Discussion for article #231877
“That rationale expired Friday.”
Really? Who needs a rationale that’s rational any more? What’s wrong with “People say that the Nebraska court has made some kind of decision, but I’m not a judge and I’m not a reporter and I can’t say if that’s true or not.”
He said he would VETO it, and I expect he will no matter how much repubs want to pay back the Koch Bros or want Boehners stock portfolio to go up.
the GOP’s attempt to force his hand on Keystone is just one example of his diminished leverage over Congress
Huh?!?!??
Plenty of “diminished leverage” to go around…
1 Like
Isn’t it convenient that the Nebraska court decision comes down on the very day the Republicans take control of Congress and need something to throw in Obama’s face? More politicians in black robes. Obama’s proper response is that this is an issue to be debated in the 2016 campaign and decided on by the next President. Therefore veto.
2 Likes
Let’s hear from TransCanada. Do they still even plan to build this pipeline? Are they considering moving east through Canada instead, or are they still facing opposition from Canadians?
Plunging oil prices must be impacting their plans for this project.
Whose taxpayers are going to pay for this pipe? Canada? USA? Or will the corporations who are about to benefit from amazing savings over costs of shipping by rail and truck? Sorry, folks, there’s not enough information in this debate over Keystone and the people would like to know that important and possibly incendiary detail.
1 Like
Obama will veto the KXL to demonstrate a firm commitment to follow through on the US/Chinese climate change agreement. If we expect much from China to limit the increases in GHG, then we, too, must lead by example. His veto will have much less to do with Republicans and much more to do with China. Put up, or shut up. Republicans will offer only a token outcry over his veto because they know the stakes are with China, instead of with Canada.