Robert Redford Is 77 Years Old

No, it isn’t Redford’s birthday, but at his age and with his decades of watching the Big Business dictate to the U.S. government, he should no better than to ask President Obama to reject the Keystone XL pipeline.

It is well known the Keystone XL project fails the President’s own climate test, but it does pass Big Oil’s test for amassing more obscene profits at the expense of the environment and the average Americans.

This means Big Oil will win and the Keystone XL pipeline will be built. Most of the product from Keystone will be exported so the right wing argument that it will lower gas prices here in the U.S. is wrong. Just like all of their arguments on issues concerning the economy and the environment.

For those Americans that want to let Obama and Big Oil know they oppose Keystone XL, http://www.demandcleanpower.org/ is the link. Sadly, it is a link no conservative or neoconservative will use. For them, profit for Big Business, Big Oil in this instance, takes precedence over all else.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-redford/keystone-pipeline-clean-energy_b_3933812.html

 

Solar is a good idea, wind, not so much.

 

That depends on the region.

 

Better that Canada refine it and sell it to the Chinese so we can continue to import from enemies. Go power your car on wind. Until you do, don't be a hypocrite enjoying gasoline.

 

Can I assume all liberals that hate "big oil" are either walking or biking these days?

 

Yes let's protest good high paying blue collar jobs extracting our vast mineral wealth. You lefties realize that the Scandinavian social democracies you love so much are funded by oil right? No of course not.

Anyway the attention given to celebrity endorsements is indicative of the vapid depth free emotion based ideology you subscribe to.

When you kids grow up a bit phrases like "big oil" and "greedy corporations" are going to start reading "herp derp.". Just giving you a heads up.

 

The fact that right-wingers idolize Big Business in every form and want to see them profit at all costs has been obvious for decades. Conservatives and neoconservatives also have absolutely no consideration for the world we are leaving for future generations.

To the misguided conservative/neoconservative thinking, a fantastic plan to create jobs would be to burn hundreds of thousands of acres of forest lands to provide high paying, blue collar, firefighting jobs. They always forget our natural resources are finite, and the environment that can support human life is fragile.

 

I walk and use public transit. What's your point?

 

Here is the thing I frankly don't get. Canada could refine the oil- and sell it to us- why would they choose to sell it to the Chinese?

And why do we want to pile the crude clear across the U.S. to the Gulf for refining? Why not build refineries in Detroit or Flint or somewhere there- and eliminate transporting the crude clear across the U.S.?

I have yet to hear a great explanation- the only thing that makes sense to me about refining in the Gulf is so that it will be easier to export that refined oil product out of the U.S.

I am not particularly against the pipeline- it just has never made any sense to me. Why don't the Canadians want to keep those refining jobs in Canada? Why don't we do the refining as close to the source as possible- and then transport the finish product to where it is needed?

her

 

Leaving the tar sands in the north has the potential to put the "wrong people" in control of that finished procuct you mention.

 

Should rich old people be allowed to vote?
Think of it. A government policy that causes 5 million poor people to starve to death, makes three million homeless, reduces 10 million middle-class people to poverty and mathematically eliminates 5 million more from rising from middle-class to rich will still leave him rich when he dies and won't lower his children to middle-class unless they're idiots. A government that leads to a war in which he is killed will only minimally adjust his lifespan downward, and he's likely to survive the war because even invading armies won't see any need to kill him. If the Soviet Union had invaded the US in 1980 and won Redford would already have been too old for the draft and would have been a more popular film maker later into life.
There is no reason to think that rich old people have the best interest in the country at heart.
Poor people know which government policies might cause them premature death.
It's time for a constitutional amendment that denies anyone over 65 with a net worth of over $5 million fom voting. Anyone who wants to can stay out of that category just by spending lots of money at age 64 and retiring a little early, and nothing helps the economy more than aging rich people spending lots of money as quickly as they can.
Notice only voting rights would be affected. They could still win elections, finance campaigns and speak publicly.

 

So your thought is that if we DON'T build the Keystone pipeline, which moves Canadian unrefined oil to Texas refineries (where it will, uh, be refined), then it just WON'T cause any damage to the environment?

Let's not be stupid here. That oil is going to be refined. If we don't build the Keystone pipeline, it's just going to be shipped to refineries elsewhere. What does that mean? On one hand, that's less jobs and less taxable income in the US (the government loses money, and the people have fewer well-paying jobs). On the other hand, it will still be shipped elsewhere, but it will be over a longer distance and end up being a bigger damage to the environment and will require transportation by vessels that burn fuel and create carbon emissions.

So your solution to an environmental concern is to keep tax dollars out of America, keep new revenues out of America, keep high-paying jobs out of America, and to hurt the environment more than the alternative. Dude, really, wtf gives?

 

Building that Keystone pipeline is about the stupidest thing the fats cats have come up with yet. Can we send the check getters to jail when the Aquafier gets polluted? I'll bet not. Somebody else will be left to deal with it, and the profiteers will be long gone.

 

This has become the American way that right-wingers so defend.

 

Refineries cost a lot of money. Have you driven through our refining coast? These places are city big. Billions. Hell, county big. They are quite awe inspiring. Thy go on for about 100 miles or so. Etc...

 

So you prefer we conserve oil by trucking and shipping it instead of the pipeline? Rather drill the ocean? Or do you pretend you don't use oil?

 

Oil to put on the world market? That's where it will go. They'll still drill in the oceans too. They'll extract profit from wherever they can, because they can. Has nothing to do with the use of oil. Has everything to do with fat cat profit. I say let them make their profit, and when an "accident" occurs from their actions, they should go straight to jail. What's wrong with that? Nobody is at fault when these things occur. Suddenly, the profiteers all deny responsibility, and can't be held accountable because it's "somebody else's fault" (which is strange because they don't seem to have a problem figuring out who gets the big checks). No accidents. No jail. I think that's fair.

 

canada doesn't build refineries energy corporations do and most are owned by international corporations many based in USA...refineries are very expensive so there built in the best logistical locations, near coastal shipping routes and large energy deposits(the gulf)

most canadians think it's stupid as well but energy corporations won't build refineries here unless they are forced to, instead the crude is piped to the gulf and we buy it back as a finished product...

 

Building a pipeline all the way from Canada to the Gulf coast will cost a lot of money also.

it is not as if we have too much refining capability in the United States now as it is- why not put the money into building a refinery somewhere along the Great Lakes- and not transport crude all the way across the U.S.?

Like I said- I haven't heard a good explanation of why the pipeline makes sense- I am all for oil developement but this seems like a great way to be able to export refined oil- not bring oil for consumption in the U.S.- if it was for here in the U.S. it would make more sense to refine as close to the source as possible and ship the finished product to market- not ship the crude as far as possible- refine it- and then ship the finished product to market also.

 

Nowhere near the same amount. You have to also get another set of trained personnel and another distribution model etc. these people know what they are doing. If you can out do them I would jump on tht and make a fortune. If you can save money like you say it has to be worth a stack of cash.