Reagan Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 2:40 PM, nappyroots said: This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Expand You do realize van jones is an admitted Communist! Or does that bother you? Quote
LumRaiderFan Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 2:40 PM, nappyroots said: This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Expand Do you have a point here? Do you think this is simply about how many permanent jobs will be created? Quote
stevenash Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 3:36 PM, LumRaiderFan said: Do you have a point here? Do you think this is simply about how many permanent jobs will be created? Expand Accepting the economic opinion of Van Jones is akin to believing Nancy Pelosi's opinion on who will win the NCAA basketball tourney. Reagan and LumRaiderFan 2 Quote
nappyroots Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 3:50 PM, stevenash said: Accepting the economic opinion of Van Jones is akin to believing Nancy Pelosi's opinion on who will win the NCAA basketball tourney. Expand Kinda like letting paul ryan take care of a vote for a new healthcare bill when he controls the house and the senate. should've let ...itch McConnel handle it all. Quote
Englebert Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 6:30 PM, nappyroots said: Kinda like letting paul ryan take care of a vote for a new healthcare bill when he controls the house and the senate. should've let ...itch McConnel handle it all. Expand I find it hilarious that you want to try to make fun of Mitch McConnell's name when there is so much stuff to rag on him about. All that material and all you can muster is petty name-calling. Embarrassing! And what's even funnier is that you want to make fun of McConnell after witnessing Harry Reid's follies. Double embarrassing! Quote
nappyroots Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 6:36 PM, Englebert said: I find it hilarious that you want to try to make fun of Mitch McConnell's name when there is so much stuff to rag on him about. All that material and all you can muster is petty name-calling. Embarrassing! And what's even funnier is that you want to make fun of McConnell after witnessing Harry Reid's follies. Double embarrassing! Expand Don't give a crap about Scary Reid, Crazy Pelosi, Eddie Munster Ryan or .itch McConnell. Can't believe with all of the younger smarter politicians that this is all our country has to offer. Repeat #Reidsuckstoo Quote
new tobie Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 6:42 PM, nappyroots said: Don't give a crap about Scary Reid, Crazy Pelosi, Eddie Munster Ryan or .itch McConnell. Can't believe with all of the younger smarter politicians that this is all our country has to offer. Repeat #Reidsuckstoo Expand I agree that all four of those Mitch's suck Quote
Englebert Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 6:42 PM, nappyroots said: Don't give a crap about Scary Reid, Crazy Pelosi, Eddie Munster Ryan or .itch McConnell. Can't believe with all of the younger smarter politicians that this is all our country has to offer. Repeat #Reidsuckstoo Expand Why would anyone want to be in Congress when they know you will give them cute little nicknames. You sound just like Trump. Are y'all related? Quote
nappyroots Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 6:47 PM, Englebert said: Why would anyone want to be in Congress when they know you will give them cute little nicknames. You sound just like Trump. Are y'all related? Expand Yeah he used to be my sister Quote
Englebert Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 6:54 PM, nappyroots said: Yeah he used to be my sister Expand Are you making fun of transgender people? The LGBT community might be coming after you. You do know you have to walk on egg shells also. It's not just for angry old white men any longer. baddog 1 Quote
stevenash Posted March 24, 2017 Report Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/24/2017 at 6:30 PM, nappyroots said: Kinda like letting paul ryan take care of a vote for a new healthcare bill when he controls the house and the senate. should've let ...itch McConnel handle it all. Expand Do tell. How does Mr. Ryan control the House of Representatives. I anxiously await this education. Quote
new tobie Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Quote
Reagan Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 4:28 PM, new tobie said: This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Expand Again -- you do realize you are posting quotes from an admitted communist?! Who, BTW, obama had working for him! Quote
new tobie Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 4:36 PM, Reagan said: Again -- you do realize you are posted quotes from an admitted communist?! Expand Its about satisfying the rich folk that want the pipeline that will in turn payoff Trump and his buddies. just like the drug companies and healthcare Ceo's. Quote
