Democrat job destroyers

[Newt]

[Newt]

Chief, if you were building a house and once you laid the foundation, had the walls up, and were installing the roof, the local building code changed. Due to global warming you had to install a different heating cooling system that was twice as big and twice as heavy and had to be installed in the attic. How do you think it would affect your costs. Then when you had it finished, they came back and told you that they wanted a lab test report on every fastener or support bracket used in the house. They had to be identified and certified that they could withstand hurricane force winds and earth quakes. They had to be kept in a vault for as long as your house was used as a living quarters. Do you think you would still be building the same house?
It wasn't the design nor the construction it was the constant changing of the codes that halted the construction of Nuclear Power Plants. They paper trailed them to death. In addition, they told the plants who they could hire with affirmative action. It wasn't poor disign that caused three mile island. It was human error. The operators had grown cocky and complacent and didn't believe their instruments.
If you would check the facts, Jimmy Carter. appointed a man who had written a book comdeming nuclear power, as head of TVA and their Nuclear Power Construction. The truth is that Mr Carter and his gang made a big change in the building requiremtns for Nuclear Plants. So plants that were half way through construction, were required to put in a lot of extra piping and supports. Some of the multimillion dollar buidlings were not big enough to hold the extra piping and supports. The changes were so costly that the power plants had no choice but to shut down construction rather than make the modifications. They knew the Oil check had been cashed and it was over at that time. How could an industry continue to build nuclear plants when the government was constantly changing design requirements. Three Mile Island was the excuse used by anti nuke faction to scare the sheep.
I has been several years since I was around the nuclear industry, but at that time there had been no deaths due to plant design, or equipment failure that I was aware of.

Once Constructtion came to a grinding hault, much of the equipment was sold to nations such as Japan where it has been helping keep their costs low and their air free of pollution.
How many jobs did stopping the contruction of Nuclear Power Plants cost the nation?. How much cheap power was lost? How many billion Barrells of petroleum have been burned as a result? How many billion dollars have been sent to the Muslim world? How many bombs have they built with that money? How many trillions have we spent on defense to stop them from delivering those bombs? Think about it. Nuclear power wasn't that expensive after all.
If you think Jimmy Carter was for Nuclear Power then you believe that he is a Liar. He stated publicly many times that he was against Nuclear Power.

Time on your hands? You seem to believe the stories made up by govt officials and beaucrats, I recommend that you investigate the bombing of the USS Liberty. I beg you. Do a google search and watch the BBC Documentary, then let me know who you trust.

Maybe you should dig a little deeper and read the report on the Chernobyl accident in the Soviet Union.

Do you still believe LBJ's version to the Gulf of Tonken Incident?. How about the sinking of Lusitania? I was taught in history that the sinking of the Passenger Ship Lusitania was the event that triggered our entering into WWI. They knew that most of the sheep would be dead or would have forgotten by the time technology progressed to the point tht it could be verified that the Lusitania was carrying arms.
More time? Find out why DDT was taken off the market.

[Pine Mt Beagles]

