TCTI: Too Crazy Too Ignore
 Dave Ross
AP: 269f7885-ba4b-4b34-acfb-2268087c4786
Thousands of protestors gather at the National Mall in Washington calling on President Barack Obama to reject the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada, as well as act to limit carbon pollution from power plants and "move beyond" coal and natural gas, Sunday, Feb. 17, 2013. But as it turns out, it's not just a liberal cause anymore. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

When a liberal cause turns conservative

BY Dave Ross  on February 19, 2013 @ 5:44 am (Updated: 10:22 am - 2/19/13 )

At his inauguration the President mentioned climate change. To environmentalists, that means stopping the Keystone oil pipeline, which is being built to bring oil from the Canadian tar sands to the Gulf of Mexico.

Activist Bill McKibben was at last weekend's pipeline protest outside the White House. He's worried that the President is so determined not to be stereotyped as some liberal oil-phobic, anti-car, pipeline hater that he might be too eager to compromise.

But the opposition, as it turns out, isn't just from hyper-sensitive urban liberals.

"I just don't believe that a Canadian organization, that appears to be building a pipeline for their financial gain, has more of a right to my land than I do," said Julia Crawford.

Crawford owns a Texas farm and doesn't want a pipeline under it.

Then there's this woman - Deborah Medina. "Why would the legislature allow a company, merely passing through our state, to forcibly take land for Texas landowners?"

You've never heard of Medina, but she ran for governor of Texas, is a Tea Party member and considers gun rights sacred. She doesn't exactly come across as a Save-The-Polar-Bears type, and she told a state hearing last year she doesn't see how this Canadian company gets off forcing its pipeline across private land.

With gas prices going up, the President is under pressure to approve the full pipeline. But with the protest expanding from an environmental issue to a property rights issue - he might have the political cover to say no, and be seen not so much as a fossil-fuel-hating liberal, but as a property rights protecting conservative.

Read more:
Celebs, enviros arrested at White House pipeline protest

Dave Ross, KIRO Radio Talk Show Host
Dave Ross is co-host of The Ross & Burbank Show on KIRO Radio (weekdays 9-Noon) and never too far from the spotlight.
More Dave Ross

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (66)


  • Add A Comment

  • sportsguru wrote...
    Dave it's never been about Liberalism
    February 19, 2013 6:06 am

    That's what the jackboot neo-con rwnj want there followers to believe. They depend on the useful idiots to think protecting the environment and your private land is only a liberal mindset.

    Jackboot neo-con rwnj are the slimiest, greediest hyprocrits in the history of American politics, they talk about the constitution but are constantly trashing the constitution in order to get there cut of that big oil money.

    Anybody that would vote for these fools are not Americans and should be tried for treason.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Rick W7PSK wrote...
    Wow
    February 19, 2013 6:10 am
    your so full of bile and hate. You should seek help.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Oly80 wrote...
    yet NONE of you...
    February 19, 2013 9:32 am
    who've lashed out at sportsguru have ANY actual points to make AGAINST what they said.

    and YOU go throwing the word "hate" and claiming "no cred" when you provide NOTHING to prove otherwise and put sportsguru in their place.

    kindly shut up unless you can ADD to the conversation. otherwise, let the adults speak and try not to soil your diapers.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Seattle Dad wrote...
    Sports guru
    February 19, 2013 11:51 am
    Didn't make a point to contradict. He had several sentences of name calling with no point to challenge.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HPD 5-0 wrote...
    They depend on the useful idiots
    February 19, 2013 3:38 pm
    That is not a nice way to describe youself....
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    sports-r shareholders of oil companies these bad, greedy rwnj's?
    February 19, 2013 5:55 pm
    Can you be right wing and not a shareholder in an oil company? I am not getting your point.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • maplefish wrote...
    Ohhh please Guru
    February 19, 2013 10:23 pm
    C'mon man. You are way smarter than this pathetic post. This is about JOBS. You have lost some serious credibility with this mindless drivel. Let go of your hatred for white people (RWNJ's) and research some eF ing FACTS!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cameron wrote...
    Sportsguru is an example of what Dave Ross fans are.
    February 19, 2013 6:21 am
    It's not a very good endorsement of the "True Beleiver" crowd that Dave attracts.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • vanderleun wrote...
    Now now.... compassion for Sportsguru
    February 19, 2013 7:31 am
    He's just applying for the job of bathroom attendent at Dave's Place.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • WAmovesRight wrote...
    A Question
    February 19, 2013 6:23 am
    Is the US Government going to give the land to Canada or are they merely leasing and easement to them? If it's the latter, it's called "eminent domain" and does not inffringe on an pretected property rights so long as the land owner is compensated appropriately

