<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Bush accentuates nuke positives, inspires malefactors everywhere]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by jdhlax</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/peters1/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2005 08:27:42 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/peters1/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>The Joker And Saruman ...</strong></p><p>are from a comic and a novel, respectively. &nbsp;They are only secondarily cinematic.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>The Joker And Saruman ...</strong></p><p>are from a comic and a novel, respectively. &nbsp;They are only secondarily cinematic.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by yorkvillezendo</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/peters1/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2005 04:07:45 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/peters1/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>In defense of George...</strong></p><p>I never thought I'd write, say, or think those words, but there they are. </p><p>
George (of whom I am definitely NOT a fan) uses the words, "safe" and "clean" for the same reasons that any politician would. "Nuclear power," as a phrase, makes many many Americans shudder. Everything we've used as a large-scale energy source has had some terrible downsides. But most Americans don't wince in agony if you say the word, "coal" or "oil;" the general public nods and thinks, "That's how we do energy... there's some downsides, but that's how we do it..." These sources are generally accepted as the norm and unavoidable (although hopefully that's changing...). </p><p>
Nuclear power, though, is viewed in a Cold War frame of mind about the word "nuclear."</p><p>
I'm &nbsp;not surprised to hear any political power feel the need to specify that, when they're talking about energy options, they're talking about the SAFE and CLEAN kind of nuclear power. Not the three-eyed fish, end of the world kind. &nbsp; &nbsp;</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>In defense of George...</strong></p><p>I never thought I'd write, say, or think those words, but there they are. </p><p>
George (of whom I am definitely NOT a fan) uses the words, "safe" and "clean" for the same reasons that any politician would. "Nuclear power," as a phrase, makes many many Americans shudder. Everything we've used as a large-scale energy source has had some terrible downsides. But most Americans don't wince in agony if you say the word, "coal" or "oil;" the general public nods and thinks, "That's how we do energy... there's some downsides, but that's how we do it..." These sources are generally accepted as the norm and unavoidable (although hopefully that's changing...). </p><p>
Nuclear power, though, is viewed in a Cold War frame of mind about the word "nuclear."</p><p>
I'm &nbsp;not surprised to hear any political power feel the need to specify that, when they're talking about energy options, they're talking about the SAFE and CLEAN kind of nuclear power. Not the three-eyed fish, end of the world kind. &nbsp; &nbsp;</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>