Was Jimmy Carter right?
by Stephen Koff
Washington- President Bush is telling Americans to go easy on energy, use carpools and "curtail nonessential travel" - an unusual moment for an administration that used to say it could meet growing energy demand by expanding supply, not consuming less.
But this is not a Jimmy Carter, turn- down-the-thermostat, late-1970s moment.
Carter wore a cardigan when asking Americans to bear a little discomfort in a time of severe oil price increases. Last Monday,
Bush rode in a motorcade - two limousines, three utility vans, six SUVs and a medical truck - to the climate-controlled Department of Energy, where he appeared in a suit and tie behind a podium.
Symbols aside, the former oilman who occupies the White House today shares a problem that plagued Carter, a former peanut farmer and naval nuclear engineer: How to solve an energy crunch in a nation utterly dependent on fossil fuel?
Conservation is only a tiny part of Bush's answer, although on Monday, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman will lay out what his office calls a comprehensive, national conservation campaign in the face of rising winter energy costs.
In the past, Bush focused on promoting new nuclear power plants, better use of coal, new shipments of liquefied natural gas and further exploration of oil and gas in Alaska.
Bush's energy problems stem largely from growing worldwide demand for limited supplies of oil and natural gas. The situation has grown worse because of the war in Iraq and, recently, hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which knocked out rigs in the Gulf Coast and hampered refineries.
Carter faced a crisis from a combination of economic problems, failed policies of his predecessors and, finally, an Iranian revolution that cut access to some Middle Eastern oil.
Carter met the problems by starting sweeping oil-reduction reforms, including creation of the Cabinet-level Department of Energy.
He began spending millions of dollars researching alternative sources for electrical power, including solar power. He got utilities to cut their use of oil for electricity and ramp up their use of natural gas or coal.
"Up until Carter, we were getting about 20 percent of our electricity from oil generation," said Jay Hakes, director of the Energy Information Administration under Carter and an authority on modern presidents and oil. "And post-Carter, it went down to about 3 percent."
=
=THIS, IS NOT ALL THEY HAD IN COMMON==THEY, HAD ABOUT THE SAME POLL NUMBER'S I THINK, CARTER'S WAS A LITTLE HIGHER =WHEN LEAVING OFFICE=

[Chief Long Hair]

First off Newt, I couldn't help but notice that you had no reply to my statement about what you and President Obama have in common. I'll repeat it again since you might have missed it. (I realize there was so much reading involved.) I'm quite interested in your thoughts. Here it is:

Oh, here's one more thing. Since you seem to strongly believe that we need nuclear power, just like me, you've got to read this link.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... r-reactors

AND

http://media.www.theduquesneduke.com/me ... 8976.shtml

The first link is a White House Press release stating that President Obama announced an $8.3 billion loan guarantee that will be put toward two new nuclear reactors in Georgia.

The second link states:

On Feb. 16, President Barack Obama announced an $8.3 billion loan guarantee that will be put toward two new nuclear reactors in Georgia. Throughout his short tenure, Obama has consistently pushed nuclear energy.

WOW!!!!! Just like you and me!!!!! I guess you need to look a little differently at our President now, uh????? You two have something in common.

Did anybody see Hell freeze over????? Go figure.

Chief, if you were building a house and once you laid the foundation, had the walls up, and were installing the roof, the local building code changed. Due to global warming you had to install a different heating cooling system that was twice as big and twice as heavy and had to be installed in the attic. How do you think it would affect your costs. Then when you had it finished, they came back and told you that they wanted a lab test report on every fastener or support bracket used in the house. They had to be identified and certified that they could withstand hurricane force winds and earth quakes. They had to be kept in a vault for as long as your house was used as a living quarters. Do you think you would still be building the same house?

I don't think my house has, or had, the capabilities of creating corium, (a lava-like molten mixture of portions of nuclear reactor core, formed during a nuclear meltdown, the most severe class of a nuclear reactor accident. It consists of nuclear fuel, control rods, structural materials from the affected parts of the reactor, products of their chemical reaction with air, water and steam, and, in case the reactor vessel is breached, molten concrete from the floor of the reactor room), so your first paragraph deserves no merit. It's a simple case of political spinning of my comments due to the fact that it’s trying to compare 2 like items while actually comparing apples to oranges.

(I really did like the words “molten concrete”. I’ve worked with concrete many times before but I’ve never seen it “molten“ before. It must take a lot to “molten” it.)

It wasn't the design nor the construction it was the constant changing of the codes that halted the construction of Nuclear Power Plants. They paper trailed them to death.

First off, they needed to change the codes, (I'll explain later). Changing the "CODES" changed the design AND construction which increased the cost of a nuclear power plant!!!!! duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. That means it wasn't cost effective for creating electrical power compared to hydro or coal burning power plants. You also need to add into the equation, in the late 70's and early 80's, all fossil fuels had decreased considerably in price, (like coal). You also might have missed one more thing. Did you miss the overcapacity of power plants in those days in my research? Or you can't handle the truth?

If you would check the facts, Jimmy Carter. appointed a man who had written a book comdeming nuclear power, as head of TVA and their Nuclear Power Construction.

