Dogged by 'bully' charge, U.S. nuclear chief Jaczko resigns

Well, well, well! If he has been nasty to everyone around him, should we be surprised??

Wait a moment! He was a Democrat?? Ha! I smell a Republican smear campaign!!

Peter A. Bradford, in defense of Chairman Jaczko, according to NY Times (via Wikipedia)

Peter A. Bradford, who was a commission member from 1977 to 1982, has defended Jaczko. Bradford said it was not unusual for the commissioners to disagree strongly, and added that he did not believe that "the chairman is somehow raging around the agency and intimidating the staff". He also argued that, although the letter came from two Republicans and two Democrats, it was necessarily bi-partisan in the context of nuclear politics. He claimed that "In Washington, you’ve got a situation where the ‘nuclear party’ transcends the Republican and Democratic party," adding that "You’ve got four members of the nuclear party writing a letter about the chairman, who’s never been a member of the nuclear party.

@Reckless,

I do not know how reliable thedailybeast.com is as a news source, but they ran a list ranking the vulnerabilities of all of the US's 65 nuclear power plants. You can find it at: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/03/16/nuclear-power-plants-ranking-americas-most-vulnerable.html

Regardless of whether their ranking is correct or not, the basic facts of licensing year, output etc seems to be correct.

This guy was the poster child for more regulation, more government interference in the free market, and more waste of taxpayer money. We are better off now.

Yaklut, The free market hasn't done a very good job of self regulating nuclear safety issues this far. No reason to believe that they will start now.

This guy was the poster child for more regulation, more government interference in the free market, and more waste of taxpayer money.

Spot-on, Yaklut! Seeing as it was a TEPCO reactor which caused the Fukushima nuclear disaster, I do not see why the government has stepped in with taxpayer money. TEPCO should bear full responsibility, and if it is unable to, well - too bad.

Similarly, banks like Goldman Sachs should not be regulated - nor should their deposits be federally insured. Too big to fail? - not anymore!

Nothing is better than blind faith in the invisible hand.

I figure that Laguna's comments were all "tongue-in-cheek". To take him seriously would mean a company like TEPCO could declare bankruptcy and turn off their electricity - leaving millions without power. If anybody dies because of the loss of power, who are you going to sue? The company is bankrupt!