Politifact: Sanders "Actively Ushered" Bill to Dump Nuclear Waste Near Poor West Texas Town

[RandySF]

In 1998, the House of Representatives approved a compact struck between Texas, Vermont and Maine that would allow Vermont and Maine to dump low-level nuclear waste at a designated site in Sierra Blanca, Texas. Sanders, at the time representing Vermont in the House, cosponsored the bill and actively ushered it through Congress.

Located about 16 miles from the Mexican border, Sierra Blanca’s population is predominantly of Mexican ancestry. At the time, the community was about two-thirds Latino, and its residents had an average income of $8,000, according to the an article in the Bangor Daily News.

The low-level nuclear waste would include "items such as scrap metal and worker’s gloves… as well as medical gloves used in radiation treatments at hospitals," according to the Bangor Daily News. Clinton, then the First Lady, did not have a vote on the matter.


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/sep/22/fact-checking-viral-graphic-critical-bernie-sander/

[MADem]

1. Yes--it was a disgraceful chapter in his career, one that even VT activists didn't agree with.

The Texas Observer had a very good article on it.

The Vermont Chapter of the Sierra Club had arranged for this hearing, held in the stately granite building that looks like a small prototype of the Texas Capitol. Apparently, some Vermonters are waking from their long utopian dream of environmental purity and moral rectitude, and they're having second thoughts about shipping their nuke waste to Texas. The committee chairman, state Senator Elizabeth Ready, acknowledged, "Some of us don't feel very good about it."
So badly do environmentally sensitive Vermonters feel that about forty of them listened for two hours while Oliver, Flanders, and Curry delivered their message in no uncertain terms: Sierra Blanca, which was chosen for purely political reasons, is environmentally no better suited than Vermont for burying nuclear waste. And after the West Texans got through lambasting federal, state, and local politicians from all three Compact states, as well as the nuclear utility lobbyists whom they hold responsible for arranging things this way, several of the Vermonters in the audience stood up and apologized.
During the following week, the West Texans joined an anti-nuclear weapons march from Montpelier to Springfield, sponsored by the Unitarian Church and the American Friends Service Committee. The marchers from Vermont were careful to restrain the West Texans from protesting aloud on any platform occupied by Bernie Sanders, Vermont's independent Socialist candidate for re-election to the U.S. House. Sanders' campaign committee had warned march planners that Bernie wouldn't show if the West Texans were on the platform.
Nonetheless, spirits were high on Thursday morning, August 20, as the West Texans, along with about twenty Vermonters, trudged up and down the lush green hills on their way to a Springfield rally, where Bernie was scheduled to speak. They'd driven two thousand miles and walked nearly a hundred, and they'd had a wonderful time, meeting Vermonters, talking with them about the Sierra Blanca dump, and changing quite a few minds. Gary Oliver explained some of the group dynamics this way: "There'd been all this tension on the walk, because it's been planned since February, and we just got invited two months ago. But the issues (nuclear power and nuclear weapons) are two warts on the same hog."
Before the rally Sanders invited the three West Texans to meet with him privately, and the Texans eagerly agreed. The meeting was no longer than Sanders' attention span - when it comes to Sierra Blanca. "He didn't listen," Curry said. "He had his mind made up." Afterward, Bernie was giving his pro forma campaign speech, never mentioning nuclear power or nuclear waste. Sierra Blanca activist Bill Addington, who'd arrived just that morning to join the march, along with his neighbor María Méndez, had had enough, and he yelled from the crowd, "What about my home, Bernie? What about Sierra Blanca?"

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?id=144212115605882&story_fbid=1181624378531312

[BainsBane]

8. The person who posted that article had her thread hidden

And the OP contained only a link to the article, no comments. They've also hidden quotes from Sanders himself. It's interesting how offensive they seem to find the actions and words of a candidate they support.

[bravenak]

13. I find that very interesting

Facts are hidden. Constantly.

[JaneyVee]

22. But they claim they want to "discuss the issues".

[bravenak]

25. Only issues bad for Hillary.

[SusanaMontana41]

59. Such as?

Which issues are bad for Hillary?

[bravenak]

62. Republican lies

[riversedge]

85. Which are posted and Re-posted week after week

on DU. Yet none are hidden and receive hundreds of Recs over time. Sick.

[restorefreedom]

93. which one would you like?

other than her prochoice stance, its all bad imo

war
banking
money in politics
war
minimum wage
death penalty
trade (she will revert)
war


etc etc.

[MADem]

119. Use your DU search feature to find articles posted here from

rightwing rags like NEWSMAX, The Daily Caller, BREITBART, REDSTATE, etc., and those will probably give you those "issues."

The GOP are using liberals to carry their water. Not sure why liberals would be so obtuse as to do their bidding, but they do--and we've got proof right here on DU.

It's a crying shame.

[randys1]

154. It is a real problem and some of the ones who arent paid to be here by Karl Rove are

just so selfish that all they can see is others might interfere with their pocketbook issues.

That is all they see.

I think anyone who links to these sites should be insta banned, permanently, unless said link is to make a point about the lack of credibility for the site.

[MADem]

170. I agree. When I see those sites without any "grain of salt"

reference, it causes me to think ill of the person posting the link, to be honest about it. If the person appears to be a political neophyte, I can be forgiving, but if it's someone who knows their way around the scene, I start smelling ye olde rodent!

[Scootaloo]

177. Darn, you got us

There are no legitimate criticisms of Clinton from the left. At all. Everything - all of it is just stuff we've been spoon-fed by Rove.

[MADem]

179. If the "legitimate criticisms of Clinton from the left" are indeed,

from the left, then there's no need for these "legitimate leftists" to use--never mind be reading, and passing along--garbage generated by shit sources like Newsmax and Brietbart.

The expression "Consider the source" has currency for a reason, Scootaloo.

And that's just the darn truth!

[Scootaloo]

181. I see claims, but no support for them

Who's posting breitbart, now?

[MADem]

183. You can do your own homework, if you've a mind.

I am not going to get accused of 'call outs,' even though they're not 'against the rules' here anymore.

Hell, as we've seen in reference to this thread, a DUer got a hide for doing nothing more than posting the exact headline of an article by the TX Observer... one of the most unfair hides I have seen at DU, ever.

[Scootaloo]

192. Why would I do work to support your claim? Support it yourself, if you can

[MADem]

194. I'm not going to be sucked into an alert scenario, thanks anyway. nt

[MADem]

180. Hmmm--odd, double post! I deleted this one. NT

[BlueCaliDem]

134. Well, outside of their group, nobody believes that.

Just writing post after post after post proclaiming they only want to discuss the issues while they actively hide threads and posts when anyone tries to discuss the issues, well,...the idiom, "actions speak louder than words" comes to mind.

[mwrguy]

18. the Berniebro bullyboys are out in force tonight

Hiding posts and banning people from subforums.

[Cali_Democrat]

24. I can picture them right now...

[Scootaloo]

176. That's how you see Sanders supporters? That's funny

[MADem]

122. It's a shame that this place has sunk so low.

It's one thing to hide a post if someone gets personally insulting, but to hide a post SOLELY because you don't like what an article in an established paper says?

That's just not right. It's chickenshit, frankly.

[MADem]

32. I saw that--disgraceful. There's no excuse for that kind of "partisan censorship."

Particularly when some sketchy, falsehood-filled threads trashing Clinton are allowed to stand.

It is SHAMEFUL what that jury did, and the alerter should be ashamed, too. I hope Skinner takes note.

[JimDandy]

38. I noticed you left off the title to the article.

you posted above. What is it?

[SusanaMontana41]

55. Well, that goes both ways.

Weeks ago I responded to a post that put Hillary Clinton "on par" (exact words) with Elizabeth Warren.

I said, "Nobody is on par with Elizabeth Warren."

No mention of Hillary Clinton. No mention of Bernie Sanders. I said nobody and meant nobody. I was banned instantly. That's pretty thin skinned.