(It’s condemning) Nope, can't find such an account of this. I did find this though. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is a federally owned corporation, (I think it's called socialism in your book), which means President Carter could only choose the person to go before Congress so that they can vote on him to head the TVA.

In addition, they told the plants who they could hire with affirmative action.

I take it you're a pissed off, racist, ex-employee of a socialist company.

It wasn't poor disign that caused three mile island. It was human error. The operators had grown cocky and complacent and didn't believe their instruments.

(It's design) Poor design, hell yes it was-----especially to the control system‘s user interface and equipment failure, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ci ... _accidents. Cocky? No. Complacent? Maybe. In the dark on what was really going on? Hell yes. It took them 7 hours to find out that the temperature was critically high in the primary loop water, (which was way late as you‘ll see later). It took 16 hours to figure a way on how to start cooling it AND it took years, until the reactor vessel was physically opened, to discover that by the time the plant operator called the NRC 4 hour after the accident started that roughly one-half of the uranium fuel had already melted. It also wasn't till 3 days after the accident that they found a hydrogen bubble had formed in the reactor!!!!! That's called a hydrogen bomb waiting to happen that could have blown it up and then all hell would’ve busted loose, (Thank God it didn‘t blow). All due to a burned out indicator lamp!!!!! (It didn’t say how long it took them to figure out that the lamp burned out.)

You must have missed the "Accident description" part in the Wikipeda, (on-line encyclopedia to you), research on the TMI accident. Here, look it up again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile ... ite_ref-47

It describes a cascading, catastrophic, series of events. There were missing "fail-safes", "red-flags" and failing equipment all over the place. That's where the code needed to change which changed the design and construction which lead to the high cost of building them.

If you would check the facts, Jimmy Carter. appointed a man who had written a book comdeming nuclear power, as head of TVA and their Nuclear Power Construction. The truth is that Mr Carter and his gang made a big change in the building requiremtns for Nuclear Plants.

(It's “condemning” again and “requirements“) Jimmy Carter appointed a commission to evaluate and report back on the TMI accident. John G. Kemeny chaired this commission. That’s the only thing I could find as far as "a book", (or better a report). Is he, John G. Kemeny, the one who you speak of who authored the book? If so, he wrote no such book.

It’s pretty d-a-m-n easy to say that “someone appointed someone else to write a book against something” without showing proof of it, isn’t it. But that’s not fact finding. It’s called “HEARSAY”!!!!! Give me the name of the author and then I’ll check on it. President Jimmy Carter didn’t like the uranium that was used in the use of nuclear fuel. (Here’s some possible news to you…….IT CAN BE USED IN BOMB MAKING!!!!! It‘s a by-product called plutonium.) Beside, we had loads of coal. He did call for the use of nuclear power as a share in our energy production. (You’ll see the proof later.) He also wanted it to be safe. Did you know he was instrumental in creating the NRC along with the help of Congress? WHOA!!!!! What was that? A President getting help from Congress? That's unheard of this day and age. Everybody's more worried about getting re-elected and saving their party's azz‘s. Enough said.

So plants that were half way through construction, were required to put in a lot of extra piping and supports. Some of the multimillion dollar buidlings were not big enough to hold the extra piping and supports. The changes were so costly that the power plants had no choice but to shut down construction rather than make the modifications.

(You need to switch the “d” and the “l” in buidling.) Covered that already but this will be used as ammunition later.

They knew the Oil check had been cashed and it was over at that time.

Not worth commenting on.

How could an industry continue to build nuclear plants when the government was constantly changing design requirements.

Just to making sure you understand, cost too much compared to other types of power houses, lower fossil fuel prices, and overcapacity.

Three Mile Island was the excuse used by anti nuke faction to scare the sheep.

The anti nuke faction had a name, Jane Fonda. Here's an interesting fact. She was the main actress in the movie "The China Syndrome" which opened 12 days before the TMI accident. WHAT TIMING!!!!!

I has been several years since I was around the nuclear industry, but at that time there had been no deaths due to plant design, or equipment failure that I was aware of.

Not sure eh? If no deaths occurred (which I believe you're right for once), the new codes sure did work well, didn't they?

Once Constructtion came to a grinding hault, much of the equipment was sold to nations such as Japan where it has been helping keep their costs low and their air free of pollution.
How many jobs did stopping the contruction of Nuclear Power Plants cost the nation?. How much cheap power was lost? How many billion Barrells of petroleum have been burned as a result? How many billion dollars have been sent to the Muslim world? How many bombs have they built with that money? How many trillions have we spent on defense to stop them from delivering those bombs? Think about it. Nuclear power wasn't that expensive after all.

(Do you have spell check? Might want to check on grammar while you‘re at it.) Blah blah blah blah balh ultra-conservative Republican this and blah blah blah blah balh ultra-conservative Republican that.............except for what????? "CHEAP POWER????? You’re contradicting yourself. Here, look:

So plants that were half way through construction, were required to put in a lot of extra piping and supports. Some of the multimillion dollar buidlings were not big enough to hold the extra piping and supports. The changes were so costly that the power plants had no choice but to shut down construction rather than make the modifications.

And where did this oil sh** come from as well? The major portion of electrical power generation that I know of is from coal, hydro, and nukes. Oil ain’t a huge part of it. Maybe a little diesel fuel in small emergency generators. (Typical ultra-conservative Republican spinning here I guess.)

If you think Jimmy Carter was for Nuclear Power then you believe that he is a Liar. He stated publicly many times that he was against Nuclear Power.

We're both right. He was for but also against nuclear power. Look here from his own words on April 7, 1977.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=7316

Here is a quote from the above link.

"There is no dilemma today more difficult to resolve than that connected with the use of nuclear power. Many countries see nuclear power as the only real opportunity, at least in this century, to reduce the dependence of their economic well-being on foreign oil--an energy source of uncertain availability, growing price, and ultimate exhaustion. The U.S., by contrast, has a major domestic energy source--coal--but its use is not without penalties, and our plans also call for the use of nuclear power as a share in our energy production.

The benefits of nuclear power are thus very real and practical. But a serious risk accompanies worldwide use of nuclear power--the risk that components of the nuclear power process will be turned to providing atomic weapons."

Therefore, we're both right. He's for it-----"Our plans also call for the use of nuclear power" and “It's benefits are very real and practical“. And against it-----"It's benefits are very real and practical BUT IT'S BOMB MAK'N MATERIAL!" "Besides, we got loads of coal." (And it cost less.)

Time on your hands? You seem to believe the stories made up by govt officials and beaucrats

(It’s bureaucrats.) Typical statement from a hard core ultra-conservative Republican to anyone who thinks differently whether it be moderate Republican, Independent, any kind of Democrat or whatever.

Time on your hands? You seem to believe the stories made up by govt officials and beaucrats, I recommend that you investigate the bombing of the USS Liberty. I beg you. Do a google search and watch the BBC Documentary, then let me know who you trust.

Did what you asked. I didn't trust the government of that time on this as well as a few other things. Let see..........what else was going on there? Oh yeah, nothing big it’s just the VIETNAM WAR!!!!! Who trusted the government then? Enough said there.

This is solid proof that you definitely don't understand me, and many others like me, as well. Ask me about what I thought of Bush's election, particularly the State of Florida and what were his REAL reasons on attacking Saddam, er, I mean Iraq and their weapons of mass destruction and “HEY Al-QAIDA IS THERE TOO!!!!!” (No WMD’s were found and Al-Qaida wasn’t there till we got there.) I’ll never forget watching him during a speech defending his reasons for going to Iraq when he said “Besides, he tried to kill my daddy!!!!!

Maybe you should dig a little deeper and read the report on the Chernobyl accident in the Soviet Union.

Why? It's got nothing to do with this. Besides, it was almost 10 years after the TMI accident.

Do you still believe LBJ's version to the Gulf of Tonken Incident?. How about the sinking of Lusitania? I was taught in history that the sinking of the Passenger Ship Lusitania was the event that triggered our entering into WWI. They knew that most of the sheep would be dead or would have forgotten by the time technology progressed to the point tht it could be verified that the Lusitania was carrying arms.
More time? Find out why DDT was taken off the market.

