Sunday, March 24, 2013

Keystone Pipeline Sucks But Bill Nelson Sucks More for Voting In Favor. By Geniusofdespair



From Common Dreams:
"In a 62-37 vote late Friday, the US Senate passed a non-binding amendment calling for the approval of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline.

Environmental groups and climate activists were quick to condemn the vote, but said the "symbolic vote" was valuable because it revealed which members of the Senate have received the message on the seriousness posed by climate change and which continue to bend to the demands of industry lobbyists.

A post-vote analysis by Oil Change International, in fact, revealed that supporters of the amendment "received 3.5 times more in campaign contributions from fossil fuel interests" than those who voted against it. In total, the researchers found that supporters took an average of $499,648 from the industry before voting for the pipeline, for a total of $30,978,153."
Senator Bill Nelson actually voted with Marco Rubio, and Inhofe. Bad, bad Bill! You should have followed your fellow party members.

6 comments:

Malagodi said...

Senator Nelson, who prides himself as a former astronaut, can't seem to muster either the facts of climate science or the consequences of Keystone despite the volumes of data on both, not to mention the rising seas around South Florida and the billions that must be spent for adaptation where that is possible even at current emission levels. It must be easier to have oneself launched into orbit than to face the lobbyists of big oil.
It may take some amount of courage to ride in a rocket, but he doesn't have the courage it takes to represent the long-term interests of his state over the short term profits of the energy industry.
Shame, Senator. It's absolutely shameful.

Proud Democrat said...

Three cheers for Bill Nelson. Only an idiot would oppose energy independence for Americans.

Anonymous said...

How is buying oil from Canadians energy independence for America? How is shipping this oil to other countries making us independent? We won't even be using this oil from Canada (which, by the way, does not belong to the USA). I don't get it, but, as the "Proud Democrat" states, I must be an idiot.

Anonymous said...

He shouldn't have voted Nay to follow his "fellow party members."
He should have voted Nay because its the right thing to do.

Anonymous said...

The economy of tar sands requires that crude trade at around $100 a barrel because of the amount of energy expended to make it behave less like tar and more like oil, so the only way this makes money for Canada is if gas stays expensive.

And yes, this pipeline will provide a pathway from the arboreal forests of Canada (which will require the clearcutting of an area the size of Florida) to the Gulf of Mexico.

TransCanada CEO recently admitted that the pipeline, once operational will provide about two dozen permanent US jobs at the most:

Keystone’s Thousands of Jobs Fall to 20 When Pipeline Opens

www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-13/keystone-s-thousands-of-jobs-fall-to-20-when-pipeline-opens-1-.html


Anonymous said...

show me someone who is against the pipeline, and I will show you a rich environmentalist who can afford to pay high gas prices.