    I DO find it incredibly telling that a liberal commentator actually admits that property rights are a conservative value but not a liberals. It reminds me when King County passed an ordinance forbidding landowners with more than 5 acres to develop all but a small portion (something like 25%) of their land... with no compensation... now that SHOULD be illegal.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Newton wrote...
    Well said Sportsguru.
    February 19, 2013 6:26 am
    Its all about bankrupting the U>S>A to take away your rights then inslave you to do what ever they want. Total control over you. All under the smoking mirrors of globle warming and a greener world that is a complete Hoax. Ice caps are gaining in antarctica(south pole) The temp on this planet is cooling setting rcords on every nation. Yet they will only report on Hi Heat day to support thier agenda that does not happen often.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Edgar Allan Pho wrote...
    (Not Sir Isaac) Newton
    February 19, 2013 7:13 am
    A study, published in the journal Science, ends a long-running debate over whether the vast ice sheet covering the Antarctic continent is losing or gaining mass. East Antarctica is gaining some ice, the satellite data shows, but west Antarctica and the Antarctic peninsula is losing twice as much, meaning overall the sheet is melting.

    As for 'the earth is cooling': presumably you're quoting from a 'study' by the Heartland Institute.

    The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian public policy think tank based in Chicago, which advocates free market policies. The Institute is designated as a 501(c) non-profit by the Internal Revenue Service and has a full-time staff of 40, including editors and senior fellows. The Institute was founded in 1984 and conducts research and advocacy work on issues including government spending, taxation, healthcare, tobacco policy, hydraulic fracturing[8] global warming, information technology, and free-market environmentalism.

    In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question the science linking secondhand smoke to health risks, and to lobby against government public-health reforms. More recently, the Institute has focused on questioning the science of human-caused climate change, and was described by the New York Times as "the primary American organization pushing climate change skepticism." The Institute has sponsored meetings of climate change skeptics, and has been reported to promote public school curricula challenging the scientific consensus on human-caused climate change.

    Real great 'source' you have there. Have another cigarette. They don't cause cancer (According to your 'sources').

    NASA says, The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years. They cite empirical evidence such as:

    Sea level rise -- Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century.

    Global temperature rise -- All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880. Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years. Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase.

    Warming oceans --The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

    Shrinking ice sheets -- The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005

    Declining Arctic sea ice -- Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.

    Glacial retreat -- Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.

    Extreme events -- The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.

    Ocean acidification -- Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent. This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.

    I love these guys who would parrot the contorted conclusions of politically and financially motivated groups rather than a broad consensus of independent scientists.

    And, Sir Isaac, just because it's chilly where you are doesn't mean climate change isn't happening. Hard to believe, I KNOW.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Hawkman wrote...
    INDUSTRIAL AGE.. BUT..
    February 19, 2013 8:48 am
    I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE THE STATS BASE ON INFORMATION LEADING BACK SEVERAL THOUSAND YEARS NOT JUST THE LAST HUNDRED OR SO. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT OUR FOOT PRINT IS SMALL COMPAIRED TO THE OVERALL BIG NUMBERS OF NATURAL LOWERING AND RAISING OF GLOBAL TEMPS THROUGH NATURAL CAUSES. VOLCANOS, EARTH MOMEMENT THE RISE AND FALL OF THE ICE CAPS AND TEMPS OF THE SEAS BASED ON LOCATION OF THE EARTH AND THE SUN. OUR PLANET IS VERY YOUNG AND HAS BEEN AROUND MUCH LONGER THAN WE HAVE AND WILL BE MUCH LONGER THAN WE WILL BE.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Pair o'dimes wrote...
    Need a time machine for that
    February 20, 2013 4:55 am
    It might be difficult to collect temperature data from the past. Even if someone did, there would be someone else to cry hoax.. The earth will recover, the question is how will the earth's warming affect sea levels, agriculture and many other things that are crucial to us.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    Scientists can tell to some degree of accuracy.
    February 20, 2013 7:35 am
    They can tell from sediments and deposits which indicate the presence of plant and animal remains (which tell them what animals could live where and what plants could grow where), but they can also look at the deep sediments on the bottom of the seas. Shells from small land animals fall continually and build up (up to 65 million years ago)..., eventually building up hundreds of meters of sediment. These sediments preserve the shells of these small animals for millions of years, all the way back to the age of the dinosaurs, 65 million years ago. Their shells are made up of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) which is found many geological features. This carbonate has atoms that exist in two naturally-occurring isotopes (180 and 160). The ratio of the isotopes tell us about past temperatures because when the carbonate solidifies to form a shell, the isotopic ration in the oxygen varies depending on the temperature of the surrounding water. Anyways, it's more complicated. I think the point you were trying to make is who cares? Whether global warming is man made or part of a natural cycle we are here now and we need to figure out how it will affect us and what we can do about it.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HPD 5-0 wrote...
    Its all about bankrupting the U>S>A
    February 19, 2013 3:40 pm
    I'm pretty sure Owebama and you Dims are doing that already. I don't think Barry needs help destroying a once great nation.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Moondoggie wrote...
    And there are liberal Democrats
    February 19, 2013 7:18 am
    who understand that abortion is the killing of an innocent human being. So what's your point Dave? Pipelines serve the greater good of providing a way to move oil from point A to point B with less envirmental damage than trucking the oil. Can you imagine a pipeline that had to go around every piece of property where the owner didn't want to grant an easement? The pipeline would be much longer with many more twists and turns and therefore many more leaks and accidents.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cbrew wrote...
    I don't even understand why this pipeline became such a hot button conservative issue
    February 19, 2013 7:32 am
    The Pipeline is going to be owned by a Canadian Company... it's going to run through the US to the Gulf of Mexico where that Oil will be exported overseas there's absolutely no benefit for US citizens, we take the enviromental risk of this pipeline breaking somewhere, and we don't get a reward... The Oil is being exported... why do conservatives want this stupid thing in the first place?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    Cbrew
    February 19, 2013 7:37 am

