Published: October 27th 2008 - at 1:41 pm

John McCain makes a simple case for nuclear energy


by Justin McKeating    

It’s probably unfair to expect high-flown rhetoric and complex ideas from a presidential candidate’s speech. They’re designed to get the candidate’s ideas and policies across to potential voters in the most simple and shortest way.

That said, you can take the simplicity too far. Take John McCain criticising Barack Obama’s stance on nuclear power

You know, the other night in a debate I said his eloquence is admirable but pay attention to his words […] We talked about nuclear power. Well, it has to be safe, environment, blah blah blah. […] Nuclear power is safe. We ought to do it now.

Pay attention to Obama’s words, says McCain. What about McCain’s words? Blah, blah, blah? Is that an ‘admirable eloquence’? Sure, the arguments around nuclear power and safety can be complex. They often need to be simplified so that people who aren’t nuclear scientist can understand then, but blah, blah, blah? Do the workers cleaning up at Hanford, the most radioactive place in America regard nuclear safety as blah, blah, blah, do you think? John McCain is 72, as if we needed reminding, not 7.

And ‘nuclear power is safe’, says McCain. Really? If it’s so safe why is McCain on the record as saying he would not want nuclear waste being transported through his home state of Arizona? Is it safe or is it not, Senator? If it’s as safe as you say, let’s see you call for nuclear waste to be trucked through Arizona. Let’s have a straight answer and make it a little less simple than blah, blah, blah. We’re intelligent enough to understand.

(Originally published at Nuclear Reaction.)


---------------------------
    Share on Tumblr  


About the author
Justin McKeating is an occasional contributor to Liberal Conspiracy. He is a Brighton-based writer and blogger who can also be found at Chicken Yoghurt and Nuclear Reaction.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Environment ,United States


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


Indeed.

I suppose, over the past few months, we have gotten used to McCain constructing his policy in step with his goals.

In one breath he’s the most stringent supporter of W (when courting the GOP nomination), and in the next (when trying to capture the hearts of America en masse) he’s emphasising his differences with Bush 43.

On the wider issue, I’m unsure about nuclear power. If it really was the super-safe panacea to all our energy needs, why does the nuclear industry spend so much trying to mislead us?

I’m unsure about nuclear power. If it really was the super-safe panacea to all our energy needs, why does the nuclear industry spend so much trying to mislead us?

It seems to me that the nuclear industry and the anti-nuclear industry are more concerned about what furthers their respective agendas than our energy needs.

The problem is that if nothing is done we will lose 30% of today’s electricity generating capacity within 15 years. The difference between the two sides is that the nuclear industry has an answer.

In what sense? If none of the next generation of nuclear plants are going to be up and running before 2023-ish (with a complete replacement of current capacity not being possible before the second half of the 2020s), how is building them going to help the shortfall which will exist “within 15 years”?


Reactions: Twitter, blogs




Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
Liberal Conspiracy is the UK's most popular left-of-centre politics blog. Our aim is to re-vitalise the liberal-left through discussion and action. More about us here.

You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
LATEST COMMENT PIECES
» Why Cameron’s claim of 600,000 jobs created is plainly wrong
» By using age to allocate NHS funding, Lansley rewards Tory voters
» The rise in domestic violence deaths is not an “isolated” problem
» Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right
» The US is now a model for the Eurozone to save itself
» The IMF plan to revive the economy doesn’t go far enough
» The Boris brand is weaker than his friends think
» Nine things you can do to halt Lansley’s destruction of our NHS
» Incidents like this shame us all
» Taxpayers Alliance want to cut taxes, mostly for the rich
» We’re turning The Spirit Level into a film: help us in that goal
» I love the counter-productive attitude of right-wing commentators






14 Comments



33 Comments



10 Comments



24 Comments



22 Comments



69 Comments



44 Comments



25 Comments



13 Comments



30 Comments



LATEST COMMENTS
» Tom (iow) posted on Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right

» BenM posted on Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right

» vimothy posted on The rise in domestic violence deaths is not an "isolated" problem

» Barrie J posted on Why Cameron's claim of 600,000 jobs created is plainly wrong

» steveb posted on By using age to allocate NHS funding, Lansley rewards Tory voters

» BenSix posted on The rise in domestic violence deaths is not an "isolated" problem

» Robin Levett posted on Incidents like this shame us all

» Paul posted on Why Cameron's claim of 600,000 jobs created is plainly wrong

» Planeshift posted on Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right

» vimothy posted on The rise in domestic violence deaths is not an "isolated" problem

» john b posted on By using age to allocate NHS funding, Lansley rewards Tory voters

» john b posted on Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right

» John Ruddy posted on Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right

» Trooper Thompson posted on Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right

» Chaise Guevara posted on The Boris brand is weaker than his friends think