Replies

I think all these people bashing Hodges should answer two questions. First, if he was a conservative republican would they still be upset with him? And second, would they welcome those spent fuel rods to their own neighborhood? As for dixy lee ray, I grew up quite close to her, and knew her family a bit. She was a Zoologist, whose main scientific research was the study of marine worms. She was a very colorfull gov, but mangaged to alienate just about everybody with her style. As for her book, it is woefully outdated. It is not footnoted, has no scientific research to back up her claims that acid rain does no harm, that pesticides are not harmful, and that radiation is actually good for you. It was mostly written by Lou Guzzo, a local journalist, and another character, as we say, but somone whose knowledge of science could be comfortably held in a thimble.

Dixie Lee Ray's credentials are every bit as good as the sources Green Peace, the Sierra Club, etc use. As for the Govenor, I would not care if he claimed he was conservative or liberal, political grandstanding is still grandstanding. Calling out State Troopers in this instance is a ridiculous ploy. As for the plutonium, I would have no problem with the stuff being transported to a nuclear recycling place that I lived next door to. In fact, I would gladly live within spitting distance of a nuclear power plant. However, I certainly would not say the same for a coal or fuel oil power plant.

I think all these people bashing Hodges should answer two questions. First, if he was a conservative republican would they still be upset with him? And second, would they welcome those spent fuel rods to their own neighborhood?

I am no fan of Hodges, but the guy is attempting to make the Federal government stand to account for its behavior within his State. I don't know what his personal reasons for it are, nor do I care, but as a State action I am glad to see it.

He is asking for the timetable, he is asking for the government to follow its own rules via Environmental Impact statements. Both are good things. The Federal government does not want to do these things and thinks it can do whatever it wants in any of its constituent members with impunity. It believes it can ignore the desires of the people of South Carolina because the rest of us only care about our rights as semi-sovereign States when it is WE who are targeted as a dump site, or a Federal reserve.

It is a good thing for the Federal government to be reminded that it is indeed a 'federal' government and that its constituent sovereignties are not mere provinces. Its a good thing that it be reminded from time to time that it is not the only judge of the extent of its own powers. A little modern Virginia and Kentucky Resolution or South Carolina/Nevada Resolution might not be a bad thing.

Even though the rest of us are not directly involved in the Plutonium issue and may not agree with the Plutonium issue or care about it. We are still concerned with our State's ability to defend itself against a tyranny of the majority within our federal republic. For this reason it might be worthwhile for the rest of our States, particularly small rural ones, to give political backing for the people of South Carolina's freedom to have their say in what goes on within their borders.

Otherwise, the Nevadas and South Carolinas will continue to have their roads closed, their irrigation channels closed, their land seized by corrupt administrations for park lands, or designated as poison dumps by larger States who need one.

First, if he was a conservative republican would they still be upset with him?

LOL!!!

Conservative Republicans put the interests of the nation ahead of their own political ambitions.

Thats the very difference between the Jackass party and the GOP.

You'll see what I mean in November 2002.