stevenash Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 4:38 PM, new tobie said: Its about satisfying the rich folk that want the pipeline that will in turn payoff Trump and his buddies. just like the drug companies and healthcare Ceo's. Expand But none of Obamas "buddies" benifitted from Solyndra, right? Quote
new tobie Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 5:16 PM, stevenash said: But none of Obamas "buddies" benifitted from Solyndra, right? Expand ALL politicians take care of folks with money, they choose which ones. I am not gonna benefit from a trump presidency, no more than i did Obama. At least the presidency has term limits, Unlike congress with all the crooked, greedy bastards there. Probably will benefit some when Trump starts cutting environmental regulations it will make my employer happy. Probably will make the medical facilities and specialty doctors happy also. LumRaiderFan 1 Quote
LumRaiderFan Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 4:28 PM, new tobie said: This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Expand van jones...lol. Tobie, do you know who has gotten even more filthy rich than he already is because of the Keystone delay and all the rail car hauling? You probably don't, but even if you did, I'm guessing you would have no problem with it. Quote
new tobie Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 6:23 PM, LumRaiderFan said: van jones...lol. Tobie, do you know who has gotten even more filthy rich than he already is because of the Keystone delay and all the rail car hauling? You probably don't, but even if you did, I'm guessing you would have no problem with it. Expand Warren Buffet was already filthy rich. how about Sheldon Adelson trying to buy Donald Trump the presidency. Why? Quote
LumRaiderFan Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 6:29 PM, new tobie said: Warren Buffet was already filthy rich. how about Sheldon Adelson trying to buy Donald Trump the presidency. Why? Expand No, you answer a question for once...no problem with buffet's railroad situation? Quote
new tobie Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 9:01 PM, LumRaiderFan said: No, you answer a question for once...no problem with buffet's railroad situation? Expand So buffet wants to keep his trains moving instead of using a pipeline, what does adelson want in return for his donations. Quote
LumRaiderFan Posted April 22, 2017 Report Posted April 22, 2017 On 4/22/2017 at 10:01 PM, new tobie said: So buffet wants to keep his trains moving instead of using a pipeline, what does adelson want in return for his donations. Expand You tell me. Quote
tvc184 Posted April 23, 2017 Report Posted April 23, 2017 I believe that Van Jones is correct or nearly so. It is a typical way of taking a fact and skewing it to make it look like something different. I read a CNN article on the pipeline and those numbers. It used the same figures but then went on to explain them. The 35 permanent jobs is to run the pipeline itself. That is, the actual flowing of the oil through the pipeline. This will be like at the point origination and pump stations along the way. No, the pipeline itself will not create 42,000 new jobs. That would be a worker approximately every 175 feet of an underground pipe line. So Van Jones and others are correct. It does not take a different worker every 175 feet of an underground pipeline to keep it flowing. Duhhh..... Oh yeah, the CNN article does mention the 42,000 jobs. Jobs will be created but they will not be standing on the pipeline. They will be in production, transportation, services provided, etc. So yes, the pipeline will only create 35 new jobs for people staring at the pipeline to make sure it's not leaking and to man pump stations along the way. Yes that will be an additional 42,000 jobs created by the same pipeline by the product that runs through it. Jones and others choose to ignore the 42,000 jobs and focus on the actual "pipeline" jobs and hope (successfully it appears) that some people will be too stupid to believe that million barrels of oil will create 35 jobs. Englebert 1 Quote
baddog Posted April 23, 2017 Report Posted April 23, 2017 Help me out here. The pipeline was halted due to environmental reasons and for crossing sacred Indian lands, at least that is what we are told. If the Indians are so concerned about a pipeline then how can this be so. Is it geographical? I guess it goes to Tobie's constant complaining about the government not lining his pockets. BTW, I believe in coal mining and power and oil pipelines. This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Hagar 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.