Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Public Records | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

America needs Keystone XL Pipeline

March 15, 2013

To the editor: As a Minnesotan and a small business owner, I support constructing the Keystone XL Pipeline. The Keystone XL would be a sustainable source of energy and economic growth for America....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Mar-25-13 9:43 AM

MCW-don't start down that road of taking money from special interest groups. EVERY piece of legislation is influenced by special interest money...if we're going to use that argument here, then it needs to get applied in all arguments and I don't think any of us want to really see how our legislator's opinions are formed!!

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-24-13 1:35 PM

Senators voting for the Keystone XL Project took an average of $499,648 from the fossil fuel industry for a total of $30,978,153 according to 350dotorg.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 10:08 AM


Obama's trillion dollar stimulus jobs were the same type of "temp" jobs. We already have numerous pipelines across our beautiful nation - check a map some time.

8 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 8:43 AM

The jobs are only temp and the pipeline will be there for a long time an eyesore straight thru the heart of America.

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 8:39 AM

One concern about Keystone that no one is talking about and that I just learned is there seems to be a lot of forcibly taking of private property under eminent domain.

Go this article: Why You Should Oppose the Keystone XL Pipeline *******dailyreckoning****/why-you-should-oppose-the-keystone-xl-pipeline/#ixzz2NzMW4agp

Here is one paragraph for you: "All you have to do is Google “TransCanada Pipeline” and “eminent domain.” You will find a long trail of news stories covering the struggles of property owners against the thuggish oil company and its bullying government henchmen. You’ll find the pepper-spraying protesters, threatening letters and other nastiness. And you’ll find TransCanada stealing a lot of property."

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 8:26 AM


For starters, I can't afford a girlfriend - I can barely afford a wife...

As for talking to my wife, well if you've been married for any length of time you'd know that she speaks and I listen (or pretend to).

Now, about Keystone, why would the U.S. want to dismiss 2 billion plus of employment stimulus, 7 million labor hours for American workers, and over 500 million in local & state tax revenues ? Do you know what the best part is ? This is Canadian dough being placed into our economy. Not more borrowed American "stimulus funds". That's probably why Obama hates it so much - he couldn't charge it on his credit card.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-18-13 12:47 PM

JR: Canadians are a warm and gentle people. The worst that we could expect from them is a few bottles of Molson tossed our way. Who knows if they would be empty or, preferably, full. (The Molson, that is.)

You need to stop thinking of guns, always, as the only solution to any given problem. Talk to your wife, or girlfriend. (Or, both.)

Learn to nurture.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-18-13 9:42 AM


How can we invade Canada without any guns ??? How would this be pulled off in the world according to Sven ? Are you changing your tune about banning all guns simply to rob the Canadians of their oil and hockey phenoms ??? Oh,the contradiction !!!

You'd fit in real well in Washington right now.

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-17-13 11:30 PM

JR: I'm liking your idea of invading Canada. For the $1.5 trillion Bush spent in Iraq we got...(trumpets sound here)...absolutely nothing. picking up Manitoba or Alberta or Saskatchewan, we'd get some oil and some good hockey teams for our $1.5 trillion. Maybe even a few stray plaid pants.

What a swell deal.

Good thinking,aye.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-17-13 2:21 AM

Read the report, "Pipe Dreams" by Cornell University. Type in "Cornell Keystone" into your Google search. Keystone will be bad for America.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-16-13 5:04 PM

I understand that the oil will be going to this little Island in the gulf coast that has foreign refineries on it. No Americans will ever touch that oil sir

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-16-13 4:30 PM

If we don't allow this to go through the Canadians will pipe it to the west coast where it will then be sent to China. Chinese refinery workers will process it instead of American workers. This oil is going to make it to the world markets and we can either play a role in it or watch from the sidelines as more American jobs are shipped overseas. The whole notion of this having an impact on Midwest gas prices is a farce. Canada can do whatever they wish with their oil and short of us invading their country nothing can be to change a that.

Kidnappings in Nigeria impacted Midwest gas prices. What possible thing could the U.S. have done to change that ?

