In response to:

Who Would Follow Our Example on Keystone?

Corbett_ Wrote: Mar 15, 2013 11:08 AM
There IS one argument against the pipeline. It requires the taking of people's property for the use of a corporation -- not the public.
jkash1776 Wrote: Mar 15, 2013 6:54 PM
Have you checked out how 'invasive' and harmful these pipelines are? Try NOT. In Alaska, not only is there no harm to this desolate tundra but the elk are actually gathering around it because it's warmer and having more babies.
Illbay Wrote: Mar 15, 2013 2:57 PM
I'm pretty sure it requires that people are compensated for use of a small corridor - a right of way - through private property. The kind of thing that is done all the time.

Get educated, how about.
Mack30 Wrote: Mar 15, 2013 11:29 AM
Nothing is "taken" without compensation. I have done many small pipeline right of way agreements and the landowners are always compensated by the corporation.
True Conservative! Wrote: Mar 15, 2013 11:39 AM
Corbett misses ... again!

In the old days, Corbett, hunting for your food, with your kind of accuracy your family would have starved! Natural selection at work ... ain't it great! Now, the state takes care of you and the gene pool deteriorates!
Roy323 Wrote: Mar 15, 2013 5:11 PM
Mack30- Yeah-BUT! As a property owner here in WV I have been "Plagued" by Natural Gas/Oil pipelines since 1949- Nowhere near is the "compensation" worth the trouble!

While many have long seen America as the global bad boy, everybody likes Canada. If Uncle Sam tucks his pack of Marlboros under his T-shirt sleeve and plays by his own rules, the Canadian moose -- or whatever their Uncle Sam equivalent is -- always wears his blue blazer and school tie and does his chores without being asked. Canada is a global citizen, a good neighbor, a northern Puerto Rico with an EU sensibility that earns its gold stars from the United Nations every day.

This fact should have relevance below the 49th parallel. Right now, we're all waiting for...