McCain says disaster if no rescue pkg.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081001/pl_nm/us_financial_bailout_mccain;_ylt=AkF_Owh26.fpJyexFJtvV2Bh24cA

Senator McCain has a lot of credibility invested after he suspended his campaign and nearly had to miss a debate trying to get this crisis resolved and get President Bush's rescue pkg. passed.

Say what you want about him, he is willing to take unpopular positions.

Just like with comprehensive immigration reform. Which his party did not want.

And building 100 nuclear power plants instead of coal. Which hardly anyone wants.

Heck he even takes the side of science on global warming, which is almost anti-republican these days.

So I wonder if he really will stick with his vp choice?

Sherm,

Many people want 100 new nuclear power plants, including me and the electric companies. Exelon runs one nearby here that employs many people with great paying jobs, without smog. You know how many people ended up dying from Chernobyl? 52.

As far as global warming, what is anti-Republican is "antroprogenic" global warming. That people are so quick to dismiss any argument to the contrary suggests to me that the case is not as strong as they believe. The earth warms and the earth cools.

Well Mike I could be wrong and sometimes am.

But not usually.

I would be really surprised if even close to a majority support building 100 new nuclear plants.

And I stand by my statement that McCain's recognition of science in the global warming issue is not popular with the active and vocal base of the republican party.

My point was not to argue global warming issues here, but to point out McCain is willing to take positions at odds with his republican Party.

It is pretty evident to me that republicans in general are opposed to the idea that there is anything we can or should do to reduce global warning or that it even exists.

Contrary to the vast majority of scientists who have studied it.

Again, global warming itself is not my point.

McCain's willingness to part ways and side with science instead of his party is my point.

I think that if you polled all Republican members of Congress about building 100 nuclear power plant right now, an overwhelming majority would favor it. Congressional opposition is not why we're not building nuclear power plants.

Hint. It's the same reason we're not building new refineries.

I do agree with the gest of your post that in the past McCain has taken unpopular stances and done what's best for the country in the past. I would cite the the surge, which most opposed (including you) but actually worked in Iraq as a prime example. He said last year he would rather lose an election then a war so yes, I agree with you.

On this issue though I think he's been all political, including the suspension of his campaign. Even some republican leaders admitted off the record that all he did was hinder the negotiations. And once the issue came for a vote, he wasn't able to deliver 12 house votes that would have passed this bad bill. What kind of leadership is that?

If anything, he's likely lost my vote and this financial crisis is the reason for it.

sodbuster wrote:Well Mike I could be wrong and sometimes am.

But not usually.

I would be really surprised if even close to a majority support building 100 new nuclear plants.

Gee Shermmy, the US Navy operates more nuclear reactors than that.

The USA has the main navy with nuclear-powered aircraft carriers (11), while both it and Russia have had nuclear-powered cruisers (USA: 9, Russia 4). Russia has seven nuclear icebreakers and a nuclear freighter in service.

The US Navy has accumulated over 5500 reactor years of accident-free experience, and operates more than 80 nuclear-powered ships (with 103 reactors as of early 2005). Russia has logged 6000 nautical reactor years.

But that doesn't help fix our needed power situation because you Democrats done convinced the public that nuclear reactors are really dangerous.

Now if we had one of those Navy reactors to set up here in Braxton county ...... it would provide dirt cheap reliable electrical power to this county and 3 or 4 surrounding counties for the next 50 years or longer.



But there is no "pork" in such a venture and you Democrats would defeat any attempt to accomplish said.


.