Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

President Obama spoke out against nuclear power plants!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 12:16 PM
Original message
President Obama spoke out against nuclear power plants!

An Atomic Credibility Gap
Obama Goes Nuclear
By KARL GROSSMAN
February 17, 2010

Before taking office, including as a candidate for president, Obama not only was negative about atomic energy but—unusual for a politician—indicated a detailed knowledge of its threat to life.

“I start off with the premise that nuclear energy is not optimal and so I am not a nuclear energy proponent,” Obama said at a campaign stop in Newton, Iowa on December 30, 2007. “My general view is that until we can make certain that nuclear power plants are safe, that they have solved the storage problem—because I’m opposed to Yucca Mountain and just dumping…in one state, in Nevada particularly, since there’s potentially an earthquake line there—until we solve those problems and the whole nuclear industry can show that they can produce clean, safe energy without enormous subsidies from the U.S. government, I don’t think that’s the best option. I am much more interested in solar and wind and bio-diesel and strategies alternative fuels.”

As he told the editorial board of the Keene Sentinel in New Hampshire on November 25, 2007: “I don’t think there’s anything that we inevitably dislike about nuclear power. We just dislike the fact that it might blow up…and irradiate us…and kill us. That’s the problem.”

As he stated at a Londonderry, New Hampshire town meeting on October 7, 2007: “Nuclear power has a host of problems that have not been solved. We haven’t solved the storage situation effectively. We have not dealt with all of the security aspects of our nuclear plants and nuclear power is very expensive.”

He still left the door open to it. His Energy Plan as a candidate stated: “It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power from the table. However, there is no future for expanded nuclear without first addressing four key issues: public right-to-know, security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation.”

http://www.counterpunch.org/grossman02172010.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Common Sense Party Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. I, for one, am glad he is re-thinking the issue.
We are long overdue for nuclear plants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
farmout rightarm Donating Member (680 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Of course. Some people apparently think the President is too dense to learn...
I certainly don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Could this have something to do with Obama's "rethinking the issue"?


"In his first year as president, nuclear power proponents worked to influence him. Among nuclear opponents, there has been anxiety regarding Obama’s two top aides, both of whom have been involved with what is now the utility operating more nuclear power plants than any other in the United States, Exelon.

Rahm Emanuel, now Obama’s chief of staff, as an investment banker was in the middle of the $8.2 billion merger in 1999 of Unicom, the parent company of Commonwealth Edison of Chicago, and Peco Energy to put together Exelon. David Axelrod, now a senior Obama advisor and formerly chief campaign strategist, was an Exelon consultant. Candidate Obama received sizeable contributions from Exelon executives including from John Rowe, its president and chief executive officer who in 2007 also became chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the U.S. nuclear industry’s main trade group.

It’s not only been nuclear opponents who have seen a link between Exelon and the Obama administration. Forbes magazine, in its January 18th issue, in an article on John Rowe and how he has “focused the company on nuclear,” displayed a sidebar headlined, “The President’s Utility.” It read: “Ties are tight between Exelon and the Obama administration,” noting Exelon political contributions and featuring Emanuel and Axelrod with photos and descriptions of their Exelon connections.

Chicago-based Exelon’s website boasts of its operating “the largest nuclear fleet in the nation and the third largest in the world.” It owns 17 nuclear power plants which “represent approximately 20 percent of the U.S. nuclear industry’s power capacity"

http://www.counterpunch.org/grossman02172010.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NightWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. and this has nothing to do with Citizens United v. FEC
free money? hell yes, I'll do your bidding.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Agreed...nt
Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gravel Democrat Donating Member (598 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. And insurance mandates, & revolving doors for lobbyists ...
and other stuff

Does anybody paying attention actually believe anything that spouts from
the big hole on his face and what exactly would they be called anyway



our out to lunch media pretends not to remember.
I know I'm supposed to accept that all politicians lie
about important stuff to get elected.

I also understand that it's a felony for me
to lie to a government agent. We can change this around
if we try, or we can roll over.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
7. Yes he did. But he has new friends now and they have different wants than his old ones.

He can't please everyone so he'd rather please his new, rich powerful friends rather than his old, ordinary, run of the mill friends.
Wouldn't you?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Nuclear plants are much safer now than in 2007.

And .... could I interest you in buying the Brooklyn Bridge?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. They have LONG been FAR safer than EITHER Coal OR Hydro power.
Can I interest you in the truth?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. They are also safer than nuclear bombs. So that's comforting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. "Can I interest you in the truth?" Yes. As long as its not taken from a nuclear industry news
Edited on Wed Feb-17-10 09:40 PM by Better Believe It
release or talking points.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-17-10 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
9. Yeah because at the time he represented the interests of a coal state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 03:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC