Google +LinkedInPinterestYouTubeInstagramTwitterFacebook

What best expresses your position on the decision to block the permit for construction of the Keystone Pipeline?

We need the 20,000 jobs now, and the permit should have been approved without delay.
55% (1796 votes)
There is already excess capacity to carry all the crude in existing pipelines, and building more would endanger the environment.
5% (166 votes)
If we put off building this, Canada might end up selling the unrefined oil to China, jeopardizing our national security.
25% (811 votes)
The administration had no alternative, because the deadline did not allow enough time to properly review the permit.
15% (472 votes)
Total votes: 3245

 

View more polls

 

HarryMundy

January 19, 2012 - 4:18pm

Not enough time to make decision. What was Obama waiting for Joe Biden to return from San Francisco, where our VP Genius was supporting the San Francision Giants in the Superbowl. The VP could then explain to Secretary Clinton and the folks at US State Department on the Keystone Oil Pipe Line. Sounds ridiculous, but no more ridiculous then that which was cited by the Administration in rejecting the Keystone Pipeline, at this time. A lot of returning veterans could have been hired in this project, not-to-mention the businesses in the surrounding area of construction -- restaurants, shopping centers, barbers, beauticians and etc

jvonlehman

January 20, 2012 - 9:50am

Obama simply does not and has never had the best interest of the USA in his heart. Any extraction or shipment of oil has risks that are reasonable and can be mitigated. His decision is inexcusable, idiotic, and strictly political.

JJLONG

January 23, 2012 - 7:04pm

Cut the crap.You sure have a short memory.

GP

January 19, 2012 - 4:47pm

President Obama has offered the oil companies another opportunity to submit a permit; this time they should include an alternate route such as that proposed by some Nebraska state officials. I few months delay means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Why rush a high-risk project. How quickly your readers have forgotten the April gulf oil spill. The cause: cutting corners to save $$. Was it worth it?

1hannah

January 19, 2012 - 6:58pm

The Pres could have approved with reservations. Any potential problems could have been worked out. The American Peroleum Institute has the details on all available. The Canadians are ready to work out the details, but a flat no from Obama has jeopardized the viability of even waiting to see the 2012 election results. This is not a matter of needing iron clad protection against a potential spill, it is a matter of years of delay, the oil going to dangerous competitors, and slower economic revival.

phil martin

January 21, 2012 - 5:25pm

Americans DEMAND oil. ck alaskas record. i remember some dumb shot a hole in the pipe line. shoot hin not our economy. If nebraska doesn't want oil dont send them any. NO ONE spills oil on purpose. WE demand oil The fault is on all of us. no rocket science here. phil

KenBob

January 19, 2012 - 4:51pm

When the Keystone pipeline in Michigan leaked into the Kalamazoo river Keystone repeatedly lied about the severity and their ability to effectively clean it up. The proposed new pipeline would not create 20,000 jobs and the ones created would be only temporary. The risks of pollution far outway the dubious benefits.

phil martin

January 21, 2012 - 5:31pm

no nat gas, no fuelfor cars or school busses or truck to bring u that mega flat screen no propane, NO hEAT. what do you call dubious? not to mention almost every thing we consume is from petrochemicals. go to school and get an education.

Forester

January 19, 2012 - 5:13pm

The review of the pipeline details should have (and I'll bet have been) been reviewed from the first day of receiving. To say the deadline put on by congress is a falacy, in my mind. Are you telling the American people that adequate reviews cannot be made in a short period of time? Only when you don't want to do something from the start.

wingrider6

January 19, 2012 - 5:17pm

Why not just ask an apolitical question? Like should it have been approved or not. Why all of the political statements added?

larryschupp

January 25, 2012 - 6:55pm

Exactly my thoughts. None of the choices reflect how I believe most of us vets feel - why is this even on our website? What has it got to do with veterans' issues? And why do all the options assume that it should have been approved? Our leadership has gotten way off-track here.

1hannah

January 19, 2012 - 6:48pm

The ruse that 60 days too short time to review by Obama is and excuse, and also to make the Repubs look like bad guys (election fodder). The proposal for the pipeline has been on the table for 3, yes thats right, three years. Anyone who says that Pres Obama is acting in the best interests of this country is either covering for him, has a racist agenda and can't stand the truth, or is just plain stupid. He and his people have done everything they could get away with to keep the US from being energy independent, and have been driving the dollar into insolvency so that it will no longer qualify as the reserve currency of the world. I heard someone coin the right words today, "economic treason".

ND Don

January 19, 2012 - 6:57pm

It is also ND and MT oil that can go into the pipeline. The administration has had more than adequate time for their envirnmental assessments. It is just a stall to be able to be political for the Pres to try and make some hay with his "green" buddies. The jobs can be vets as well as others. Put in the pipeline now.

royam3440

January 19, 2012 - 8:10pm

There is no doubt that a pipeline would be a good idea. What I find wrong with the process is the Drop Dead date. Why can't they tentatively agree and work out the details in a timely sensible manner. For far too often it is "My way or the highway." The trouble is every time the devil is in the details and the American public always wind up with the devil in their pocket.

