The Nordstream 2 will be carrying natural gas. The keystone pipeline would be carrying tar sand oil, for Canada. Canada wanted it to go south through our country, instead of taking the chance it would leak on their own land. It was also slated to go over a major fresh water equifer. The USA would be taking all the risks of a leak and a private Canadian business would be taking all the profits. There is a big difference in tar sands oil and natural gas.
Hey Ramirez, learn the difference between a natural gas pipeline (Nord Stream 2) and an oil pipeline (Keystone). Keystone is an environmental nightmare that can impact native lands in the US. Objections over Nord Stream are purely political (concern over Russian influence in the region).
You need to stop watching FoxNews/OAN/NewsMaxx/Breitbart.
Ramirez isn’t under the false impression that the U.S. could prevent the Russian/EU pipeline, but he’s quite content to IMPLY that the U.S. COULD shut it down if it wanted to. This is an accurate example of HOW Ramirez lies to his readers, i.e., by implication, by false analogies. He LOVES to assign blame to the blameless and to take undeserved credit from the selflessly beneficent. He is a proud, unscrupulous, contemporary example of the malevolent, malicious, venal, and mendacious schoolyard bully.
Seems a popular theme today. Also another apples and oranges.
Europe has a bigger say in this pipeline than the USA.
As stated above, this is a natural gas line and not a petroleum oil line. Particularly, the type of oil that would be piped.
Tar sands oil is the most corrosive oil one could deal with. Many oil experts feel it was best left where it is. Which means even though all pipelines will leak eventually, this one will leak far sooner.
Canada chose this route, as their environmentalists wouldn’t let them make one to the west coast of Canada. Which would have gotten it to its intended destination of China quicker. No one wants to refine it here. Well, maybe Texas where they don’t worry about the quality of the air they breath so much. As, long as rich people don’t live near the refineries, that is. The problem with the pipeline route through the USA is it will go through, above, and under large freshwater resources in the Midwest. The one in Nebraska being one of, if no the largest underground aquifer in the USA, which many farms rely on for not only irrigation, but their own homes.
Republicons destroying farmer’s fresh water sources is a funny way of supporting them.
Anywhere this pipeline leaks it could be overwhelmingly devastating to the environment and people in those areas.
Routing it to Texas to ship to China, also brings in the problem of potential spills in the Gulf off of Texas, and anywhere these ships take it. Mostly through Panama to get to China.
Until Trump gave it the Keystone Pipeline the go ahead under his watch, Canada had been fighting it’s environmentalists to be able build their preferred pipeline route to the Canadian west coast.
Oil must be running out if they are going after tar sands which is a solid material that needs to be melted with boiling fresh water and tons of toxic chemicals to reduce it to a material that can be pumped.
It really doesn’t matter what a pipeline is carrying. If you are concerned by the environment and CO2 being emitted or spills pipelines are the way to go. Sure it would be nice to have a source of power that produced NO emissions, was available at the flip of a switch 24/7, and cheap. There’s a great market out there for just that. Instead of GOVERNMENT saying you can’t use what is available. Why doesn’t it let us use what we have and private entities invent a new power source.
Micheal, Do you do any research at all, any? Even a tinny bit? Keystone provides virtually no benefit to us and lots of risk. It was designed to take Canadian tar sands oil to a Gulf port, where it will be sold overseas. Please try to use a couple of your brain cells instead of just pushing a right wing agenda.
Kurtass Premium Member almost 3 years ago
The Nordstream 2 will be carrying natural gas. The keystone pipeline would be carrying tar sand oil, for Canada. Canada wanted it to go south through our country, instead of taking the chance it would leak on their own land. It was also slated to go over a major fresh water equifer. The USA would be taking all the risks of a leak and a private Canadian business would be taking all the profits. There is a big difference in tar sands oil and natural gas.
baroden Premium Member almost 3 years ago
Hey Ramirez, learn the difference between a natural gas pipeline (Nord Stream 2) and an oil pipeline (Keystone). Keystone is an environmental nightmare that can impact native lands in the US. Objections over Nord Stream are purely political (concern over Russian influence in the region).
You need to stop watching FoxNews/OAN/NewsMaxx/Breitbart.