    A huge paycheck. Follow the money. RWNJ don't care about rights or the constitution, that's all a lie that they tell there useful idiots to vote for them so they can use there land to export oil to OTHER COUNTRIES for purpose of getting paid.

    They depend on the uninformed in order to make this happen.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • GoldFish wrote...
    sportsguru
    February 19, 2013 3:22 pm
    You say conservatives are the nut jobs? What about the "environmentalists" who are threatening eco terrorism? Are they left wing nut jobs? More importantly, are you a left wing nut job? Under your assumed criteria for a nut job, both you and these "environmentalists" would not only be nut jobs, you would in fact be the poster children for nut jobs everywhere. Keep it crazy.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • maplefish wrote...
    Cbrew
    February 19, 2013 5:47 pm
    JOBS! Not ALL of the oil will be exported and the jobs created will be a huge boost to the ECONMY here in the US. Please site any pipeline breaks in the Alaska Pipeline over the last 30 years? Come man, do a little research before yo start blaming then republicans....this is a matter of creating JOBS!!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Pair o'dimes wrote...
    Construction jobs only last until the thing is built
    February 20, 2013 5:02 am
    The bulk of the jobs created are short term. Having worked in construction for 30 years, I can tell you that you are often unemployed when the job is done. Please come up with the number of permanent, full time jobs created by the pipeline, and then it might be possible to determine cost/benefit, factoring risk to aquifers and loss of farmland. Do a little research?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • anotherfencewalker wrote...
    Dave...off the subject..
    February 19, 2013 7:51 am
    A couple of your latest headshots arent doing you justice. I know people age and all but lately you're looking sort of like the homeless guy down on the corner with the "out of gas, anything helps" sign..Just sayin'
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    "With gas prices going up, the president is under pressure to approve the full pipelin." Why? It will have no effect on domestic gas prices.
    February 19, 2013 7:51 am
    Some liberals and some conservatives dwell in a land of fantasy where some relationship exists between the amount of crude oil available to domestic refineries and the price of gasoline at the pump. Ha, ha, ha, ho, ho, ho, tee, hee, hee...there's a knee slapper if ever there was.

    The price of gas in the USA is controlled by the amount of refined product (not crude oil) available to the market and that amount is deliberately manipulated by the refiners/producers/distributors/retailers (all the same folks) of petroleum and its byproducts.

    If that Canadian oil was intended to be refined in the United States, it wouldn't have to cross the entire dang country to terminate at a *tanker port* in the Gulf of Mexico.

    The conservatives should be rejoicing that the free market is alive and well. If farmers in Eastern Europe are willing to pay 6-8 Euros per gallon for diesel, that sets the standard for fuel sales in the US as well.

    How high will the price go this spring? Until the computer models show the refiners that a decrease in demand is beginning to offset extraordinary profits from gouging at the gas pump. Just that high. Not one cent higher.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Lonestar wrote...
    Canada will build the pipeline. They will either point it South or West.
    February 19, 2013 8:21 am
    If the pipeline goes west, there will be a big terminal just north of Seattle. When the oil leaks, where is it going to end up? But, on the positive side, the pristine beauty of Texas will be preserved.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CH wrote...
    Jackboot neo-con rwnj are the slimiest, greediest hyprocrits in the history of American politics - could not have said better!
    February 19, 2013 11:10 am
    Between "their" and "there" has zero credibility. O wise one how do you spell cop? U R 2 E Z !!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }