I-70 could be considered an extension the to Interstate system... As the Keystone XL pipeline could be considered an extension to the national network of pipelines. Sure it's a new route, but denying it based on the environment is ridiculous because as you pointed out, it's already getting there, a new pipeline would merely make it more efficient to transport.

Property owners are compensated for the easement that crosses their property.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

No one is taking people's land. There is just restricted use of the part of the land that will contain the pipeline. The property owners are compensated for this.

Actually, in the news today, he's giving you bonus money if the error is in your favor from the incorrect tax documents sent to people who enrolled.

Ok they are idiots... The vast majority of the population are idiots. Statistically it would make sense that most political parties are therefore comprised mostly of idiots. Racists however are not as common as idiots, and assuming that an entire political movement is racist because they disagree with you is statistically unlikely.

This is spoken from a Libertarian who dislikes the tea party because it's full of religious nutjobs (who are also statistically common). Of course, we Libertarians also disagree with you and we hear plenty of racism accusation thrown at us too. The question you have to ask yourself is, are there reasons to dislike Obama other than the color of his skin?

Good luck with that. A new refinery hasn't been able to be built in the US since 1986. Also new refineries don't help you at all. Then instead of Canadian crude being stuck in North Dakota, you have gasoline stuck in North Dakota. I guess you'll have to approve a products pipeline instead of a crude pipeline which is even more hazardous (still not very) to the environment. The reason it's going to the gulf is because 1) that's where the refineries are and 2) that's where the transportation network is.

Are you saying I can vacation on the gulf coast this year? Hooray, the claims of global doom due to the Deepwater Horizon spill were crazy overblown!

I also work in the pipeline industry, and yes... People don't understand how ridiculous oil companies are about cleaning up the tiny spills they do have. And how even more ridiculous regulatory bodies are on even vapors of crude oil getting out into the environment.

Furthermore, people are against new stuff because old stuff breaks down. How the heck does that make sense? Sure 1940s pipelines have leaks from time to time. That doesn't mean that a 2015 pipeline will be constructed to the same standards.

Yes, because the environment of Canada never crosses the border.

Not only that but people complain about the maintenance of old pipelines to stop the construction of new pipelines... Because you know, we don't build better pipelines today than we did 40+ years ago right? The Pinto was not a safe car. Ford doesn't make Pintos anymore. Let us build a Fusion to get more Pintos off the road.

New pipelines have a very good safety record. The DOT regulates their construction and their maintenance. There are heavy fines for non-compliance.

Or maybe it could be that the gulf coast has the majority of refining capacity in the United States. In addition to water access, the gulf coast also has these things called "product pipelines" that can move refined products back to the Midwest and eastern half of the country. The alternative to piping it to the gulf coast would be to build new refineries in North and South Dakoka (not going to happen) and then build products pipelines to where it needs to go.

The point of the pipeline is to bring the oil to a transportation and refining hub. Without mentioning China, it's still the damn gulf coast.

No one is taking property from those that won't lease. There is no selling or taking of land for a pipeline (except maybe minimal amounts for stations along the way). This shows the ignorance of those opposed to it. The land used by the pipeline is called "right-of-way." The property owner remains owning the land. They are just restricted from digging and constructing certain things in a safe zone area where the pipeline crosses their property. The property owners are compensated on a yearly basis for the use of their land.

Trucks and rail are more likely to leak than a pipeline. Even more true of a new pipeline. Drinking water supplies are not as badly influenced by oil spills as you might think. Oil and water are pretty easy to separate.

Oil sands are already being refined, by low throughput refineries in the upper midwest.
The pipeline will allow the crude to be sent to much larger capacity refineries. There is no such thing as a "duty free port."
Those same gulf coast refineries also have products pipelines that bring the refined gasoline and diesel back to the midwest and all down the eastern half of the US.

Only crazy people would mod an AC to +5 Interesting with bullshit paranoia and even worse, one that uses an apostrophe for a plural.

The point is that trains are running through the midwest and will be for the next few years because the pipeline isn't there. The risk of rail accident is higher than pipeline and a pipeline couldn't care less about snow and the weather. No one seriously says Keystone would have prevented this accident, but they cite this accident as what we are making more likely to occur by delaying the pipeline.

This needs to be modded insightful. I can only imagine how the Catholic Church will respond to a male birth control solution.