Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

McNutt's answer about nuclear power? Jeez!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
iwillalwayswonderwhy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-08 05:05 AM
Original message
McNutt's answer about nuclear power? Jeez!
I haven't seen this one mentioned. He mumbled something kind of incoherant about Obama being for nuclear power, but not without (and with a sneer and withering disdain) worrying about safe disposal, of, um.......(voice trails off) and then unbelieveably mumbling about nuclear power being perfectly safe, why I was in a nuclear submarine, mumble mumbler mumble.

WHAT?

Come ON! WHAT? Disposal of spent nuclear material isn't something to think about at all? WHAT?

If we are going to go towards more nuclear plants, I want somebody who is thinking about the full picture. Not just build 'em and worry about that shit later.

That was imbecilic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Celebrandil Donating Member (254 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-08 05:18 AM
Response to Original message
1. I reacted to that too...
but never understand what he wanted to say regarding Obama's position. That submarine thing was just pure nonsense, but maybe someone bought it. If you have a problem on a submarine, just sink it. It's all water around you. It might not be the most environmentally friendly thing to do, but nuclear power on submarines is far safer that nuclear power in Harrisburg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-08 05:23 AM
Response to Original message
2. But he served on nuclear vessels
Is that even true? I didn't think a majority of our fleet was nuclear at the time of the Vietnam War, I could be wrong, but what an assinine thing to say. "Yep I didn't get fried on a ship with New Clear stuff in it, so why should we worry about waste from power plants?"

The mind boggles. I think maybe you did stand a little too close to the main reactor Johnny boy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-08 05:43 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Probably true
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_marine_propulsion

"The first nuclear-powered submarine, USS Nautilus (SSN-571), put to sea in 1955."

"Nautilus led to the parallel development of further Skate-class submarines, powered by single reactors, and a cruiser, Long Beach, in 1961, powered by two reactors. The aircraft carrier Enterprise, commissioned in 1962, was powered by eight reactor units in 1960. Enterprise remains in service.

By 1962 the United States Navy had 26 nuclear submarines operational and 30 under construction."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-08 05:51 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. He was a pilot though
Edited on Wed Oct-08-08 05:52 AM by shadowknows69
Why would he serve on a sub?


Edit to add: Carrier/Enterprise. Yeah could have been. Stupid answer anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-08 06:02 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. McBain's Nuclear Navy Experience
According to his Wikipedia page:
"Onboard for Enterprise's maiden voyage in January 1962, McCain gained visibility with the captain and shipboard publicity that fellow sailors and aviators attributed to his famous last name. McCain was made a lieutenant in June 1962, and was on alert duty on Enterprise when it helped enforce the naval quarantine of Cuba during the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. In November 1963, he was rotated back to shore duty, serving nine months on the staff of the Naval Air Basic Training Command at Pensacola."

Barring Wikipedia incompleteness about the dates, his experience with nuclear power amounts to not quite two years serving in the air wing (not engineering staff) of a nuclear-powered carrier.

Maybe someone should point out that the radioactive waste from Enterprise's reactor from the time he served on it 35 years ago is today still sitting around in a "temporary" waste storage facility, still hazardous all these years later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-08 05:45 AM
Response to Original message
4. Oh yeah....
That was a MASSIVE WTF too. :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Higher Standard Donating Member (499 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-08 05:45 AM
Response to Original message
5. He didn't die on a nuclear sub, so nuclear power must be safe.
Tell that to the folks at Chernobyl.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC