Bush: U.S. Needs More Nuclear Power Plants

[justinsb]

http://www.hannity.com/index/news-app/story.147/menu./sec./home.

There you go, the solution to high gas prices. There doesn't seem to be a link for the waiting list, but if your town has alot of real estate around it, just e the president and tell him you want one.

[carrowsboy]

1. Of course...

We need more unprotected targets for planes to hit.

But then again, if you were by chance the ones behind it, then of course you'd be all for it. Hmmmmm

[oscar111]

3. NUKE PLANTS = DIRTY BOMBS. Just add a terra sneaking across the Mex border

then in a plane diving on the nuke plant, full engine acceleration added to the dive.

no need to smuggle in a dirty bomb.

You really believe the domes at plants can withstand a diving set of four jet engines... at 600 mph? my estimate on speed.

i dont think the dome can hold up.

PS uranium miners `.. 90 percent get lung cancer, just as you would expect. Most are poor native americans.

And... imagine the cancer in Paki miners, India miners, Iran miners... on and on

"ALL URANIUM BACK IN THE GROUND"

{except tiny amounts for medics and physics research}

Man is not competent to handle uranium. Admit it. We havent even done well handling gunpowder... war, war, war, war. Now mix uranium into that history.

"ALL URANIUM BACK IN THE GROUND"

[assclown_bush]

4. AHHHHHHH! Please don't let Nancy "Flash" me!

Where in the world did you get that scary pic???? :rofl:

All we need in America are more "Nucular" Plants. Chernobyl was just NOT bad enough. And, anyway, that happened in the former Soviet Union. It could NEVER happen here.
:scared: :nuke:

ASSCLOWN BUSH

[Oversea Visitor]

2. Aaaah did you chimp sell of all the nuke

[formercia]

5. So we can give away (dispose) of all that nasty

weapons grade Uranium and Plutonium to our corporate benefactors who will use the fuel, created at enormous taxpayer expense, to fuel their new reactors and generate obscene profit by producing "cheap" power. "Cheap" for them, not for us.

[formercia]

7. kick

[zbdent]

6. Build them upstream, upwind, and over the water tables feeding into

the areas which overwhelmingly supported Bush & Repukes . . .

Besides, those are not "urban" areas, anyway - and repukes hate "urban" areas - tend to vote Dem . . .

[Chicago Democrat]

8. Its a Faustian Bargain no matter which way you go....

Except one...


A pre-industrial age... AGAIN! PEAK OIL BABY!!



Its all downhill from NOW ON.

[Chicago Democrat]

9. In a related story: Nuclear Electric Utilities hit all time high in

Stock Market:



http://marketwatch.nytimes.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp?sid=346606&symb=EXC

[Saboburns]

10. Sorry

But I have to agree. And yes the downside of nuclear power can be immense.

But, damn, y'all, we gotta get away from burning fossil fuels.

There are newer, much safer reactor models being built all over the world. I understand the fears and emotion nuclear power brings to the front of a bunch of people, but i tend to think it could be huge benefit.