It’s lose-lose for enviros on Keystone XL

It’s actually more important to get rid of Obama than to green light the Keystone XL pipeline right now.

The enviros are saying that the inclusion of Keystone XL in the payroll-tax extension bill will certainly doom the pipeline.

As reported by Environment and Energy Daily,

…”This may be the final chapter for the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, now that Republicans are forcing the president’s hand prematurely,” National Wildlife Federation (NWF) Vice President Jeremy Symons said in an interview…

But not only do the enviros obviously lose if Obama approves the pipeline, they lose if he rejects it.

Rest assured his re-election bid will be beaten to a pulp with his rejection of the pipeline.

6 thoughts on “It’s lose-lose for enviros on Keystone XL”

  1. I feel sooo bad for those poor Greenies. Everything the do to save the environment falls flat on its face and turns to SHI.. you know where I’m going with this…

  2. It’s a lose-lose situation for the enviros, but I have mixed feelings about Keystone being used as a political pawn. It’s emblematic of everything that’s wrong with our political process. Both sides are guilty. The pipeline should be built, period, full stop. Construction should have started yesterday. Instead, we have this political dance going on which has nothing to do with the real issue of energy security and affordability. Fracking is another political football. Let’s get on with it!

  3. Obama delayed the pipeline decision to 2013, so he did not have to upset the enviro’s and the unions. That way he would be able to keep them both on the hook for another year and get campaign contributions and election support though the 2012 election. By forcing him to make a decision the Republican House has made it so that he has to upset either the unions or the enviro’s. He will not get support from one group or the other. If he decides to dispprove the pipeline, he will have a hard time running as the job presdent.

  4. Ever notice that no matter what happens, that we can replace a lot of “bad oil” with “good N. gas” or that Nuke reactors have become quite viable, that cars are producing less and less toxic emissions, the target is always energy? Ever notice that as the planet actually gets better, (except for the glorious Chinese of course) the greens get more shrill?
    I say remove the funding and these groups wither on the vine.
    One way is to require them to disclose all sources of revenue.
    Did any of you know that about 200 million dollars is being diverted to groups in Canada to challenge the vast energy reserves there? Who thinks maybe Soros and Opec are playing in that sand box?
    Keystone XL goes through….. Chavez and his minions get a blind fold and a last smoke.

  5. Pipelines have a much better history of safety and far fewer leaks than tankers. The only alternative to Keystone is to continue to use tankers to import oil. So are the environazis really trying to keep the environment safe, or just keep energy prices higher? Of course that question answers itself. We WILL use the oil, no matter the source, and the higher price will only have a trivial impact on demand. The environazis are showing their true disdain for the environment in return for exerting more control over the populace.

Comments are closed.