Similar Posts

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

24 Comments

  1. “You dirty rat!” That Reid is a real class act, isn’t he?

    I guess he now thinks that he’s James Cagney.

  2. Rod,

    A question that you from the US can answer.

    I understand that Reid is setting up a site and account to help Dr Jaczko with legal fees following his tenure at the NRC.

    Is this for real ? In most countries, if legal actions are taken against an individual who served in government in a high ranking position his former employer will provide all the necessary funds so that he can defend himself.

    Is this a scam ?

    1. You can contribute to his legal defense fund here:

      http://www.JaczkoLegalFund.com/

      But a bit of a correction. It’s not for future and forthcoming bills, but past and outstanding bills during the dust up (or “whisper campaign”) that eventually resulted in his resignation. He hired two lawyers to consult on issues as they were developing in the media (understandable given the high profile nature of the charges). As I am sure you are aware, and as has been reported here (I would expect), the NRC’s Inspector General found Jaczko did not overstep his authority, no rules were broken, and he made no unilateral decisions that affected companies holding NRC licenses.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/27/us/investigation-finds-no-violations-by-nuclear-head.html?_r=1

      It appears the debacle is over. His colleagues on the Commission had always asserted their differences with him were not on substantive matters before the Commission, but on personal demeanor and management style. If anybody thinks any different, they certainly aren’t saying so in public. And one would think the NRC’s own Inspector General had the full confidence of the other Commissioners, and received a full accounting of their grievances (and reported fairly and accurately in it’s report). Any suggestion to the contrary implies the Commissioners were not telling the truth before the Congress, that deeper and more substantive legal issues pertain, and that the Inspector General may be covering up matters that have not yet been brought before the public. In which case, the Agency itself needs to be taken to task (and not simply the man).

      1. Jaczko WITHHELD information from the commissioners. No rules were broken?
        Since when is the NRC a dictatorship.
        Magwood: a man of integrity!

  3. Like Magwood, Reid also swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States as a US Senator. Unlike Magwood, Reid violates this oath every day by unilaterally blocking implementation of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the duly enacted law of the land.

    Other than political cowardice, could someone please explain to me why this is not an impeachable act? And let’s not forget his willing co-conspirators, the President and Sec of Energy.

    1. Reminds me of Reid calling for an audit the FED bill for the last 25 years and than one passes the house by an overwhelming majority and he refuses to even let it go to an up or down vote in the senate.

  4. Why is the Democratic leadership of the US Senate content to chose a man who is confused to represent them. Surely there must be a senator who is loyal to the american people who can do a better job.

    1. You have got to be kidding me if you think any of the power players in DC, Republican or Democrat, act any differently than Reid. Unfortunately, lying, cheating and stealing are standard, daily practice for getting what you want.

      I always laugh when Republicans get on their high horse about a Democrat pulling the same crap as Republicans. I’m not excusing the behavior but please don’t take us for fools with the Pollyana routine.

      1. @gerry

        I’m no Pollyanna. I worked in DC for 9 years, long enough to know that bad behavior is not uncommon, but it is also not the norm. There are good people in politics; it is worth the effort to find them and support them rather than condemning the whole enterprise.

        How else to you suggest we rule ourselves if not through political processes?

        I tend to agree that there is not too much difference between the two major parties; I am not a big fan of the two party, winner take all system that we have in place. However, it is unlikely that we can change it by giving up and adopting the cynical attitude that you are displaying.

        1. Thank you, Rod. As a retired civil servant, I take pride that I was never a bureaucrat. A bureaucrat is a person to whom the opinion of the boss is more important than the proper execution of the job. In the Government, as you have indicated often, one’s proper loyalty is to “the People”. In the Regulatory Commission where I worked, there were indeed a few people who were simply bureaucrats. Sad to say, now I think of it, the proportion rose as one looked higher up in Management.

          But having also worked at IBM, which is one of the good companies, I do not believe that the private sector is any less bureaucratic than the public sector.

  5. You guys are way to myopic. There was almost nothing about Reid’s position on nuclear energy that got him elected excepting the issue of Yucca Mountain, which most Nevadians were against. So in that sense Nevada got who they wanted. He’s elected by the state of Nevada not the people as a whole.

    Secondly nuclear energy is not the most pertinent issue even for Reid, there are other issues of more importance from any politicians perspective that he has to deal with as head of the Senate, a position based solely on seniority and nothing else.

    D.

    1. D, are you denying the assertion that political leaders are one of the biggest reasons the nuclear industry has been held back? Sorry if I come accross as a one-issue voter but I believe that cheap, abundant energy is necessary for a thriving economy and the most important factor in lifting nations out of poverty.

      Rod, obviously the only way to remove Reid from his powerful position as senate majority leader would be for republicans to gain the majority. Go on and keep voting “D”, but get used to the words “wind” and “solar”. Not trying to be offensive, you seem like a nice guy.