FrankErnesto almost 3 years ago
Two different situations require two different actions, something a Right-wing Conservative would not understand.
cocavan11 almost 3 years ago
Ramirez isn’t under the false impression that the U.S. could prevent the Russian/EU pipeline, but he’s quite content to IMPLY that the U.S. COULD shut it down if it wanted to. This is an accurate example of HOW Ramirez lies to his readers, i.e., by implication, by false analogies. He LOVES to assign blame to the blameless and to take undeserved credit from the selflessly beneficent. He is a proud, unscrupulous, contemporary example of the malevolent, malicious, venal, and mendacious schoolyard bully.
dotbup almost 3 years ago
Repugs spent four years fellating Putin… now they don’t like him?
Must have left a bad taste in their mouth.
Zebrastripes almost 3 years ago
The sands of time….some can’t get past the truth and fiction….
DrDon1 almost 3 years ago
As Fred Allen might say, ‘What Ramirez understands about geo-politics would fit into the navel of a fruit fly with room for three slot machines!’
Iseau almost 3 years ago
A big thank you to Michael Ramirez, the cartoon was great the topic was spot on. I haven’t had this much fun in comments and replies in a long time.
ferddo almost 3 years ago
If Russia wins, Trumpers grin…
GiantShetlandPony almost 3 years ago
Seems a popular theme today. Also another apples and oranges.
Europe has a bigger say in this pipeline than the USA.
As stated above, this is a natural gas line and not a petroleum oil line. Particularly, the type of oil that would be piped.
Tar sands oil is the most corrosive oil one could deal with. Many oil experts feel it was best left where it is. Which means even though all pipelines will leak eventually, this one will leak far sooner.
Canada chose this route, as their environmentalists wouldn’t let them make one to the west coast of Canada. Which would have gotten it to its intended destination of China quicker. No one wants to refine it here. Well, maybe Texas where they don’t worry about the quality of the air they breath so much. As, long as rich people don’t live near the refineries, that is. The problem with the pipeline route through the USA is it will go through, above, and under large freshwater resources in the Midwest. The one in Nebraska being one of, if no the largest underground aquifer in the USA, which many farms rely on for not only irrigation, but their own homes.
Republicons destroying farmer’s fresh water sources is a funny way of supporting them.
Anywhere this pipeline leaks it could be overwhelmingly devastating to the environment and people in those areas.
Routing it to Texas to ship to China, also brings in the problem of potential spills in the Gulf off of Texas, and anywhere these ships take it. Mostly through Panama to get to China.
Until Trump gave it the Keystone Pipeline the go ahead under his watch, Canada had been fighting it’s environmentalists to be able build their preferred pipeline route to the Canadian west coast.
Concretionist almost 3 years ago
Ramirez is comparing apples to… um… hellicopters? Toasters to Tin Pan Alley? Ah. Right: Intelligent discourse to GQP talking points.
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] almost 3 years ago
Oil must be running out if they are going after tar sands which is a solid material that needs to be melted with boiling fresh water and tons of toxic chemicals to reduce it to a material that can be pumped.
BWR almost 3 years ago
Slow Joe is in Putin’s pocket. And China’s.
knutdl almost 3 years ago
Don’t scare the russian bear
FJB Premium Member almost 3 years ago
It’s clear. We can all agree. Biden = WPE (Worst President Ever).Jimmy Carter and Obama have to finally pass that trophy to Sleepy Joe.
AllenHudsonVeasman Premium Member almost 3 years ago
It really doesn’t matter what a pipeline is carrying. If you are concerned by the environment and CO2 being emitted or spills pipelines are the way to go. Sure it would be nice to have a source of power that produced NO emissions, was available at the flip of a switch 24/7, and cheap. There’s a great market out there for just that. Instead of GOVERNMENT saying you can’t use what is available. Why doesn’t it let us use what we have and private entities invent a new power source.
J Short almost 3 years ago
Biden, when in doubt blame it on Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia…
shstuart Premium Member almost 3 years ago
Rhetorically inept. Comparing apples to aardvarks.
Deny Crane almost 3 years ago
Picking winners again? YAY Solyndra!!!
rmfrye Premium Member almost 3 years ago
Micheal, Do you do any research at all, any? Even a tinny bit? Keystone provides virtually no benefit to us and lots of risk. It was designed to take Canadian tar sands oil to a Gulf port, where it will be sold overseas. Please try to use a couple of your brain cells instead of just pushing a right wing agenda.