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-16-13 10:49 AM

Obama is a joke and should be tried as a spy.

9 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-16-13 10:47 AM

Obama don't want it because his buddies overseas don't want it cutting their profits.We just gave Egypt 250 million dollars in aid for what so us Americans can pay higher gas prices.Time to blow up Washington like on TV.

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-16-13 10:40 AM

Seems a waste of money to pipe it that far. How can there be a profit margin without raising gas prices so that the rich oilmen get richer.Instead of gas we should be using free energy. Oh wait there is no profit for free energy so the rich oilmen wont get richer. Stupid America.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-16-13 9:29 AM

If Canada wants to cross our country to export their oil, then we should get something worth while out of it, and I have not been sold or seen any guarantee as to what that might be, other than an increase in Midwest gas prices. No thank you.

Let Canada pipe this to their coasts if they need to get it to China so badly.

Why not build more refineries in the northern US? If the US/Canada does not need all the oil that these two countries can produce, why not slow down on the removal of it from the ground and make the resource last a little longer. Once it is gone, it is gone. Why should we give North America's resources to China, just so that a few oil ty***** can get even more ridiculously rich?

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 3:43 PM

It sounds like we're debating the difference between $4 & $5 gas! Both scenarios*****in my opinion.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 3:14 PM

What you fail to mention is what will happen if Keystone is not constructed. Canada has alternate pans to get their oil to shipping ports. The cost of midwest oil is going to be impacted irregardless so it really isn't relavent to the conversation.

It's also not realistic to think that there is any way the U.S. can hold Canadian oil hostage for out own personal use.

Notice how the excuses for not building it keep shifting ? They still can't find one that will stick, however.

5 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 12:03 PM

Right now the majority of Canada’s export pipelines go to refineries in the U.S. Midwest. Those refineries sell gasoline, diesel and motor oil to American consumers. Keystone XL will divert up to 830,000 barrels a day of oil from the Midwest, sending it instead to the “Foreign Trade Zone” in Port Arthur, Texas for export overseas. US farmers could see fuel costs rise by $3 billion higher. At least $500 million of the added expense would come from the Canadian market manipulation.

7 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 11:57 AM

If the pipeline gets built so that crude can easily be sent overseas, that excess will immediately disappear and gas prices for 15 states across the middle of the country will suddenly rise. So said TRANSCANADA in their 2008 permit application: “Existing markets for Canadian heavy crude, principally U.S. Midwest, are currently oversupplied, resulting in price discounting for Canadian heavy crude oil. Access to the U.S. Gulf Coast via Keystone XL is expected to strengthen Canadian crude oil pricing in the Midwest by removing this oversupply. This is expected to increase the price of heavy crude to the equivalent cost of imported crude. The resultant increase in the price of heavy crude is estimated to provide an increase in annual revenue to the Canadian producing industry in 2013 of US $2 billion to US $3.9 billion.” Search for Search for - Philip Verleger: If gas prices go up further, blame Canada and State’s Keystone Assessment Firms linked to Transcanada.

6 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 11:07 AM

Don't get me wrong, I am pro pipeline for many other reasons, including those mentioned by JR.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 11:05 AM

The impact will not be better for ALL purchasers of oil, because right now cost effectively transporting the Canadian oil is limited in it's radius, therefore driving down the local price of oil. Once that radius is expanded to international shipping hubs, the regional price of oil will increase.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 10:17 AM

If more oil can be cost effectively placed into the world markets the better the impact will be for all purchasers of oil including the United States. Canada is already the largest source of imported oil for the United States and it stands to reason that situation wouldn't change with the Keystone pipeline. It is also advantageous for oil production to occur in more stable parts of the world where the risk of war,terrorism, or kidnappings aren't a factor.

The continued delay by the Obama administration just demonstrates how he is beholding to special interest groups and doesn't consider the best interest of the American people.

7 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 7:24 AM

The whole point of the pipeline is to move oil from Canadian tar sands to the Gulf of Mexico so that it can be sold on the international market.

10 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 6:47 AM


6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 25 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web