77% of all electricity generated in Europe is from Nuclear power plants. Why is it we don’t do the same here? When talking about atmospheric pollution I think nuclear is a “greener” source of power then burning anything. At least with nuclear waste one can presumably keep it in a barrel and pay someone to watch for a long time, once co2 or mercury is released into the environment it is very hard to remove. http://www.hamline.edu/personal/amurphy01/es110/eswebsite/ProjectsSpring03/ebarker/Minamata%20Web%20Page.htm

'Everybody's jumping on the green bandwagon,' says Pat Doyle, 54, These bulbs are far from environmentally friendly or “so called green” and is another example of how foolish laws attempting to “manage” people’s behavior create more long term problems. Each bulb contains about 5 milligrams (mg) of mercury, a toxic heavy metal that can interfere with the development of children and unborn fetuses and may cause a wide range of health issues in adults, including brain, kidney and liver damage. Large commercial users of fluorescent lights are required to recycle, proper disposal of CFLs, but not home owners. Huh?????? Let’s just assume that 7 million people in NYC dispose of one bulb a month, that is 35 Kilos of Mercury introduced into the environment each month in NYC alone. If I have my numbers wrong I am sorry, it has been awhile since I have done those types of calculations, regardless the amount of Mercury is not insignificant. I personally would rather live with the consequences of the incandescent lamp for a while longer.

The U.S. Supreme Court, has recognized the importance of ensuring that average citizens have the right to use false names and publish anonymously. In its 1960 decision in Talley v. California, the Supreme Court ruled that a law forbidding individuals from distributing handbills without identifying their identity unconstitutionally infringed on the First Amendment's guarantee to free speech. The Court declared: Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind. Persecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all. . . . Before the Revolutionary War colonial patriots frequently had to conceal their authorship or distribution of literature that easily could have brought down on them prosecutions by English-controlled courts . . .. It is plain that anonymity has sometimes been assumed for the most constructive purposes. Just because someone writes on an electronic medium does not preclude to free speach.