(It’s Tonkin) No sense in it. I guess I need to clarify what I want to research. How about some false statements made from the 6 to 10 guys here? Oh crap!!!!! Your one of them!!!!!

Da Chief, er, Chief

[tommyg]

First off Newt, I couldn't help but notice that you had no reply to my statement about what you and President Obama have in common. I'll repeat it again since you might have missed it. (I realize there was so much reading involved.) I'm quite interested in your thoughts. Here it is:

Oh, here's one more thing. Since you seem to strongly believe that we need nuclear power, just like me, you've got to read this link.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... r-reactors

AND

http://media.www.theduquesneduke.com/me ... 8976.shtml

The first link is a White House Press release stating that President Obama announced an $8.3 billion loan guarantee that will be put toward two new nuclear reactors in Georgia.

The second link states:

On Feb. 16, President Barack Obama announced an $8.3 billion loan guarantee that will be put toward two new nuclear reactors in Georgia. Throughout his short tenure, Obama has consistently pushed nuclear energy.

WOW!!!!! Just like you and me!!!!! I guess you need to look a little differently at our President now, uh????? You two have something in common.

Did anybody see Hell freeze over????? Go figure.

Chief, if you were building a house and once you laid the foundation, had the walls up, and were installing the roof, the local building code changed. Due to global warming you had to install a different heating cooling system that was twice as big and twice as heavy and had to be installed in the attic. How do you think it would affect your costs. Then when you had it finished, they came back and told you that they wanted a lab test report on every fastener or support bracket used in the house. They had to be identified and certified that they could withstand hurricane force winds and earth quakes. They had to be kept in a vault for as long as your house was used as a living quarters. Do you think you would still be building the same house?

I don't think my house has, or had, the capabilities of creating corium, (a lava-like molten mixture of portions of nuclear reactor core, formed during a nuclear meltdown, the most severe class of a nuclear reactor accident. It consists of nuclear fuel, control rods, structural materials from the affected parts of the reactor, products of their chemical reaction with air, water and steam, and, in case the reactor vessel is breached, molten concrete from the floor of the reactor room), so your first paragraph deserves no merit. It's a simple case of political spinning of my comments due to the fact that it’s trying to compare 2 like items while actually comparing apples to oranges.

(I really did like the words “molten concrete”. I’ve worked with concrete many times before but I’ve never seen it “molten“ before. It must take a lot to “molten” it.)

It wasn't the design nor the construction it was the constant changing of the codes that halted the construction of Nuclear Power Plants. They paper trailed them to death.

First off, they needed to change the codes, (I'll explain later). Changing the "CODES" changed the design AND construction which increased the cost of a nuclear power plant!!!!! duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. That means it wasn't cost effective for creating electrical power compared to hydro or coal burning power plants. You also need to add into the equation, in the late 70's and early 80's, all fossil fuels had decreased considerably in price, (like coal). You also might have missed one more thing. Did you miss the overcapacity of power plants in those days in my research? Or you can't handle the truth?

If you would check the facts, Jimmy Carter. appointed a man who had written a book comdeming nuclear power, as head of TVA and their Nuclear Power Construction.

(It’s condemning) Nope, can't find such an account of this. I did find this though. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is a federally owned corporation, (I think it's called socialism in your book), which means President Carter could only choose the person to go before Congress so that they can vote on him to head the TVA.

In addition, they told the plants who they could hire with affirmative action.

I take it you're a pissed off, racist, ex-employee of a socialist company.

It wasn't poor disign that caused three mile island. It was human error. The operators had grown cocky and complacent and didn't believe their instruments.

(It's design) Poor design, hell yes it was-----especially to the control system‘s user interface and equipment failure, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ci ... _accidents. Cocky? No. Complacent? Maybe. In the dark on what was really going on? Hell yes. It took them 7 hours to find out that the temperature was critically high in the primary loop water, (which was way late as you‘ll see later). It took 16 hours to figure a way on how to start cooling it AND it took years, until the reactor vessel was physically opened, to discover that by the time the plant operator called the NRC 4 hour after the accident started that roughly one-half of the uranium fuel had already melted. It also wasn't till 3 days after the accident that they found a hydrogen bubble had formed in the reactor!!!!! That's called a hydrogen bomb waiting to happen that could have blown it up and then all hell would’ve busted loose, (Thank God it didn‘t blow). All due to a burned out indicator lamp!!!!! (It didn’t say how long it took them to figure out that the lamp burned out.)

You must have missed the "Accident description" part in the Wikipeda, (on-line encyclopedia to you), research on the TMI accident. Here, look it up again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile ... ite_ref-47

It describes a cascading, catastrophic, series of events. There were missing "fail-safes", "red-flags" and failing equipment all over the place. That's where the code needed to change which changed the design and construction which lead to the high cost of building them.

If you would check the facts, Jimmy Carter. appointed a man who had written a book comdeming nuclear power, as head of TVA and their Nuclear Power Construction. The truth is that Mr Carter and his gang made a big change in the building requiremtns for Nuclear Plants.

(It's “condemning” again and “requirements“) Jimmy Carter appointed a commission to evaluate and report back on the TMI accident. John G. Kemeny chaired this commission. That’s the only thing I could find as far as "a book", (or better a report). Is he, John G. Kemeny, the one who you speak of who authored the book? If so, he wrote no such book.

It’s pretty d-a-m-n easy to say that “someone appointed someone else to write a book against something” without showing proof of it, isn’t it. But that’s not fact finding. It’s called “HEARSAY”!!!!! Give me the name of the author and then I’ll check on it. President Jimmy Carter didn’t like the uranium that was used in the use of nuclear fuel. (Here’s some possible news to you…….IT CAN BE USED IN BOMB MAKING!!!!! It‘s a by-product called plutonium.) Beside, we had loads of coal. He did call for the use of nuclear power as a share in our energy production. (You’ll see the proof later.) He also wanted it to be safe. Did you know he was instrumental in creating the NRC along with the help of Congress? WHOA!!!!! What was that? A President getting help from Congress? That's unheard of this day and age. Everybody's more worried about getting re-elected and saving their party's azz‘s. Enough said.

So plants that were half way through construction, were required to put in a lot of extra piping and supports. Some of the multimillion dollar buidlings were not big enough to hold the extra piping and supports. The changes were so costly that the power plants had no choice but to shut down construction rather than make the modifications.

(You need to switch the “d” and the “l” in buidling.) Covered that already but this will be used as ammunition later.

They knew the Oil check had been cashed and it was over at that time.

Not worth commenting on.

How could an industry continue to build nuclear plants when the government was constantly changing design requirements.

Just to making sure you understand, cost too much compared to other types of power houses, lower fossil fuel prices, and overcapacity.

Three Mile Island was the excuse used by anti nuke faction to scare the sheep.

The anti nuke faction had a name, Jane Fonda. Here's an interesting fact. She was the main actress in the movie "The China Syndrome" which opened 12 days before the TMI accident. WHAT TIMING!!!!!

I has been several years since I was around the nuclear industry, but at that time there had been no deaths due to plant design, or equipment failure that I was aware of.

Not sure eh? If no deaths occurred (which I believe you're right for once), the new codes sure did work well, didn't they?

Once Constructtion came to a grinding hault, much of the equipment was sold to nations such as Japan where it has been helping keep their costs low and their air free of pollution.
How many jobs did stopping the contruction of Nuclear Power Plants cost the nation?. How much cheap power was lost? How many billion Barrells of petroleum have been burned as a result? How many billion dollars have been sent to the Muslim world? How many bombs have they built with that money? How many trillions have we spent on defense to stop them from delivering those bombs? Think about it. Nuclear power wasn't that expensive after all.

(Do you have spell check? Might want to check on grammar while you‘re at it.) Blah blah blah blah balh ultra-conservative Republican this and blah blah blah blah balh ultra-conservative Republican that.............except for what????? "CHEAP POWER????? You’re contradicting yourself. Here, look:

So plants that were half way through construction, were required to put in a lot of extra piping and supports. Some of the multimillion dollar buidlings were not big enough to hold the extra piping and supports. The changes were so costly that the power plants had no choice but to shut down construction rather than make the modifications.

And where did this oil sh** come from as well? The major portion of electrical power generation that I know of is from coal, hydro, and nukes. Oil ain’t a huge part of it. Maybe a little diesel fuel in small emergency generators. (Typical ultra-conservative Republican spinning here I guess.)

If you think Jimmy Carter was for Nuclear Power then you believe that he is a Liar. He stated publicly many times that he was against Nuclear Power.

We're both right. He was for but also against nuclear power. Look here from his own words on April 7, 1977.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=7316

Here is a quote from the above link.

"There is no dilemma today more difficult to resolve than that connected with the use of nuclear power. Many countries see nuclear power as the only real opportunity, at least in this century, to reduce the dependence of their economic well-being on foreign oil--an energy source of uncertain availability, growing price, and ultimate exhaustion. The U.S., by contrast, has a major domestic energy source--coal--but its use is not without penalties, and our plans also call for the use of nuclear power as a share in our energy production.

The benefits of nuclear power are thus very real and practical. But a serious risk accompanies worldwide use of nuclear power--the risk that components of the nuclear power process will be turned to providing atomic weapons."

Therefore, we're both right. He's for it-----"Our plans also call for the use of nuclear power" and “It's benefits are very real and practical“. And against it-----"It's benefits are very real and practical BUT IT'S BOMB MAK'N MATERIAL!" "Besides, we got loads of coal." (And it cost less.)

Time on your hands? You seem to believe the stories made up by govt officials and beaucrats

(It’s bureaucrats.) Typical statement from a hard core ultra-conservative Republican to anyone who thinks differently whether it be moderate Republican, Independent, any kind of Democrat or whatever.

Time on your hands? You seem to believe the stories made up by govt officials and beaucrats, I recommend that you investigate the bombing of the USS Liberty. I beg you. Do a google search and watch the BBC Documentary, then let me know who you trust.

Did what you asked. I didn't trust the government of that time on this as well as a few other things. Let see..........what else was going on there? Oh yeah, nothing big it’s just the VIETNAM WAR!!!!! Who trusted the government then? Enough said there.

This is solid proof that you definitely don't understand me, and many others like me, as well. Ask me about what I thought of Bush's election, particularly the State of Florida and what were his REAL reasons on attacking Saddam, er, I mean Iraq and their weapons of mass destruction and “HEY Al-QAIDA IS THERE TOO!!!!!” (No WMD’s were found and Al-Qaida wasn’t there till we got there.) I’ll never forget watching him during a speech defending his reasons for going to Iraq when he said “Besides, he tried to kill my daddy!!!!!

Maybe you should dig a little deeper and read the report on the Chernobyl accident in the Soviet Union.

Why? It's got nothing to do with this. Besides, it was almost 10 years after the TMI accident.

Do you still believe LBJ's version to the Gulf of Tonken Incident?. How about the sinking of Lusitania? I was taught in history that the sinking of the Passenger Ship Lusitania was the event that triggered our entering into WWI. They knew that most of the sheep would be dead or would have forgotten by the time technology progressed to the point tht it could be verified that the Lusitania was carrying arms.
More time? Find out why DDT was taken off the market.

(It’s Tonkin) No sense in it. I guess I need to clarify what I want to research. How about some false statements made from the 6 to 10 guys here? Oh crap!!!!! Your one of them!!!!!

Da Chief, er, Chief

[Pine Mt Beagles]

IN THE END IT WILL BE LEFT UP TO THE LOBBIST WITH THE MOST MONEY==DARN I FORGOT THE REPUBLICAN SUPREME COURT JUSTICES DID AWAY WITH ELECTION'S= SO THE COMPANIES=THAT BUILD THE PLANT'S = WILL JUST APPOINT SOME ONE= TO SEE WHICH ONE= AMERICA= GET'S AND CHANGE THE REGULATIONS TO SUIT THERE NEED'S =GOOD BY COAL=