--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For example, if Kerry were to argue that starting a > program to develop > nuclear plants that would be able to be run cheaper > with more efficient > regulation is a practical way to reduce greenhouse > gases, then he would be > reasonable...even if the fruit of the labor wouldn't > start to be seen for > 10 years, and the real benefit would only be > realized after 20.
Well heck, Dan, all we would have to do that is to build the damn things. It's not exactly a matter of uncertainty. We already know how to build pebble beds, after all. > > The column you cited gives strong arguments that > this is not the scenario > we were in, but I thought I'd comment on that one > point. It would have > been enough to show that, under Bush, we'd have to > wait another 4 years to > get started. > > Dan M. Sure. As I said, I'm in favor of stem cell research. I just think that it's unacceptable to claim - as Edwards really was claiming - that somehow Kerry's election makes this certain. He actually said _when_, so it seems to me he was actually saying it would happen soon, and I just found it repugnant in a way that really very few political statements by major figures have ever been - I think the last one that bothered me this much was Dean suggesting that President Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened. ===== Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Freedom is not free" http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