      1. @Jon

        We had a good shot at getting rid of Reid, but the R’s nominated an easy-to-defeat clown.

        I am not, and never have been, a party-line partisan. In fact, I was a registered Republican until I moved to VA because my home state of Florida did not allow anyone to vote in primaries without a party affiliation.

        Here in VA, there was no requirement to declare a party at registration and we have open primaries.

        If you look at the records, however, you will find that there are a lot of hypocritical R’s who like wind and solar as long as the dollars flow back to their political bases.

      2. Sorry folks, the demise of the nuclear industry in Britain began when Reagan’s friend Margaret Thatcher sold off the CEGB, which belonged to the people, to private industry. British Energy, which seems to have most of the surviving reactors, is now part of a French company, that was privatized much more recently.

        I am trying to persuade my D friends that wind and solar are a delusion. The folk who fund the R lot know it. Chevron even has videos that PBS lets them show in return for their financial support, telling us of their enthusiasm for the Unreliables. That proves they see them as no threat.

    2. … there are other issues of more importance from any politicians perspective that he has to deal with as head of the Senate, a position based solely on seniority and nothing else.

      David – I think that you’re confusing Reid’s position with the president pro tempore, which since circa 1949 has been held by the most senior member of the majority party by tradition.

      When it comes to seniority, Reid is outranked by nine of his fellow Democratic Senators, almost one-sixth of the Democratic Caucus. So clearly, more than seniority is used to determine the Majority Leader.

      1. @Brian Mays

        Thanks for that info. I thought there was an election for Majority Leader, but I had not yet taken the time to do a quick search.

        The only reasonably understandable explanation for Reid’s power is his role as a power broker who uses techniques familiar in Chicago, Sicily, Las Vegas and certain areas of NYC. Someone once told me that “what goes in Las Vegas” often gets recorded for future use as a tool of power and there are way too many members of the 100 who enjoy engaging in compromising activities.

        1. Rod – There is an election.

          There is also an election for president pro tempore, by the way, but the convention for the past six decades years has been to vote for the Senator with the most seniority. The current president pro tempore has been in the Senate since before Kennedy was shot.

        2. You can thank Senators Bill Frist (R-TN) and John Thune (R-SD) for the election of Harry Reid as the Minority Leader of the Senate in 2005 (and election as Majority Leader in 2009). Tom Daschle (D-SD) was the choice of the party for Majority and Minority leader from 2001 – 2005. He was favored to continue in this role because of his expertise in Health Care Reform (and early supporting roles in the Obama and Clinton campaigns). Daschle lost his seat at the end of 2004 to John Thune by a mere 4,508 votes. It was a closely contested race with current Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist campaigning for Thune in South Dakota (thus nationalizing the election). Leading in the polls in all but the final weeks, it was the only time since 1952 that a Leader of the Senate had lost a bid for re-election.

        3. There should be some term limits in the Senate, in my opinion.

          And the theory that a significant part of Reid’s power is derived from the fact he could have so many eyes and ears to know what happens in Vegas is quite interesting and could well be true.

  6. It’s not that Harry Reid is confused by the difference, but as a typical politician (read “dirt-bag”) in his mind “loyalty” IS “integrity” rather than truth, justice, ethical behavior, and the rule of law. Are there any politicians with integrity?

    1. @Mike Repucci

      Yes. There are political leaders who have integrity. I do not agree that Reid’s behavior and attitude are typical of the entire breed. He is from a certain portion of the political spectrum – that group that believes that power is more important than truth and that loyalty is more valuable that honest, questioning attitude service to a higher calling.

      It is self defeating in a democracy to tar all political leaders with the same brush. We have to find and support the ones that truly want to lead us in a better direction.

      (One of my college classmate got spit out of DC in less than 2 yrs as a congressman. Another is doing a better job of learning the ropes, not to get along, but to survive and make a positive difference.)

  7. It was a long time ago, but to my mind there are few politicians more honest and devoted to the People’s welfare than Aneurin Bevan, the Welshman who was Minister of Health in the postwar Labour government. He was a genuine socialist.

    Also, although I have not made enough study of it, I note that in Keynes’s “Consequences of the Peace” -of Versailles, he has good words to say for Woodrow Wilson, who saw that the swingeing penalties to be imposed upon Germany were unjust and unlikely to be fulfilled. Wilson was outflanked by Lloyd George, Clemenceau, and Orlando.
    Wikipedia says:
    “The Treaty of Versailles has been criticized as a vindictive agreement that violated the spirit of Wilson’s Fourteen Points. The harsh terms hurt the German economy in the 1920s and contributed to the popularity of leaders such as Hitler who argued for the restoration of German honor through remilitarization.”

    I fancy that Obama is honest, but too ready as a Christian to forgive people who have not repented.

Comments are closed.