Bruce was wrong

CofC

Shared on Mon, 05/14/2007 - 20:43

In the eighties, I remember the movement to halt the building of nuclear power plants, called NoNukes.

Had we built those plants, we wouldn't be at the mercy of extremist nations like Iran, and gas wouldn't be at four dollars a gallon.

Today, I am very skeptical of passionate and ignorant celebrities who can derail ideas, without providing workable alternatives of their own.

What now Boss?

 

Comments

Devonsangel's picture
Submitted by Devonsangel on Mon, 05/14/2007 - 20:48
Does raise the question as to how credible "celebrities" are when they promote and idea or ideology.
madwoman's picture
Submitted by madwoman on Mon, 05/14/2007 - 22:13
Agreed!!!! :)
OldManRiver48's picture
Submitted by OldManRiver48 on Mon, 05/14/2007 - 22:29
Damn that Pepsi generation!
CaptJB's picture
Submitted by CaptJB on Mon, 05/14/2007 - 23:58
yeah another ass that comes to mind is George Clooney.
microscent's picture
Submitted by microscent on Sat, 05/19/2007 - 11:33
It's all a matter of "perception" The average "joe" perceives the dangers of nuclear power to be too high. When in fact, they are safer than coal fired plants.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 05/15/2007 - 08:57
Right on.
ST3W13's picture
Submitted by ST3W13 on Sun, 05/20/2007 - 10:32
Seriously, anyone who listens to celebrities just because of their celebrity are just ignorant douches. But that applies across the board & extends to all people. If you blindly follow your priest (or whatever), cops, politicians, CEOs, or ANYONE, you do all of us a disservice. No one is above reproach...use your brain! That said, I'm not sure how nuclear power impacts gasoline, & is anyone talking about nuclear fission-powered vehicles? Clearly, there's something incredibly wrong with todays gas prices & it pisses me off to no end that these profits are going into oil company pockets instead of being used to find solutions. And the gov't has done nothing to intervene. Pathetic. In fairness, times have changed & most environmentalists embrace nuclear power as a green resource. From an emissions stand point, clearly nuclear power is cleaner, but the technology is inherently more dangerous than coal. Nuclear fission requires many, many safeguards throughout the entire process (from site location, building design, cooling systems, collections systems, material handling & storage, monitoring, security--you get the point) whereas coal has nearly none of these requirements. There's a reason why joe-schmoo is allowed to have a charcoal BBQ & will never be allowed to have a nuclear fission BBQ. (I know, dumb example.) Sorry for the rant. As Molly Shannon says, "Don't get me started. Don't even get me started."
Brad's picture
Submitted by Brad on Tue, 05/15/2007 - 13:50
hey - I'm all for no nukes... as in the weapons, but why wouldn't we use nuclear power?

Join our Universe

Connect with 2o2p