Grant this much to President Obama: he does not pander to mass opinion.

[Better Believe It]

Obama Loves Nukes
By Mark Hertsgaard
March 24, 2011

Grant this much to President Obama: he does not pander to mass opinion. In his first year in office, he stood with Wall Street even after its reckless greed produced an economic collapse that left most Americans calling for bankers’ heads. Now, even as the Fukushima power station threatens to unleash the greatest nuclear catastrophe since Chernobyl, Obama continues to champion an expansion of nuclear power in the United States. On day five of the Fukushima disaster, the Obama administration reminded Congress that it wanted to triple the amount of taxpayer-funded loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants—and this is after having reduced renewable energy loan guarantees by half last autumn.

If anything demonstrates the blind spots in Obama’s oft-stated support for clean energy—and the nation’s need for a bold alternative vision—it is his response to the Fukushima crisis, which at press time had made tap water in Tokyo, nearly 200 miles away, unsafe for infants to drink. The Fukushima disaster has led such previously firm proponents as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the government of China to announce that they will halt or pause planned expansions of nuclear power; but it’s full speed ahead for Barack Obama.

Testifying to Congress on March 16, when partial meltdowns were reportedly under way at three of the six reactors at Fukushima, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said that US nuclear plants are safe and that the president wants to build more of them. Indeed, Chu added, the administration is proposing $36 billion in taxpayer-guaranteed loans to entice private industry to do just that. What’s more, this $36 billion would be over and above the existing $18.5 billion in loan guarantees approved under the Bush administration.

As health, education and other social services are being sacrificed on the false altar of deficit reduction, $54.5 billion is a massive amount of money. Worse, Obama is shoveling money at nuclear at the very time he has diverted funds from renewable energy. As ABC News revealed in November, the Obama administration last year “quietly drained” more than half of a $6 billion fund intended to provide loan guarantees for cutting-edge wind, solar and other renewable energy projects. Instead, the funds helped to finance the “Cash for Clunkers” program and an unrelated education initiative.

Please read the full article at:

http://www.thenation.com/article/159453/obama-loves-nukes

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. Granted.

:argh:

[xchrom]

2. +1

[bvar22]

9. Duh!

It has been painfully obvious since Day One that our president doesn't really care what the Lower 98% MAJORITY wants or needs.



Who will STAND and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
Rhetoric, broken promises, and excuses mean NOTHING now.
"By their WORKS you will know them,"
and by their WORKS they will be judged.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

18. I've always believed that "Duh!" is one of the strongest arguments on Earth.

:applause:

[nashville_brook]

3. that's one way to say it.

[MadHound]

4. Somehow I think that is a bit of a liability in a democracy. n/t

[Canuckistanian]

5. $3 billion for renewables. $54 billion for nukes.

Enough said.

[Marr]

6. Yep. Sadly, this doesn't even surprise me.

I've come to expect Obama to do this sort of blatant servicing of Big Business at the cost of everyone else.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

7. $3T for Wall St.

A little more needed to be said.

[Autumn]

8. That does say it all.

I wasn't aware that he had drained half of the $6 billion for renewables for the cash for clunkers program.

[gkhouston]

10. He doesn't pander to mass opinion if you're considering masses of *people*. n/t

[pacalo]

11. I have the feeling that he has no choice, that he's being pressured or, God forbid,

selling out for a second term. Why else would he embrace Bush's policies when he said during his campaign that he would stand against them? That's my theory, fwiw.

[Toucano]

12. Doesn't wash. Why "sell out for a second term"...

when all you accomplish is the Republican agenda?

Unless you're saying it's a pure ego trip, I don't see how a second term matters.

[pacalo]

14. My theory is based on the supposition that the corporations are making the policies

& selecting the adequate number of politicians who will implement them.

[Skittles]

13. IOW, he doesn't give a fuck what we think

[madrchsod]

15. paul simon is weeping where ever great men go to rest

he had such high hopes for barack.

[LAGC]

16. Actually, this is one thing that Obama has done right.

We need to move away from our reliance on fossil fuels like mass-burning coal NOW if we hope to seriously get a handle on climate change.

We are an energy hungry society, and modern nuclear power plants are cheap, efficient, and safe.

[FLAprogressive]

17. He only panders to Beltway types...

[Modern_Matthew]

19. The presidency has become nothing more than a friendly face for corporate control. nt