59-41...

Why was it even voted on now. Why not wait until after we get all our Republicans sworn in? miles

I'm sure this all was designed to help save the gal from LA who's gonna lose the runoff next month.

The only reason that I can think of is that Senator Landrieu of Louisiana thought that passage of the KXL would enhance her chances in the upcoming runoff with her Republican opponent.

I.E. purely politics.

well, who the hell do you think is setting the agenda? A clue: it isn't McConnell.

In an effort to save Sister Mary in LA. It was a waste of time. It will be waste of time again unless they can attach it to something Obama can't veto.

She schmoozed up to Orealans parish for her entire career. But we saw what was in her area of concern post Katrina. Then they all left. Now she is wanting to schmooze up to the petro chemical industry in LA. But those people work for a living so she's SOL.

How did I know this???

After the first of the year, there will be at least three new Senators replacing three of those no votes.
62-38

O doesn't want 42,000 more jobs he wants people to be dependent on the government. You want to control the people. Then control there healthcare and how they eat.

Yep, and for sure the GUNS. thus, the gun show background check crap etc. Can't have a bunch of unpapered, unregistered guns now, can we?

All under the guise of "reasonable" or "compromise" on gun control. We cannot give them an inch!

Exactly, or it would never have made it to the floor of the senate. Having a yes vote on this by her name is something she and Reid THINK might help her in the runoff. But I think that her time has come and gone now. Good riddance!

Guaranteed that 60th Senator was told, "Don't you DARE vote for this and put Nomobama on the spot where he has to veto it or sign it!"

I agree. A armed man is a citizen... A unarmed man is a subject..

That's pretty much it. Of course after January it should coast on through to the Marxist Pig's desk at which time he'll veto it. But that should give the republicans ammunition to stockpile for 2016.

.....................................................

Not a chance. The fix was in today, and it will come out the same next time also.

Today was a lifeline for Landrieu. She can start gathering boxes and packing up.
The outcome should change next year and put the onus on the Liars desk.

The dems had it figured out who was going to vote yes and who was going to vote no. It has nothing to do with what is right for America and Americans. It's all about the power and control by the socialists. kwg

The party on "no", said no to jobs for Americans...run with it boys, find your balls and run with it!

Well said safariman. Hope you're feeling better.

I am talking about at least three incumbent Democratic Senators being replaced by new freshmen Republican Senators that will certainly vote for the pipeline.
59+3=62 41-3=38

I am also talking about the Republicans taking over the Senate leadership and kicking Harry Reid to the sidelines. Taking control of all those committees.

The pipeline bill will be one of the first bills to land on Obama's desk.
I hope he is stupid enough to veto it. More ammo for 2016.

Last I heard we won't have 62 Republicans in the Senate. Some Dems who need to vote for it will, but they'll still withhold just enough to defeat it...59-41 again.

Thank you! I had a bit of a re bound or upswing last week, which was very encouraging. With that I got some new meds that are working better, too. right now several people are testing to see if they are a close enough match to donate a Kidney to me. Some from this site even.

To the topics at hand, I hope to be well enough to go to the "I will NOT comply with I-594!" Rally and gun trading expo in about a month.

Can someone enlighten me as to the 60 (versus 51) vote requirement?

You need 60 votes to avoid a filibuster. I.E. any senator opposed to KXL could get the floor and ramble endlessly, preventing a straight up-and-down vote.

Harry Reid could invoke the nuclear option, I.E. 51 votes for this item but he won't. Because with the Republicans taking over the Senate in the near future, they would then use the nuclear option on other things such as court appointments.

60 versus 51 avoids the tyranny of the simple majority, and allows the minority party more say in things, and the Senate has long conducted business in that manner.

Cloture to end debate in Senate requires 60 votes before a simple up or down vote can occur.

Ah, that cloture part is what I was missing. I thought this was a straight vote. Thanks!

Has there ever been a "straight" vote in the Senate?

Window dressing to try and save landreau.. Wouldn't work either way. The HNIC will just veto it, and the senate doesn't have the votes to overide.

The vote was just partisan politics as usual and never mind the "new spirit of cooperation" (and all the other blah, blah, blah from both sides) since the people have spoken with their votes.

One thing you can count on from Hussein and the dems is that they don't care what the will of the people is. They're hell bent on implementing their wacko socialist ideology no matter what.

The other day I heard a dim kook refer to Keystone XL Pipeline as "xtra lethal".

"I'll Be Back!"

I am on the southern end of that pipeline. While it won't hurt, the debate is mostly symbolic. There will no more, or less, oil refined one way or the other. The only difference is who makes the money. On the other hand, it certainly identifies who the dickheads are. Obama is a fool for fighting it.

I'm suprised it was that close

Big Whoop, I beg you , change your sig. picture. my eyes are burning! if I see that any more I will have to gouge out my eyeballs.
vote was purely for sister Mary.

Harry Reid would never let it come up for a vote if it wasn't rigged. He knew exactly what the vote would be.

