This tree hugger is willing to consider nuclear power in the broad mix of energy sources. However, nuclear zealots need to understand that hearing Duhbya call the nuclear industry “over-regulated” is worrisome — how does he think it came to be so safe? It is also strange to hear the anti-environment president speak of the environmental benefits of nuclear power, not to mention to hear the anti-science president speak of global warming as a fact — he should tell Republican Senator James Inhofe (he called Global Warming one of the greatest hoaxes ever — even a greater hoax than he pulls as a senator)!

Finally, even dumping truckloads of money on the industry in tax breaks and public funding doesn’t seem to be getting it moving — you can’t just blame the environmentalists.

So, I’ll move towards nukes, but I won’t trust Bush and Cheney as advocates. mjh

Bush Calls For New Nuclear Plants By Peter Baker and Steven Mufson, Washington Post Staff Writers

President Bush promoted nuclear power Wednesday as part of his answer to energy and environmental problems as more companies consider taking advantage of government incentives to build the nation’s first new nuclear plant in decades.

In the shadow of twin giant cooling towers, Bush said that his plan to expand nuclear power would curb emissions contributing to global warming and would provide an “abundant and plentiful” alternative to limited energy sources. Bush called the nuclear sector an “overregulated industry” and pledged to work to make it more feasible to build reactors.

“Nuclear power helps us protect the environment. And nuclear power is safe,” he said to loud applause from workers at the Limerick Generating Station, about 40 miles from Philadelphia. He added: “For the sake of economic security and national security, the United States must aggressively move forward with construction of nuclear power plants. Other nations are.” …

Exelon President John W. Rowe, who hosted Bush on Wednesday, said at the company’s annual shareholders meeting last year that “Exelon has no intention of building a nuclear plant until there is a solution to the spent-fuel problem. . . . Most companies share our view.” [mjh: I thought Germany or France were cutting back — if so, why?]
—–

See also mjh’s blog — Going Nuclear
A Green Makes the Case
By Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace

Gonzales’s Rationale on Phone Data Disputed By Walter Pincus, Washington Post Staff Writer

Civil liberties lawyers yesterday questioned the legal basis that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales used Tuesday to justify the constitutionality of collecting domestic telephone records as part of the Bush administration’s anti-terrorism program.

While not confirming a USA Today report May 11 saying the National Security Agency has been collecting phone-call records of millions of Americans, Gonzales said such an activity would not require a court warrant under a 1979 Supreme Court ruling because it involved obtaining “business records.” Under the 27-year-old court ruling in Smith v. Maryland , “those kinds of records do not enjoy Fourth Amendment protection,” Gonzales said. “There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in those kinds of records,” he added.

Noting that Congress in 1986 passed the Electronic Communications Privacy Act in reaction to the Smith v. Maryland ruling to require court orders before turning over call records to the government, G. Jack King Jr. of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers said Gonzales is correct in saying “the administration isn’t violating the Fourth Amendment” but “he’s failing to acknowledge that it is breaking” the 1986 law, which requires a court order “with a few very narrow exceptions.”

Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, said, “The government is bound by the laws Congress passes, and when the attorney general doesn’t even mention them, it is symptomatic of the government’s profound disrespect for the rule of law.”

Editor at Conservative Magazine To Be Top Policy Adviser to Bush By Michael A. Fletcher, Washington Post Staff Writer

President Bush appointed a longtime scholar at the American Enterprise Institute yesterday to be his top domestic policy adviser, a post that has been vacant since February, when Claude A. Allen stepped down after being charged with stealing more than $5,000 in a phony refund scheme.

Karl Zinsmeister, who has worked the past 12 years as editor in chief of the American Enterprise magazine, is slated to assume his White House post June 12. At the institute, he focused on examining cultural issues, as well as social and economic trends. His columns for the magazine included pieces praising Wal-Mart’s efficiency and extolling the role of religion in forming the glue that bonds communities.

Zinsmeister, 47, also has written three books defending the war in Iraq, a nation he has visited four times as an embedded journalist. … [H]e argues, [good news in Iraq] is often overlooked by much of the media.

“What the establishment media covering Iraq have utterly failed to make clear today is this central reality: With the exception of periodic flare-ups in isolated corners, our struggle in Iraq as warfare is over,” Zinsmeister wrote in his column last June. [mjh: Mission Accomplished!]

“Karl has broad policy experience and a keen insight into many of the issues that face America’s families and entrepreneurs, including race, poverty, welfare, and education,” Bush said in a statement. “He is an innovative thinker and an accomplished executive. He will lead my domestic policy team with energy and a fresh perspective.” …

As Bush’s assistant for domestic policy, Zinsmeister will be called on to brief the president on a wide spectrum of issues, including education, housing, space exploration and poverty. [mjh: “space exploration”? Send Bush to Mars!]