Obama should OK Keystone

I seriously wonder if the folks who own the oil minerals in Texas and Oklahoma want Canadian oil down there. My business sense says they would like to sell their domestic oil and it is much closer.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

He'd ok a Keystone golf course.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I see MDN got rid of lorexx while I was in my koolaid stupor....doesn't MDN realize diversity is our future? For the children?

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

After very little research it looks like it's the same people who own the oil and mineral rights in Canada and the USA. So my business sense failed me on this one for awhile. The pipeline is unstoppable.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

So, how about an answer to some questions for you mental giants of the far right. Why would you want a pipeline running across the entire US after reviewing the many problems with pipeline spills from the Canadians? Why would you want such toxic and dirty oil running across the US when it is almost impossible to clean up once there is a spill? Ah, but here is another big question: Why is Canada building rail facilities to ship Bakken crude to Canada to refine but do not want to refine their dirty crude? Drive out to Berthold and view their facility. It is going to push upwards of 300 thousand plus BPD of Bakken to Canada.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I would like one of you pro supporters of the keystone to step up to the plate and explain why we need the keystone pipeline.Why would we need the dirtiest oil on this planet going through this country.We cant refine the oil in this country fast enough so why would we need this oil?The Koch brothers who have no reguard for anything other than profit is behind most of this push.I guess they cant buy enough senators fast enough.By the way billdoesnt getit how did SUPPRESS the vote workout for ya.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Let us continue: The Canadians also are planning a facility up by Crosby to ship Bakken to Canada as well. So, here is the question. Why export pure Bakken crude to Canada and then ship almost equal amounts of tar sand crude to Texas. There has to be a reason. How about this. Canada does not want to refine their cheaper dirty crude because of the many problems associated with that refining. So, just as Canadaian mining companies have done for years in Montana, Colorado, Wyoming, Nevada, and other states. Mine the land, destroy the land, then head back to Canada while declaring bankruptcy so that the US taxpayer has to pay for the cleanup. Oh, and for the MDN, has the Nebraska legislature approved the route? I believe they have to give their approval and not just the governor.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

D: Just another Obama bashing editorial.(Fueling..(pun)..the radicals as seen in first post.)

Energy issues Americans need to know:

1.For the first time since 1949, the United States exported more gasoline, heating oil and diesel fuel last year than it imported. (Due to recession, (Tks GW) weak demand, it is more profitable to sell to other markets.

2.In 2012 the U.S. exported 114 million metric tons of coal (126 million short tons) — 12 percent more than the previous high set in 1981.(low domestic natural gas prices are driving coal use down)

3.Keystone Pipeline refined oil has been promised to the Chinese.(The US will not see any of this product for domestic consumption as China is dependent on oil imports to stabilize their growing consumer need with manufacturing)

cont.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Herein lies much of what we see in DC where truth doesn't matter.Getting re-elected (big oil bought more votes since 1905 than people on this planet) is job #1.

Why on earth is the MDN afraid of a few thousand protesters when a few lobbyist groups with hundreds of millions of dollars seems like more of a threat to me?

Not being able to find the truth is the real danger to America...Can't find it on TV and can't find it in the Newspapers anymore...

Uncontentment is the guise. The real diversion is freedom lost, bought and sold to the highest bidder.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Here is another theory for you wingers. Look at gas prices. Going up and fast. Supply and demand? Nope. High oil prices? Some, but they have been this high before without the huge increase in gas prices. How about manipulation of the market so there is pressure on Obama to approve the XL. Another factoid from the bloggers: The Koch brothers and their company's in Oklahoma will make billions on this venture and they don't care about anything but money. Lefty is correct in his blog.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I heard gas was low for awhile because they blended the E-85 product with it.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Is the pipeline really going to lower our gas prices?? I am sure it will line the pocketbooks of the oil barons even more.....ps they always have a built in excuse to hike our prices at the pump

7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

The Minot Daily has an innate propensity to bash Obama every day. I do recommend that they continue and do it non-stop, 24/7.

The MDN knows how much of a pinhead he really is.

However, the MDN wants President Obama to follow their advice and ok the Keystone Cop pipeline.

You can't criticize and then expect somebody to do what you want them to do.

As for the pipeline:

It is just jobs program, the pipeline really isn't necessary and I doubt that Bakken oil will enter the pipeline unless it is discounted heavily. The BNSF can continue to carry the load and the oil is still going to find a market. Bakken oil doesn't need the pipeline, the Keystone XL needs Bakken oil.

Bakken oil will do fine without the Keystone XL and America will do even better without Obama.

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

The only pinhead I know is you mule.But I agree with the last part of your blog.You see,I compromised.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

You know mules....sooner or later you have got to come with a named candidate with the supposed skills to "right" this country...Otherwise, sore loser, unhappy patriot, discontented disengenuous or can't cut the mustard for the trees might apply.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Let's think about this too. If we're exporting so much, like to China for example, should one think it has something to do with our enormous debt to the Chinese?

"We gave you money, now you give us oil" or something like that.

And, Veritas is right, one can't find much information about anything the powers-that-be are up to.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

"can't cut the mustard for the trees"

Nice mixed metaphor, that.

:-)

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

You are all cracking me up, please pass the gas.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Well, then, pinhead maybe, but without a doubt, lunkhead, applies.

For Obama that is.

And stop calling me by your family name.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

How about the Canadians up north oppose a pipeline to the British Columbia coast line for environmental reasons, and wants the oil to travel to the US so we have to put up with their hard to market product? Why don't the Canadians want to transport their oil over to Montreal or Ottawa?

There's pipelines in Canada too.

Because it is low grade oil that is difficult to refine and they would rather have Brent Sea crude because it is high grade oil like Louisiana sweet crude.

The Keystone XL is not a compromise, it is oil dumping.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Obama, like most everything else knows nothing about energy except to burn a lot of it in Air Farce One. A couple of years ago he promised to buy oil from Brazil’s President Wilma Rousouff. Remember? Brazil is not that little third world country either but is fourth on the list of country’s buying our national debt. Strange bedfellows her and Obama are. Google her up sometime.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Garrfish, it seems that muleskinner just called the president a pinhead and or lunkhead...I have no beef with that.

Now we’re splitting hairs with what is good oil and what is bad oil. Tar oil, sweet crude and sour(spearfish) for that matter. I have no problem if it is mixed in the pipeline and the end result is energy which we need. I don’t think the oil refineries’ in the end will care much either.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

leftwing is right. Why would Obama want to approve the pipeline becasue it would just mean those unemployed folks would have a job and wouldnt need their welfare daddy anymore.

Obama likes being in control of the people he can get on welfare and food stamps. Makes him feel like a "big" man?

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

What country has heavy sour oil?

It has trouble marketing its oil and has to look for buyers.

a) Iran

b) Iran

c) Iran

D) Iran

You can't answer wrong.

What country has tar sand oil that seems to be a wrong choice in oil extraction?

a) Canada

b) first answer

c) second answer

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Yes Jack you cannot post facts on the MDN websight either . They simpoly don't understand diversity.

I blog in several papers. This one just wipes you out. No reason, no warning just hit the delete button and off you go. Almost always on or around a weekend.

Another paper I blog in sends you an email or responds in the blog itself and explains what they don't like about our posts. (very curteous) Another paper reads them all and only posts what they find exceptable accroding to the papers guidlines.

So bottom line MDN has free speech to a point!Then if BG hits the abuse button enough times they will take you out. .

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »