[killJOY]

In other words...




(Yes, that is our crackhead adolescent "president," and yes, that is his middle finger.)

[lateStarter]

I thought he was a born-again 'Christian'?

[EnemyCombatant]

[emersonbiggins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('killJOY', '[')size=150]In other words...[/size]




(Yes, that is our crackhead adolescent "president," and yes, that is his middle finger.)

[lateStarter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('killJOY', '[')size=150]In other words...[/size]




(Yes, that is our crackhead adolescent "president," and yes, that is his middle finger.)

[BabyPeanut]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s Woolsey and Schultz put it, sounding like granola munchers on their way to Earth Day:

“A plug-in hybrid averaging 125 mpg, if its fuel tank contains 85 percent cellulosic ethanol, would be obtaining about 500 mpg. If it were constructed from carbon composites, the mileage could double, and, if it were a diesel and powered by biodiesel derived from waste, it would be using no oil products at all . . . What are we waiting for?”

[EnemyCombatant]

He's got an awfully long thumb.

Makes a girl look at him in a different persepctive.

[AlCzervik]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s Woolsey and Schultz put it, sounding like granola munchers on their way to Earth Day:

“A plug-in hybrid averaging 125 mpg, if its fuel tank contains 85 percent cellulosic ethanol, would be obtaining about 500 mpg. If it were constructed from carbon composites, the mileage could double, and, if it were a diesel and powered by biodiesel derived from waste, it would be using no oil products at all . . . What are we waiting for?”

[killJOY]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')ude, I hate Bush too, but that's his thumb, not his middle finger.

[Graeme]

Bush's Nuclear Madness

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'G')eorge W. Bush has a vision for a strong, independent nuclear America. He wants nuclear weapons for everyday use -- deterrence is for Democrats -- and he wants to build dozens of new nuclear energy plants across the United States.

According to Bush administration spin, the mighty atom is a 21st century panacea for the United States' -- and the world's -- most intractable problems. Nuclear energy will free us from our dependence on those "tyrannical regimes" that sponsor global terror, bail out the planet from global warming and avert a new superpower struggle by giving fast-industrializing behemoths like China and India an endless supply of "renewable" energy. Nuclear weapons that we can deploy freely in small conflicts will lock in our global dominance for the rest of the century. And, of course, all this will create lots and lots of high-paying jobs.

On the military side, Bush wants to shrug off decades of constraints and develop a new generation of nukes. Fred Kaplan, writing in Slate, noted some of the overlooked provisions in Bush's 2004 defense budget, including the repeal of a 1992 ban on the research and development of "low-yield" nuclear weapons. Our cash outlay for new nukes, given the United States' military supremacy, is stunning:


[T]he Department of Energy is spending an astonishing $6.5 billion on nuclear weapons and President Bush is requesting $6.8 billion more for next year and a total of $30 billion over the following four years. … Measured in "real dollars" (that is, adjusting for inflation), this year's spending on nuclear activities exceeds by over 50 percent the average annual sum ($4.2 billion) that the United States spent -- again, in real dollars -- throughout the four and a half decades of the Cold War.

[SHiFTY]

Oh no, another OMG nukular! thread...

The article deliberately confuses the weapons and energy sides of things, to try and tie them together when they are completely separate technologies, developed by separate companies.

And $30b? Thats a mere few weeks of the Iraq madness. Bargain, should have done it instead. They might not need the weapons if they had got new reactors running.

It is also crucial to note that the world has been at 'peace' for 60 years, and that as such MAD does seem to work. So a smaller, rationalised US nuclear deterrent is probably a good thing as long as it is *never* used.

[Andy]

SHiFTY

The energy generation and weapons side of nuclear are but two sides of a double headed dragon. I can confidently state that there would not be one without the other or specifically, there would be no nuclear energy generation today without the past and continuing work on nuclear weapons. Nuclear energy generation was a way to attempt relief of the guilt the powers that be felt regarding nuclear weapons development. Ignore if you chose but those are the historical facts.

[Greg]

Actually, nuclear energy can be a tool in the disarmament of nuclear weapons. Thorium breeder reactors can burn of plutonium without producing any more plutonium.

[jd10135]

Graeme:

Don't be so Gaey.

How about some faects?

[Caoimhan]

We also have a wonderful worldwide communications network, because the U.S. military felt it was important to build rockets that could launch payloads into orbit.

Would you say that we put communications and weather sattelites into space to assuage our guilt over having built ICBMs?

[Mettezz]

Well he didn't say the word but he said that prices go up because demand is greater then the oil they can produce. here is the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmPvHqO87j0

in case this has already been posted i apolagise.

[PeakingAroundtheCorner]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mettezz', 'W')ell he didn't say the word but he said that prices go up because demand is greater then the oil they can produce.

here is the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmPvHqO87j0

in case this has already been posted i apolagise.

[Revi]

"We need to git more supply. We haven't built a refinery since 1976."

Great...

[Ferretlover]

IOW: "Find that frog, and turn the burner on low."

[TheDude]

"The best thing we can do is to increase supply."

No cardigan sweater here.

"Consumers have to change their habits, or there has to be an increase in supply."

Change our habits? What, are you nuts?

Gave some thought recently about starting a thread on whether Bush would admit to PO. Might make a good poll, or inject another dose of gallows humour anyway.

Been reading in The Prize about 1979. Can you say Deja Vu? Maybe we'll start seeing a fresh batch of WWIII movies soon.