And, I don’t like nuclear power either

Last week, without much media attention, President Obama, this time via Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar, put the nix on certain uranium mining on federal lands in northern Arizona.  Sadly, this too, is political pandering, as, apparently nuclear power is as toxic to the left as is coal and oil power.

And, per this fiat, the land in question is off limits to uranium mining for the next 20 years.

Let’s look at the process.  The Bureau of Land Management is in charge of analyzing whether uranium mining is good or bad for the environment in this area. It found that the,

mining would have ‘no direct impacts’ on protected wilderness areas.  The impact on drinking-water supply in the Colorado River was also found to be ‘negligible’.

Another plus…

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that the northern Arizona parcels [withdrawn from mining] contain uranium that, mined to capacity, would generate enough electricity to power Los Angeles for 154 years.


[t]he land bureau’s impact statement estimates that [the administration’s decision] will cost the region $160 million in average annual economic output…[emphasis supplied]

Northern Arizona currently has an unemployment rate of 17%.  But, then again, Arizona in general, and northern Arizona in particular, is “red”.  Let me suggest an ugly Presidential thought. 

I’m not going to win Arizona anyway, so, it makes more sense to appease the left and perhaps pick up some votes.

Any other suggestions?


23 replies
  1. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    The only suggestion is to evict this presidential poseur from office and get someone in that cares about the country more than his own reelection.

  2. Eric
    Eric says:

    Barack Obama is a coward. ?He’s more concerned about his political career then he is the national interests of our country. ?I believe he’ll be remembered in history as the worst president this country has ever had!

  3. Lynn
    Lynn says:

    SOS, Your suggestion is RIGHT on! I have no other to offer. BTW, President Obama has unleashed his first ad on TV. It is months before any other incumbent President. Could this mean he is running scared???? Ok let’s not get too confident, he still has time to buy votes and resurrect dead people to vote.

  4. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    Currently there is 70 year supply of uranium for all nuclear needs worldwide. This does not include the highly enriched uranium in nuclear weapons, which can be blended into the fuel that is needed for nuclear power generation.

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      I suppose that number is for *current* needs, no?? It doesn’t matter if they won’t clear the building of new nukes and are trying to decommission the old ones.

  5. ricbee
    ricbee says:

    ?The greatest CLEAN source of energy & new mining would add some money to the Federal coffers is refused. The “Green” lobby is even more powerful than I can imagine. Does Soros back them too?

  6. Jeff S
    Jeff S says:

    I don’t believe there has been?a president in history that put his own interests ahead of what’s good for the country.? I don’t what Wilson was like but he campaigned in 1916 to keep America out of Europe’s war and one month after his second inauguration we were in.? FDR was a dictator in the making, but this guy is so self?centered and with?no?courage to stand up for what is good for the?nation.?

  7. Murphy
    Murphy says:

    Barrack Husein Obama will what ever he needs to support the current position of the moment. Remeber back in 2010 when nuclear? power was green ;
    Speaking in Lanham, Maryland, President Obama outlined a simple objective: Jump start nuclear power plant construction in the U.S., which hasn?t built a new plant in three decades.
    Obama touted the Maryland construction project as a way to create jobs and deliver more efficient power. Obama also noted that the U.S. government will continue to offer loan guarantees to build more nuclear facilities.
    or this
    Obama’s support for nuclear power – YouTube

  8. JBS
    JBS says:

    Meanwhile, in the vicinity of Beltway Bizzarao Land:
    NEWS FLASH: The DOE ruled today that the proposed Poop to Power Project would violate the Clean Air Act and numerous other statues and treaties. Energy Czar Sala-zar said the burning of animal dung would release unregulated carbon into the atmosphere.
    Later this week, a decree is expected from the White House calling for new regulations on burning of wood for domestic heating needs. The White House is also expected to call for an new methane emissions fee for all dairy cows and other livestock. The Regime is considering a fee for all citizens emitting carbon dioxide, a dangerous greenhouse gas.
    Democrats and Environmentalists hailed the initiatives as good for the planet.
    (Silly, I know,? but what is next?)

  9. Murphy
    Murphy says:

    OK now I know how that false xnone stuff gets there. Bad link insertions.?
    Just go to YouTube and search “Obama’s support for nuclear power”

      • NH-Jim
        NH-Jim says:

        [ JBS et al: FYI: instead of inserting a long string of a URL link directly in your comment text, highlight a keyword (like this), thus, enabling the link chain at the top of the comment box, click on it and paste the link and enter the info in the “Insert-Edit Link” pop-up window.]? Hope this helps.

  10. Plainvillian
    Plainvillian says:

    America became great and powerful because we exploited vast physical and intellectual energy resources.? The results of recent reductions in utilization of both is evident in the decline overseen by Barack Obama.?

  11. JBS
    JBS says:

    It would seem better to allow some jobs to be created than appease widely dispersed environmentalists. Or, are there that many “greenies”? (He could carry one state in the election.)
    Obama needs some positive press. People in Arizona need jobs, why not get some good press with the working people of that state? He has lectured us as to how he is in favor of nuclear power. Has something changed? Is the environmental movement that strong?
    Widely dispersed votes as opposed to concentrated votes in one state? Or, does he figure that he has already lost Arizona anyway?

  12. stinkfoot
    stinkfoot says:

    It’s hardly a secret to me that the administration couldn’t possibly be less concerned about unemployment beyond exploiting the issue in whatever way they can think of… like leveraging the dependence on hand-outs to ensure votes lest those evil republicans take food out of the mouths of children by cutting programs.? We need jobs regardless of how we vote.? Perhaps the administration should rethink its tactics:? keep those red state voters busy at new jobs so they don’t have time to vote out the General Secre… err I mean the President.? They could help me find work so I shut up!

  13. ricbee
    ricbee says:

    The Unemployed will vote for Obambo because they want him to keep extending benefits-I really like the free money.

Comments are closed.