33 thoughts on “TransCanada/Keystone XL Running ads as we approach today’s PUC Hearing.”

  1. The thin $green$ line of lobbyist. COUNTERPOINT ~ The Koch Bros.(the largest foreign investor in Alberta tar sands) and their group Americans For Prosperity will make billions by risking South Dakota’s ecosystem for their own selfish interests. What’s in it for you?

    1. https://www.gop.com/meet-tom-steyer-the-man-stopping-keystone (A couple of gems about this guy from this article.)

      Yes, and Tom Steyer is an upstanding individual only thinking of others and the environment when he pumps millions into anti Keystone endeavors and Dems pockets?!

      “Tom Steyer “Made A Fortune In Oil Investments” And “Invested In A Rival Pipeline That Would Compete With Keystone.” “Yes, the influential activist spearheading the fight against the Keystone XL pipeline has made a fortune in oil investments. Yes, he’s invested in a rival pipeline that would compete with Keystone.” (Alexander Panetta, “Tom Steyer Addresses Keystone Motives,” The Canadian Press, 12/14/13)”

      “Steyer Has Been Pressuring The Obama Administration On The Keystone Pipeline. “Along with some other environmentally inclined donors, he has been pressuring President Barrack Obama to oppose the pipeline, including running an anti-keystone ad during Obama’s recent state of the union address.” (Peter Olsen-Phillips, Nancy Watzman and Jacob Fenton, “Reversing Trend, Democrats Top The List Of Biggest Super PAC Donors,” Sunlight Foundation, 2/4/14)”

      There are many more articles on this if you just google Steyer. And don’t forget good ole Soros either.

  2. Yeah, this won’t help the American economy at all, will it? And sending oil by pipeline is so much less efficient and pollutes more than sending railcar after railcar down the tracks. Why isn’t Warren Buffet mentioned as having selfish self-interest at heart in opposition to the pipeline? Why? Because he is a socialist. I know some ignorant people think that Democrats don’t ever think of themselves, but they are walking around with blinders on.

    The Koch brothers employ quite a few more people than those who always complain about them.

  3. You’ve asked several questions, today. 1. Helping the Koch Bros. sell Canadian oil to China won’t really help our USA economy. The quality of the petro sludge in Alberta will seriously increase the already putrid air in the Far East. 2. You just mentioned it (Mr. Buffet), so your point is moot. 3. This isn’t really a question but it was your defense of the Koch Bros. Here’s something for your “cheek and gun”, Mr. Anonymous. The Koch’s inherited a huge interest in oil/gas and coal (Peabody Energy). They had a choice to diversify as the tobacco companies did when it became apparent their business was afoul of public safety. They chose instead to donate to politicians, gift pundits and advertise with bloggers to influence the USA environmental regulations in an attempt to allow their businesses to continue as major pollution producers. They deserve no quarter, sympathy or support.

  4. I have never had a conservative tell me how they can justify a foreign company taking Americans land through eminent domain for the enrichment of that foreign company…. So, I ask again.

    1. Jaa Dee, you will probably never get a response because that’s just a question so many don’t want to deal with. It would be entertaining to watch them, though. Maybe when Troy’s done delivering multiple salvos of word bombs over on the other blog, he can take up the task for you and give you a treatise on why it’s ok.

      1. Thanks R.R.– You were soo right about Mr. Jones I think he and I will be BFF.

  5. Jaa Dee,

    You must have CRS (can’t remember stuff) because you ask it, it gets answered and then you ask it again. Further, even asking the question belies jingoism and xenophobia.

    First, as a matter of law and long-standing public policy, the United States doesn’t discriminate against companies based on its ownership. We apply the law equally. If building a pipeline (or selling cell phones) is legal for an American company, it is legal for a foreign-owned company (unless there is a national security issue which is ludicrous to assert with a Canadian company).

    Second, as a matter of law and long-standing public policy, the United States under its Constitution provides for eminent domain to be used for transportation companies (railroads, electricity, data, telephone, and pipelines). And again, without regard to ownership (see above).

    1. ” Further, even asking the question belies jingoism and xenophobia”– To begin a comment with something that stupid gives a clue to what comes later

      You want to begin a comment with insults, go for it dude,I am very familiar with your ilk.
      .

      I said nothing about the legalities of the land grabs. I asked how “you people” can justify it. As usual with conservatives there is always a justification of anything through blatant hypocrisy. If this were a circumstance “you people” didn’t agree with and the U.S. government with a (D) president was using eminent domain on such a scale, “you people” would throwing your usual tantrums and yelling socialism with every breath regardless of the laws…. Why are you not doing that now? Why aren’t “you people” supporting the American farmers and ranchers that are fighting this?

      How can conservatives justify a foreign company taking Americans land through eminent domain for the enrichment of that foreign company?….We have heard your smarta– remarks and deflections how about answering the question.

  6. Other than pumping stations no crop land is rendered unusable . Corn , beans etc. are growing right now on & over pipeline right of way . Not only that but farmers & ranchers are paid for weed control & rehab of the land IF NEEDED . Need determined by the landowner .

    1. So what? It is a foreign entity forcing their will on American landowners through eminent domain laws. If it is so benign why are there so many lawsuits pending by farmers and ranchers? .

    2. How long will it take native sod to recover Rep. Verchio ? And are you talking about the same company I have been dealing with?

  7. Jaa Dee,

    Are you really this ignorant or intentionally dishonest?

    NOBODY (foreign or domestic person or company) can force a state to exercise eminent domain. Whether it be the federal government, state government, or a local government, they freely decide to exercise eminent domain and then grant the privilege to have ownership or an easement.

    Regarding the lawsuits, besides it being a small percentage of the affected owners, have you ever looked at the lawsuits against every road built under eminent domain. In most cases, it is to contest the compensation/consideration being paid for the land or easement. In fact, directly or indirectly, that is what every lawsuit is about.

    So, what is it? Are you unintentionally ignorant, intentionally ignorant, or intentionally dishonest?

    1. I missed this gem.
      Haaa, weeell hello Mr.Jones…How long have your been getting away with insults here? How long have you been on your pedestal of faux intellectual superiority? I am sooo glad we met I will make a point of chatting with you from now on…..see above.

    2. Jones, you slope-sided simpleton. You’re so off the sidewalk you can’t even see the center. Pull the teabags from your eyes and see what’s right for South Dakota. And don’t get into an insult session with ME or I’ll make you cry like a calf.

  8. Jaa dee,

    Foreign ownership is only relevant if it is a question of national security (irrelevant since Canadian companies are eligible to provide mission critical products and services to our military) or one being jingoistic or xenophobic. If that is an insult to you, you seem to have an aversion to facts.

    Further, I gave an answer. The fact you don’t like the answer is a personal problem. See above.

    Finally, you and I have a refrigerator and air conditioning because of eminent domain and an electrical company found providing it to us as sufficiently enriching. We have the cheapest food in the world because of eminent domain and railroads find it sufficiently enriching to ship out food out of here. Every small town and family farm in SD is also viable because of eminent domain. You and I are communicating on the internet because of eminent domain and a cable/internet company finds it sufficiently enriching to run a line to our house and throughout the world.

    Since I know nobody wants the world it would be without eminent domain, the preculiar thing is one using it as an argument.

  9. PS. Gas would be at least two dollars higher without eminent domain and a pipeline company being enriched. And you’d be chopping down trees and releasing carbon into the air to survive a winter in SD.

  10. Jaa Dee,

    And your comment this is use of eminent domain at “such a scale” is ludicrous.

    You do realize we have tens of thousands of miles of oil and gas pipelines already here in SD via eminent domain don’t you? The couple hundred miles of Keystone is insignificant compared to what is already here.

    In fact between electrical lines, oil, gas and water pipelines, data lines, railroads, and roads, we probably have millions of miles procured via eminent domain.

    1. How about getting all your deflections, blather, and shining conservative hypocrisy into one comment…I’ll put it a different way—If Obama had from the start been a cheerleader for the pipeline “you people” would be opposing it and using the eminent domain issue and the people affected by it as your major concern.. We all know that, “you people” know that, look at the track record of disagreement with the administration by “you people” on every issue but a recent trade deal.
      I don’t know who you think you are, but I don’t need a deflection lecture, lesson. or sermon from you, you can support your opinion without being a hypocrite or you can’t and you haven’t…. I do though believe you are more concerned with the profits of a foreign company than the Americans it bullies….because of who is in the White House.