I know my experience isn't a direct parallel to hiding a post/thread (it was gone before I could read it). But I don't like that any more than you do, because that's also pretty thin skinned.

We all could use thicker hides.

[JI7]

65. if you were banned how are you still here ?

[Human101948]

79. Probably blocked from Hillary group...

I was as well for a relatively innocuous statement.

[Scootaloo]

156. You're not missing much, I don't imagine.

Just hide the group so you don't see the stuff on latest and greatest.

[SusanaMontana41]

166. That's exactly what happened.

I didn't know I was in the Hillary Group until I was banned instantly.

I don't get it.

[MADem]

106. Sorry--that's not the same thing.

If you were "banned" then that means you were locked out of the Hillary Clinton group (read their community standards--they don't go for bashing, trashing, denigrating or down - rating...it's a positive-vibes only GROUP). Anyone who goes in that group and talks down about the principal will get bounced, too. Try going into the Sanders group and telling everyone there that Elizabeth Warren is better than Sanders--see how long you last there.

What happened here is that, on a large forum where all views relating to primary candidates are allowed, a poster had a post HIDDEN. HIDDEN--for doing nothing but posting a factual, truthful link to a published article in the TX Observer.

Those hides can affect a poster's ability to communicate here--get enough of them and the poster is silenced. Your banning means you can't talk trash in the Clinton group anymore, but it doesn't affect your ability to communicate everywhere else on the board.

You are free to go on the General Discussion forum and tell people how you think Warren is better. You just can't do it in the Hillary Clinton room, to Hillary Clinton supporters.

You don't have to "watch your back" because you got a freakishly bad hide, but the individual who got a post hidden for posting a frigging published article (and nothing else) has to...and that's just wrong.

[JimDandy]

124. No, she posted a libelous title to an article, the same title you weren't willing post

when you put up the actual article in #1 on this thread. Posts with lies get hidden for a reason.

[MADem]

125. Utter nonsense. The title was the title given by the TX OBSERVER.

NOT the DUer. That argument is absolute garbage, and you should be ashamed for floating it like it's a valid excuse for a targeted and unfair hide.

I think a published newspaper knows more about "libelous titles" than someone named JimDandy on DU.

And if the reason the thing was hidden was for that phony "libelous" reason, then the alerter--whosoever he or she may be-- needs to be sanctioned for lying to a jury and telling them that was the reason they should hide. I hope the admins take careful note.

Feast your eyes on the actual, ORIGINAL text of the article, as published by the Texas Observer:



Take your gripes to the paper--but crapping on a DUer--and mischaracterizing (I won't be nasty like you were, and say "LYING about&quot her for posting an ENTIRELY accurate title to a newspaper article that accurately sums up a) How the people of that town felt, and b) The essence of Sanders' interaction with them, is one of those lame behaviors that make DU suck. Shame on you!

[SusanaMontana41]

167. "Talking trash" by saying nobody is on par with Elizabeth Warren?

"Your banning means you can't talk trash in the Clinton group anymore" ?

"Anymore"? I haven't talked trash once. I. never. mentioned. Hillary's. name. Nor anyone else's.

If I saw that posted in a Bernie Sanders thread, I'd say the same thing. I guarantee you I wouldn't get banned. We'd have a lively debate, for sure. But get banned because of it? No.

I also said threads/posts shouldn't be hidden, with a few obvious exceptions. We all should be allowed to read everything and comment on everything.

Jimmy Carter is not seeking the presidency. We have no saints in this race.

[MADem]

169. You were in the CLINTON group. The issue isn't saints, it's

group goals/purposes.

The fact is that groups can ban you for any reason or none at all.

Being shut out of a group is not the same as getting a "HIDE." 5 of those can impact your ability to post. Being shut out of a group doesn't prevent you from expressing your POV--you just can't do it in that group of supporters.

More to the point, hidden posts CAN be read--you just have to click a link and all is revealed. If you want a discussion board where there's little to no constraints on conversation, they do exist. They also pretty much suck and are overrun with trolls and disruptors.

DISCUSSIONIST is a real free-for-all. There are some people here who brave that place, which is open to everyone of every political persuasion.