Finally saw a roll call of the vote. Fourteen Dems voted YEA. No Repubs voted NAY.
At least three of those NAY votes will be replaced with YEA votes.
Harkin (D-IA) J. Ernst
Udall (D-CO) C. Gardner
Rockefeller (D-WV) S. Capito

I do not see why any of the remaining Democrats who voted for the pipeline would change to back a loser. They can read poll numbers.

Keystone is mostly symbolic at this point, but it's too bad it has come to this. Obama and the Democrats are blocking it just to block it at this point. They have re-routed the pipeline and have seriously upgraded the construction.

On the other hand, TransCanada is a company who deserves to be slapped down at pretty much anything they do; they are dirty players. They currently have 34 eminent domain cases pending just in Texas. Trying to seize peoples property by eminent domain is dirty and wrong. I'd like to see the pipeline go through, but I'd be much happier if it was someone other than TransCanada building it; they're Pieces of Chit!!!

I second the motion, seeing that early in the morning is sure to ruin a guy's day.

That old dick sucker already has used the "Nuclear Option" to get the last few (maybe just one) of the jug-eared idiot's judicial appointments through. He said Republicans were filibustering everything, and not having a super-majority to block the filibusters, dingy Harry said all that would be needed was a simple majority to pass hussien's appointments.

IMO the Keystone XL pipeline would be under construction at the moment if TransCanada had chosen a different route through Nebraska to begin with. Right now I am not certain our Nebraska Public Service Commission will approve the new route bypassing the Nebraska Sandhills. I share your sentiments that TransCanada is a dirty player and shouldn't be trusted to do the right thing.

It's really too bad this all went bad. We don't really NEED the pipeline, especially now. But it would be a very nice thing to have.

One of the things America needs to take more seriously is energy independence. I don't know that we can ever get completely independent, at least not until everyone is driving flying electric cards. But we can be completely independent of the Middle East, and I see that only as a good thing.

Keystone doesn't get us any independence from the Middle East, but it could certainly reduce our dependence on Venezuelan oil, which is nearly as unstable as the Middle East. And that can only be a good thing. Put more pressure on Venezuela, it could make them play a little nicer, and it's an ace in the hole should Venezuela be successful in their efforts to wean themselves off of America.

So while we will get along just fine without Keystone, it sure is a nice thing to have in our back pocket and can only improve our energy position.

The REAL problem, as I see it, is REFINERIES! When was the last new gasoline refinery approved and built? hint, a long, long time ago.

Seems to me that the old military bases and old Nuclear dumping sites would make ideal places for new refineries. .GOV could haul in a bunch of dough to be pointed at paying off debt by leasing the ground off to operators to make gasoline and Diesel. Being Federal land, possibly no jurisdiction problems with local environment agency's gumming up the works. Double the number of refineries AND the number of competitors or companies making gasoline and prices come down.

Yes on Keystone and HAIL YEAH on drilling in ANWAR, WITH more refineries.

Someday, we might be driving mostly electric/solar hybrid something or others. Great, just super... Until then, drill for the oil EVERYWHERE and get some new refineries on line ASAP!

Correct.. the fix was in on this one IMO. It allowed Landrieu to get up on TV and show that she stands up to Obama. Her opponent had been hammering her heavily about voting with Obama 97% of the time. But everyone was giving their marching orders on how to vote, and to make it close. If it accidentally passed, Obama would just veto it. But now she can put out commercials showing that she's for the oil industry. Ironically the bill was introduced in the House by her opponent in the runoff, Bill Cassidy. Also Ironically, the pipeline doesn't go to Louisiana, it ends in Port Arthur, TX.

Venezuela is such a dysfunctional socialist hellhole that they couldn't keep their nationalized/stolen oil rigs running so they IMPORT oil now. That heavy crude is very much like the Canadian crude so the once idle refineries have switched over IIRC. The Keystone XL is a 36" diameter pipeline, the existing 30" Keystone pipeline has been pumping oil for a couple years now. Seems to me that the current pipelines success would greenlight the 36" XL line but I guess Warren Buffett needs the railroad income. Sure hope we don't get a downtown derailment like the one in Quebec last year that killed 47 people.

I don't know how long the current oil glut will last. Fracking seems to me like wringing the towel for the last couple of drops, I hope I'm wrong. The Canadian crude will be piped some direction East, West or South, I'd prefer that it runs though our refineries as Chinas just in case we need the oil. And we might find ourselves in a hot or cold war with China someday, cutting off their Canadian oil supply would be an advantage.

You're right. The Government won't permit new facilities. That's why the existing ones are continuously being expanded.

Makes no sense building new and receiving the requisite additional fixed costs. Our Port Arthur expansion added a load of capacity with comparatively significantly less additional fixed costs.

Motiva right? Largest refinery in the country now. Second largest in the world? It started out as the Texas Company (Texaco)in the early 1900's.

The keystone will bring lots of dollars to the US
Look at Alaska no property tax ,sales tax,income tax. They run the state pretty much on the revenue from oil movements. The state gets a small piece of every barrel moved through the pipline..
Just like the railroads pay a transportation fee to our county for goods passing through.
I havnt found anyone in nebraska yet tha isn't for it..