  12. I supported Keystone before Obama was President. I support his proposed expansion of free trade authority. I support the use of eminent domain for the transportTion of electricity, water, oil, gas, data and railroads.

    Your presumptions and assumptions are false.

  13. I wouldn’t believe anything one of “you people” have ever said or might say without proof..and I have many, many reasons for not believing

    Do you disagree with this statement from Mark Home
    “I am pro-energy and pro-industry but I am also pro-property and pro-freedom. I want my energy to come to me through willing transactions that are mutually beneficial to all who are involved. I don’t want to get a slightly lower gas price because a few people had their land taken away from them against their will. That isn’t the free market; it is fascism. That is especially true when a company gets to make money because the government forces others to relinquish their property at the price the government deems to be fair.

    Any prosperity that comes through the violation of property rights is unjust and it will eventually turn into poverty. Energy is important but property rights are essential.”

    You Cliven Bundy clones have always screamed about property rights being the most important right….but now y’all just don’t
    believe anything you’ve been saying all these years? Who do you think you are fooling? Do you have no shame? Do you have no integrity? Do “you people” always have to wallow in the sewer of political hypocrisy?

    I will remind you sir of the first comment you made to me–“Are you really this ignorant or intentionally dishonest?”– Bad move princess.

  14. Jaa dee,

    If you believe nothing I or other of our ilk say, there is no reason for you to post here.

    With the only exception being an issue of national security, I support the use of eminent domain for transportation of oil, gas, water, electricity, data, and railroads. I disagree with Mark Home.

    1. Anne, how would you interpret 1.10…..The South Dakota Republican Party strongly supports private property rights…?

  16. Bret do as I have done & go check the corn , beans , hay & grass growing over our current pipelines .

    1. Can you not understand the simple fact, that is NOT the point? Scchhheezzzee dude are you that dense?

  17. The Saudi’s cut oil a couple more bucks a bbl. from the price of crude and they’ll do it until Obama asks them to stop. Keystone is dead as is the Koch Bros. dream of using South Dakota and risking it’s ecology to sell oil to China. Sorry TeaBaggers. It’s LOSERVILLE and the population is YOU. lol

  18. Porter,

    First, my comment was restricted to the issue of raising eminent domain or foreign ownership as a legitimate argument against Keystone. I’ll summarize:

    1) It is against the US law and various international treaties to prohibit a company to do what is legal in the US because they are foreign-owned (unless there is a legitimate national security issue).

    2) Pipelines are a normal and legal use of eminent domain with protocol for approval under the law whereby due process would negate treating Keystone or anyone else being treated arbitrarily.

    If you or Jaa Dee want to argue the economic or environmental merits or demerits of Keystone, they may be matters of discretionary public policy discussion. The former are bogus.

    Regarding getting into an insult battle with you, your above comment (referring to me as “slope-sided simpleton,” blinded by “teabags,” and motivated by ill for South Dakota) is sufficient- I’ll concede you win because that is who you are. Congrats.

  19. Mr. Jones,
    You started the insult assault with Ms. or Mr. Jaa Dee. I referred to you as “That bully from Orion” but I DESCRIBED you as a slope-sided simpleton. Your obfuscation of the essence of the post is disappointing. e.g. (Where is the MORAL justification for taking land from a private citizen so another private citizen group , The KOCH BROS. can make billions by risking the ecology of South Dakota?) Of course, there would be no moral justification. Only heartless financial reward for the group handing out money to support their Quixotic Quest to sell petrosludge to China, just your expertise, huh?

  20. Porter,

    My view of the merits of Keystone would not be affected if the ownership group were Warren Buffet or the California Teacher’s Retirement Fund. Ownership is irrelevant to me. Your mention of the Koch Brother’s is a classic logic fallacy- ad hominem attack.

    I support the use of eminent domain for pipelines, data transmission lines, electricity, etc. The assertion eminent domain is immoral is ironic and hypocritical coming from someone who is communicating on the internet only because of eminent domain.

    Our state already has thousands if not tens of thousands of pipelines going across our state transporting gas and oil. The incremental environmental risk from a couple hundred more miles is immaterial at worst and at best might be a net positive when considers the current form of transporting the oil by rail is of greater environmental risk per barrel of oil.

Comments are closed.