Ponchatoula

January 19, 2012 - 9:14pm

It's ridiculous for Obama to reject the pipeline so quickly. He could have said we'll negotiate with Canada and work out any problems. It's quite clear to me tht he didn't want it in the first place because his "green" supporters didn't want it...and of course votes count more to him than what's good for the economy of this country. He is an absolute embarrassment to this country, and I blame his election to office on the brain dead people who voted for him. God help us if he gets re-elected...not that the republicans will be a WHOLE lot better.

m. arnold

January 19, 2012 - 9:42pm

If they really intended the oil from this pipeline to stay here, why does it have to go all the way to the gulf? There are refineries all over the Midwest. These could be providing PERMANENT jobs for Americans. The only reason the oil has to go to the gulf is so it can be loaded onto tankers and shipped out. We get the pollution and China gets the gas? Sounds fishy to me. If the Legion thinks that's a good deal, I wonder which Koch brother is paying it off.

JJLONG

January 23, 2012 - 7:17pm

You are right. The repugs just don't like that black guy in charge. It has nothing to do with the oil.
The legion should keep there nose out of politics.And they dam well know it.

pontoon248

January 19, 2012 - 10:46pm

job creation is a ruse. the real problem is that the pipeline as proposed goes over the ogalla aguifer. one of the largest in north america that is the source of water for the fields of grain that feed the world! if the aguifer were to be polluted, it would kill thousands upon thousands of acres of crop land that is the source of food for millions of people. think about that for a few minutes!!!!

tommyB

January 20, 2012 - 6:22am

The BS That he did not have the time to study the pipeline, the studies have been going on for over two years. Nebraska does not want the pipeline because the Neb. economy is based on ehtanol production and cheaper oil would affect that. remember all the BS about the Alaska pipeline. None of it came to pass.

artwhitney

January 20, 2012 - 8:32am

The administration has had over 3 years to "study" the development of the project. We need the jobs and the oil (it includes ND and MT oil as well). just a thought but why not build a new refinery in the northeast, say Buffalo or Rochester, NY area? Pipe some of that oil there. Lower the price of oil,add jobs,become more self-sufficient. Sounds like a win-win situation to me. Why not work with the Canadians for the betterment of the USA and not help put us further in debt and trouble with the Chinese?

slang007

January 20, 2012 - 12:06pm

It should not be built. Not even considering the environmental risks of the pipeline, the oil is not intended for USA consumption. It will be sold to other countries, including China. The political distractions are a red herring, we would better understand the issue by examining the money trail of the proposed project.

mbmshooter

January 20, 2012 - 3:35pm

I see Obama's rejection of the Keystone project as purely political. He claims that the State Dept. would not have enough time to examine other alternatives. REALLY? They've already been vetting this project for three years! This was another lame excuse from a VERY LAME administration!

fstop

January 21, 2012 - 11:20am

The Legion should not even be involved in this as it is a political issue. Half the things the Legion has taken positions on recently have nothing to do with veterans; gays for example.

sonarman

January 21, 2012 - 10:19pm

This lame excuse of "not enough time" is hogwash in determining a safe path for the pipeline to be built. Politics is a dangerous game to play when our country's military depends upon the oil to protect this country, plus our economy will be destroyed even further by President Obama's action. So, it appears that our jobs, our nations defense and our fellow Americans way of life means NOTHING to this Administration! Our great nation is not so great today because of lame decisions! Will we now be downgraded to a single star in our financial standing because we can't pay our loans back to CHINA? How many more "trillions" of dollars in debt will we be in at the end of this Presidents term?
Wouldn't it have made sense to build a pipe line, no matter what....and what is the difference in having oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico or a pipe line across several states??
People out there; please WAKE up before the next election, I have had enough.
Finally, I want to see more "made in America" labels in America! God Bless America.

Army Gal

January 23, 2012 - 6:00pm

The American Legion is not supposed to have a political affiliation, yet this poll is clearly designed to promote a republican agenda. It is clearly skewed in the options for response. My opinion is we do not need the pipe line to run the entire length of this country. Refineries should be built farther north. Building new refineries in the north would shorten the pipe line, thus protecting the environment while creating jobs. Why has this option not been put on the table?

JJLONG

January 23, 2012 - 7:30pm

We have Refineries all over that they can send that crude. If it gets sent down to the coast
you won't see a drop stay in this country.
How about blaming BUSH for 4500 dead and 5 trillion in debt. Lets talk about facts not BS

meenzal

January 26, 2012 - 2:42am

I didn't really like the poll response choices because they didn't touch on important factors. There are issues about the pipeline that need to be resolved before carte blanche is given. Plus, there were other issues tagged onto the bill that had nothing to do with the pipeline. We need to stop coattailing unpopular issues on acceptable issues to sneak them past the approval process.

meenzal

January 26, 2012 - 3:11am

I'm pretty disappointed to see some of the things said here. When I joined the Legion I expected to find people who believed in the American tradition of tolerance and an environment of camaraderie.

I don't know about anyone else and so I won't speak for anyone but me. But I think that a sitting American President and Commander in Chief deserves some respect. Talk about denying things to states and shooting people makes me wonder if I paid my dues to the wrong organization.

The question that started the ugliness I've been reading here was ill-advised and I don't think it should have been asked. The way it was asked was one of those "Have you stopped beating your wife?" kind of questions and a lot of the answers sound like "No."

Partisan bickering is exactly why our nation hasn't accomplished much good. Does it really make sense to bring that stuff in here when we could direct our energies towards helping the men and women who served our country --and their families behind them? That's why I joined and that's why I spent my money on dues. I'm a service connected disabled vet and I came here to try and help others who share similar problems to mine, and to find ways to thank the Legion for help they've given me. Am I in the wrong place?

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Tell us what you think