I Kind Of Have To Wonder, Part Two - Hopefully Without The Blog Editor Randomly Moving The Cursor This Time

Right.

Before my original post was hijacked by random cursor movement and posting-without-warning-for-no-discernible-reason, I had started with:

...You thought I was going to leave you hanging with Part One, didn't you?

But I'm not.

See, I have other great questions, things I have to ask, things that make me go "what the hell?" and other such gems.

And I feel compelled to share.

So.

Let's start off with softball questions, shall we?

If one of the scientists at the heart of the recent "climategate" scandal, Professor Philip Jones, admits there has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995, why do so many people still believe in it?

If the states which HAVE universal healthcare are all going broke - like, say, Massachusetts and Tennessee - why the hell does anyone want it for the whole country?

If nuclear reactors were a bad idea for years, why are they suddenly ok now?

If people have been killed in "sudden acceleration incidents" in Toyotas for years, why are they only suing now that there are safety recalls?

I have speculation about each of these, so allow me to expand.

The global warming and nuclear reactor things are connected. The Obama Administration has been slammed from both sides about global warming, from the right because - as they rightly point out - it is looking more and more like the scientific evidence to support the theory is basically a gigantic surplus of bovine-origin organic fertilizer, and from the left because - as they rightly point out - he hasn't really done anything about it.

At his best, Obama has tagged enormous taxpayer funds to pay scientists to come up with more inconclusive data; nothing substantive whatsoever.

Which means that if he wants to retain the goodwill of his core constituency, he must be seen to be doing something with actual effect.

Going nuclear is - regardless of the wackos - clearly the way to go about this. Nuclear plants produce way more power than coal, oil, water, wind, or solar; they don't run the risk of eliminating precious, non-renewable natural resources forever; and...

...Whoa, there, is he talking about PLUTONIUM plants?

Why yes he is.

Which makes this a stupid gesture, not just an ill-advised and unpopular one. See, plutonium nuclear piles produce toxic waste, which cannot be safely contained in any facility we have yet devised; it is hugely poisonous, and stays that way for long enough that "the foreseeable future" is a reasonable description.

They can melt down.

They can vent heat - especially hot water - into the environment, which in the case of hot water leaks, can decimate the fish populations in rivers.

Plutonium plants baaaaaad. In that regard, the greenies are right.

Where they're wrong is in assuming that plutonium is the only available nuclear fuel, and that nuclear technology is time-locked in the 1950's.

Both are wrong.

See, these days, newer designs, like the South African pebble-bed modular reactor, are meltdown-proof; they never reach a critical mass in a single element, instead using helium gas to conduct the neutrons between the separated fuel elements. The bottom of the reaction chamber is sealed by a high-temperature wax plug; if the pile ever reaches a temperature in the danger zone, the wax melts, releasing the helium gas - which can transmit but not retain radiation - and the reaction stops instantly for lack of fuel.

They are perfectly safe.

Since they don't use water to keep the reaction cool, there's no danger of hot water venting, either.

And best of all - they don't run on plutonium. They run on thorium, which is far, far more plentiful than plutonium or uranium, and has the added benefit of not only leaving no toxic waste itself, but in fact rendering the wastes of uranium and plutonium reactors inert and safe if they are introduced into the reactor vessel.

In other words, they can not only provide clean power, they can also clean up all the messes from the older technology.

The greenies still won't be happy, but that's ok, because most of them can't read, and were going to protest your power plant no matter what it is, as witness the fact that they've been bitching about the wind farms, too, because they kill birds.

So, Obama has committed - again - billions of taxpayer dollars to the wrong idea, thus proving - again - that the government ought to stay out of these kinds of things, because they just plain don't know what the hell they're talking about.

So. On to healthcare.

Tennessee is suffering right now because their "universal" healthcare program nearly bankrupted the state; they are now trying desperately to cut as many people off the rolls of "eligible" people as possible.

If it's universal, it's for everybody, right?

The way to achieve that is to make it affordable, not to make the government pay for it. Having government-paid healthcare simply means that everyone will go to the doctor and incur huge expenses for the tiniest of ailments, instead of staying home and taking theraflu like they're supposed to; the mounting charges CANNOT HELP but bankrupt the country.

And as for Toyota... I want to insert two notes here, one directly related to this latest rash of lawsuits, and the other referring back to my article the other day.

After the bad parts from the Dana Holding Corporation were listed, Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler all came forward to announce that their vehicles would be unaffected by the bad parts.

Why is this interesting? Because all three of them manufacture car models that use those same parts, from those same lines.

Nearly miraculous, then, that of four companies that all use the same parts from the same manufacturer, ALL - ONE HUNDRED PERCENT - of the bad parts, went to a single customer: Toyota.

More miraculous yet: the other three manufacturers which use those same parts...

...Knew they had nothing to worry about.

Anyone think the fix is in, hmmm?

And for the lawsuits...

Back in the 80's, the Audi Corporation went through a similar rash of "sudden-acceleration" incidents, followed by a rash of lawsuits.

The NTSB investigated. Exhaustively. For years.

Their conclusion?

Drivers were letting themselves get distracted and hitting the wrong goddamn pedal.

I wish I was kidding; the direct quote is "pedal misapplication."

This, by the way, was documented in one of Ralph Nader's books.

You want to know what makes this different from the situation with Toyota?

Some of the cases being brought into litigation are coming from as far back as 1988.

22 years ago.

Why?

Because lawyers, like sharks, can smell blood in the water.