mine would they be allowed to tunnell into it? Heck NO! So what’s the difference? ~Rick Magee, “MOLON LABE”

    1. DCW16 says

      Warren Buffet is bringing it by train . . . nothing to worry about. Next year the volume of oil will double . . . twice as many trains as this year. Buffet is making Billions . . .

      900 million barrels come to the Gulf coast from Saudie Arabia . . . about half that from Venezuela . . . the Canadian oil would replace this. But if you really want to make sure the Saudis have money to fund more Whabi Scools in America – I can understand you wanting to keep buying their oil.

  21. Dolores Adams says

    Did you remember hearing when Obama was campaigning that he wanted to FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFOR AMERICA? Maybe now you know what he meant. He wants to ruin this country. He’s a muslim and some people just don’t realize this.

  22. badger says

    All those who voted against the pipe line have no compassion for our country. They only think of themselves and support for their Imperial Dictator.

  23. Paul Brown says

    If we can get this bill past the senate and override Osama the terrorist pig mus-slime, then it is a kick in the ass to him.

    1. 58 Squarebird says

      Why would you want something that’s going to leak and poison the biggest aquifer in the country? For the 35 jobs it would bring?

      1. Paul Brown says

        If you believe those lies that the demoncraps have been telling you, then you are as crazy as they are. They have been taking payoffs from these environmental idiots for years to stop any kind of progress in this country. Wake up will you. Take a look at the Alaskan Pipeline, when was the last time you heard about a so called leak to the waters or anywhere else for that matter. This will bring more oil here and a lot more jobs than you think.
        We can produce more oil in this country that we could stop buying the more expensive oil from Osama’s mus-slime buddies. He wants us to continue buying oil from them or otherwise he would start drilling in this country again. He has said many time that he was making land available for drilling, but he refuses to give the permits for them to drill. WHY??????? STOP AND ASK YOURSELF SOME QUESTIONS ONCE AND AWHILE

        BEFORE MAKING UP YOUR MIND. or are you as dumb as the rest, like a box of rocks.

  24. Juan TwoTree says

    Can someone tell me where or give me the link to see how the vote wentz/ I want to see which Senators vote for and which one voted against.


  25. Biff Kress says

    Do all of you Conservatives out there want some REAL value for your entertainment dollar? Just tune in to CNBC for about 6-8 hours a day-ESPECIALLY WAIT for that afternoon crew of theirs, where you’ll hear from Bleeding Heart Liberals like Kelly, Tyler, and Sue. Astonishing. This Kelly babe with the 3-toned hairdo was interviewing-sorry-I should have his name for you-Ovomit’s appointed leader of his Economic Council, one day after the Senate vote for the Keystone Pipeline failed to pass. This Liberal Clown scorned the Keystone and ACTUALLY SAID ON SEMI-NATIONAL TELEVISION that the Keystone Pipeline was no jobopoly, and that he told Ovomit you were talking, maybe, just MAYBE, about creating 50 new jobs. Ovomit and this moonie lemming of his, like everyone else who works FOR Ovomit IS, should follow the rest of the lemmings off of the cliff. These two losers have dumb ass Americans-present company excluded of course- believing this mantra-it’s really stunning to me. Yes, yes, Democrats, only 50 lousy jobs-THAT MUST BE WHY AN ENTIRE NATION TO THE NORTH OF US-you know, that Country who USED to like us-FROM THE PRESIDENT/PREMIER ON DOWN are so peed off at Ovomit and His Merry Men right now. I mean, what are the implications of Commerce Dollars, whether Canadian or U.S., for the VALUE of our Exports? THEN look at the Jobs those Exports create. Truly the #1 Reason why a Secession Ballot Proposal should be on EVERY State’s Ballots for the General Election. I’ll tell you why-if you want that SUPER WHACK JOB Liz Dole or the liar that never lets on to you that she IS a super whack job, Hillary, running our Economy and nosing into any dissident’s personal business matters-then you go with them, because I’m NOT…

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.