Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Environmental Advocates Are Cooling on Obama ("Environmentalist" now against cleanest energy source)
NY Times ^ | 2/17/2010 | JOHN M. BRODER

Posted on 02/17/2010 7:29:03 PM PST by tobyhill

There has been no more reliable cheerleader for President Obama’s energy and climate change policies than Daniel J. Weiss of the left-leaning Center for American Progress.

But Mr. Obama’s recent enthusiasm for nuclear power, including his budget proposal to triple federal loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors to $54 billion, was too much for Mr. Weiss.

The president’s embrace of nuclear power was disappointing, and the wrong way to go about winning Republican votes, he said, adding that Mr. Obama should not be endorsing such a costly and potentially catastrophic energy alternative “as bait just to get talks started with pro-nuke senators.”

The early optimism of environmental advocates that the policies of former President George W. Bush would be quickly swept away and replaced by a bright green future under Mr. Obama is for many environmentalists giving way to resignation, and in some cases, anger.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: agenda; bho44; bhoenvironment; environmentalist; greens

1 posted on 02/17/2010 7:29:04 PM PST by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
The Senate has not yet begun debate on a comprehensive global warming bill...

. . . and if they have any desire at all to keep their jobs, they never will.

2 posted on 02/17/2010 7:33:53 PM PST by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
Ok. So we can't burn coal. Bad..... Can't burn oil. Bad..... Can't have wind farms because they might kill migrating birds. Bad..... Can't have nuclear energy. Bad...... Can't have liquified natural gas delivered into this country via ships. Bad..... Can't have dams because it interfers with fish spawning up rivers. Bad.......

Does this no-nukes "progressive" have any, and I'm not talking pie-in-the-sky technology decades to centuries from being able to be put into mass use, but any real alternatives to the worlds energy needs?

3 posted on 02/17/2010 7:38:59 PM PST by Proud_USA_Republican ("The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

you care about climate change or not? Go nuclear power!


4 posted on 02/17/2010 7:44:39 PM PST by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican
I would say the Flux Capacitor but it takes Plutonium to produce the 1.21 Gigawatts for a DeLorean.
5 posted on 02/17/2010 7:45:52 PM PST by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican
their alternative:

6 posted on 02/17/2010 7:45:56 PM PST by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

Libs can’t stand proved technology, they have to have pie-in-the-sky at any cost technology.


7 posted on 02/17/2010 7:51:36 PM PST by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

How Lisa Jackson Stole $11,000 from Every American Household
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/04/23/how-lisa-jackson-stole-11000-from-every-american-household/

That’s what she cost us last year on this crap...what are her qualifications anyway...besides being a liar.


8 posted on 02/17/2010 7:53:15 PM PST by bronxville
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Maybe we can burn the dinosaur NYT for heat.


9 posted on 02/17/2010 8:01:37 PM PST by Wisconsinlady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
The president’s embrace of nuclear power was disappointing, and the wrong way to go about winning Republican votes

Actually it was the right way .. I stood up and took notice when he said that in the SOTU .. somewhat amusingly shocked, but took notice nonetheless ..

Obama ain't ever gonna get my VRWC vote anytime soon, but at least there was one thing in his SOTU address which I could applaud.

-- MM

10 posted on 02/17/2010 8:02:02 PM PST by Mr_Moonlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Morons. NYTimes Morons. Not a single word in the article about the nationwide shale-gas resource that will save the USA from energy extinction. We had divine intervention in the energy department. It is tight and unconventional reservoirs of gas and oil from shales and tight rock formations that will provide the US an energy future in a clean way. New York, by the way, has banned drilling of shale-gas in their state. Nuclear energy is the most inefficient and expensive resource available anywhere.


11 posted on 02/17/2010 8:03:00 PM PST by FlyingEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican
Its all about power and control. Soon energy will have to be rationed. Since this administration is so incompetent, I see no reason for success on the government's side.
12 posted on 02/17/2010 8:17:26 PM PST by oyez ( damnant quod non intelligunt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

That can’t be their alternative.

The photographed work to survive, no work-e, no eat-e, leave the tribe.

I’m sure they kill and eat furry creatures, crank up a fire.

Surely the lefty folk want no electricity, no cars etc but they expect the magic unicorn will peel and feed grapes to the unproductive masses.

The photographed are a more educated, advanced and reality based society— than are the green-left freaks.


13 posted on 02/17/2010 8:22:11 PM PST by Irenic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: oyez

The only reason Obammy said this is to create an image that he is moving toward the middle. He knows damn well that this has no chance in the Congress or his own EPA of seeing the light of day.


14 posted on 02/17/2010 8:22:56 PM PST by Wooly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: FlyingEagle
There is already a movement against the new gas and oil procurement methods. They are claiming that poisonous and corrosive gasses are being released into to the atmosphere. They want production stop and to conduct a lengthy and costly investigation.
15 posted on 02/17/2010 8:23:15 PM PST by oyez ( damnant quod non intelligunt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wooly
The Obama Administration is out of gas.
16 posted on 02/17/2010 8:30:32 PM PST by oyez ( damnant quod non intelligunt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

If we could just harness the power of the hamster wheel.


17 posted on 02/17/2010 8:47:13 PM PST by purplelobster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill; markomalley; Carlucci; grey_whiskers; meyer; WL-law; Para-Ord.45; Desdemona; ...
 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

18 posted on 02/17/2010 9:38:10 PM PST by steelyourfaith (FReepers were opposed to Obama even before it was cool to be against Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
Had Bush announced ... Mr. Obama’s recent enthusiasm for nuclear power, including his budget proposal to triple federal loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors... the greens would be marching in the streets. Their hypocrisy is undeniable.
19 posted on 02/18/2010 7:56:16 AM PST by Phlap (REDNECK@LIBARTS.EDU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson