Only a fool thinks that Nukes are dead, or for that matter, wants them dead. Heck, with JUST the nuke waste ( both from nuke plants and from rare earth mining) that we have, if we use transatomic and flibe reactors, we would have enough ENERGY (not just electricity, but full energy) to do 100% of America's Energy for over 100 years.

And note that we got into the mess that we are, because we took coal to over 60% of our electrical usage.

And yet, silicon valley is now funding Transatomic who can burn up 'waste' in a far simpler reactor. This makes them DIRT CHEAP.

It is easy enough to change the law that allows for reactors that can USES waste, instead of creating new waste.

This is NOT nuclear waste. It is only waste, if you use it in the 3rd gens and under reactors that we have.
Instead, we should be building transatomic and flibe reactors at these old sites and using this 'waste' for fuel.
Then when it is REALLY done in another 100 years, we can bury less than 5% of the current volume and have it be safe within 200 years. Heck, we can just inject it back into ground.

The REAL problem is that we are throwing away useful FUEL. None of that waste should be buried. Instead, it should go into new reactors that can make use of it, and then what is left from that, should be buried.

Right now, the greatest detriment is that the far left and far right are INSISTENT on pushing their own form of energy.
The only one being smart is O who wants to push them all, but is too busy dealing with the house neo-cons/tea*

Get rid of the far right and left, and fund new reactors. And yes, it is the far right that is blocking this as well.

lets get mPower from B&W, TransAtomic, and Flibe funded and building new reactors.
In particular, mPower can have their first reactor ready in under 5 years. We should provide them a contract for 10 reactors which are then put in place in CA for water distillation, along with electricity.
Then Transatomic and Flibe will take a while to get ready, but they are IDEAL for putting on-site at the old reactors, and burning up the 'waste' fuel. And it would allow the old reactors to be taken down slowly, with the profits from the new reactors.

By all means do not remove the old 'waste'. Leave it there. Instead, ship a unit on a grain that is designed to reprocess the waste into fuel for transatomic and flibe.

Yes, it is far better to be like Europe where they simply pay the terrorists a ransom, ignoring the fact that it continues to rise and fund the terrorism.

Wow. Such idocy rules the neo-cons/tea* today.
The reason for the COMMUNICATION is to have a single standard in which all cars talk and can tell each other that they are slowing down/speeding up. It does not mean that all will have sensors, etc. It will simply mean that they have the ability to talk.

This has NOTHING to do with Obama. This has to do with a bit of intelligence in the DOT. As to the back-up cameras, they really do NOT offer up much value. VERY FEW accidents involve a driver backing up and hitting cars/kids. So, I understand why the DOT is hedging on that, but wanting a common interface for all cars to communicate. If nothing else, look at what issues have shown up with electrical cars and simply getting a charge.

Do yourself a favor and quit sitting at the kock brothers zipper. .

Uh, no. ISIS has NOT said that they want to live peacefully. THey have openly said that they will kill all non-sunnis in "their" area. In addition, they have spoken against Israel. It is only outside of the middle east where they try to pacify fools.

I have been paying attention. There are many that call for America (and the west) to go back into Iraq with troops. WORST IDEA GOING. This needs to be done by their own troops. However, just because they changed generals and leaders does NOT solve the issues. In particular, Iraqis' need to set their religion and focus on being a nation. That is, that they pull together AS A NATION, and not as tribal warlords, which is exactly where they are at today.

In addition, for O to go back into Iraq, we actually DO need CONgress permission. Why? Because this will be a THIRD war (2 bushes and now O). In fact, we will have no choice but to bomb major parts of Syria, which by definition will require CONgress. And we have already seen that CONgress blocked O from going to Syria in the first place and stopping Assad and ISIS. IMHO, it was the house GOP that created this vacuum that allowed ISIS to expand.

That is exactly the case. Basically, it is hatred for others, with political or religious leaders blaming others and then wanting to wipe them out.

Yes, it works so great to instead pacify these ppl and turn the other cheek. Thank God that Churchill continued Chamberlin's approach of pacifying Hitler all during the 30s. And likewise, when we pacified USSR's Stalin, he settled right down. And the same with Mao and Pol Pot. Likewise, when Europe pacified Mladi, it never lead to horrible results.

It is sad that you had to resort to ad hominum thereby nullifying anything that you say rather than think things through.
Was I frightened? Nope. However, this is a group that wants to be a NATION. This is supposed to be a state. Now, they take a journalists, capture him, torture him for multiple years and then in the end, saws off his head. Frightened? No. However, a nation that would BUTCHER somebody like this, would be universally condemned.

In addition, ISIS has shown that they will BUTCHER anybody that they differ with. It is NOT terrorism that they are practicing. It is genocide. They intend to purge Iraq and Syria of all ppl that are NOT Christian. They blame them for everything. THis is really no different than when Hitler blamed the jews (yeah yeah, godwin and all).

In addition, as I have said elsewhere, I do not believe that our going back with troops will be useful. WHy? Because this has gone on for centuries. But, to want to stop this does not make a person frightened. It makes them sane. And capitulating to them like Britain did to Hitler, will only make them aggressive.

First off, this is in a part of Iraq that the Iraqi gov does NOT control. They probably would have little issues with us taking it out.
Secondly, W has already shown that CONgress can be conned into anything.
Third, while I am in favor of blowing this to bits (along with the recruits), it does ZERO good, unless the iraqi gov and army is ready to defend itself AND if the gov. is ready to change. The iraqi regime that is in control is Shias and they have not been willing to work with the Sunnis. In fact, they did to Sunnis, what SUnnies did to them for many decades. What is needed now, is for their military to take back that region (with the west's help), and then grow up and act like a nation and not a religion.