[SusanaMontana41]

193. Well, that explains that.

Thanks for the primer.

[Cha]

92. Just couldn't handle the facts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=761203

[JimDandy]

33. No, it contained the libelous, ugly title of the article, too

which the above poster interestingly has now left off.

[BainsBane]

46. Libel is a legal term

I know of no finding from a court that the article constituted libel. Do you have a link to support that claim?

[R B Garr]

84. "Drop dead" is a legitimate journalistic metaphor used

all the time. It is obviously not literal, and it's just dishonest to claim that it's libel.

Here's the Sanders quote: 'My position is unchanged, and you're not going to like it. " IOW. drop dead.

More ugliness from Sanders: "When asked if he would visit the site in Sierra Blanca, he said "'Absolutely not. I'm gonna be running for reelection in the state of Vermont.'"

So he's more concerned about his re-election than peoples welfare. What a phony and quite a calculated politician after all.

[JonLeibowitz]

107. Yes but Drop Dead was put in quotes.

It was clear that the title was saying Sanders literally said "Drop Dead". That is false, hence libelous.

[R B Garr]

114. Lol, it's a journalistic metaphor and is commonly

used.

Funny how you both answered me at the same time on this subthread with the exact comments. Hmmm.

[Agschmid]

136. And what law school did you attend?

I'd get a refund.

[JonLeibowitz]

163. LOL! I'll rephrase: factually incorrect assertion in printed text.

[JimDandy]

108. No, not when it's in quotes. That was an ugly smear, a lie

and truly tasteless when used in conjuction with nuclear waste. Quotes have a very specific use. I'd have reprimanded that reporter were it my newspaper and that's why the poster deserved the hide. Nasty stuff is nasty.

Sanders kindly gave a private meeting to a small group of people from Texas who were there for a Sierra Club protest. "My position is unchanged and you're not going to like it" was an incredibly mild remark made to gently let down people who had just traveled 2000 miles to Vermont. That remark is in no way equivalent to "DROP DEAD" and it's disingenuous to say so.

He was a Vermont Representative. I can't even come up with an example of a rep from another state coming to mine over a bill. People running for office have schedules and previous engagements. Just ask Hillary about previous engagements and Netroots.

And calculated? That's a very Rovian projection. Clinton the consumate politician with a copyright on Calculated doesn't make an unscripted, non-focus-group move. She is the Queen of Calculated.

[R B Garr]

111. Sanders own words were ugly, and he was coldly

calculating. Drop dead is a legitimate metaphor and is used regularly. Now your spin is that some meanie pants from Texas misunderstood Bernie's "kind" comments. LOL, the Bernie coddling is just nuts.

And...quick..throw in a comment about Clinton and call her a Queen so you can really play up the victim card. POOR BERNIE.

[JimDandy]

115. You're regurgitating ugly lies and you're losing the argument.

Deal with it.

[R B Garr]

120. You called Clinton a Queen, so it looks like your

Integrity only goes one way. If Clinton is maligned, no problemo, just don't say anything bad about Sanders. So much for integrity.

[JimDandy]

123. You should be proud...Queen is used to show someone

is the best at something....so celebrate!

And really if you keep insisting that Bernie was somehow calculating about this is 1998 (doesn't even make sense here, but let's play) well then, Hillary is following him again! The Queen of Following. Own it!

I'm done kicking this thread.

[R B Garr]

139. No, you used Queen as a sneering, derogatory term.

It definitely wasn't an exaltation. So much for integrity


And Bernie's own words were that he was going to run for reelection in Vermont obviously implying that was his priority. Sounds calculating.

I'm sure I'll see you object to the lame threads about Clinton being on the Walmart board of directors in the late 80's/early 90's since you imply nothing Bernie did in 1998 is relevant.

[MADem]

173. I think you're the one who has lost the argument, and you're not dealing with it

very well at all.

[MADem]

147. I posted the newspaper article in it's entirety, in photo form.

Open your eyes. Get over yourself, too.

You are not the arbiter of what constitutes "Libel." Further, the words belong to the TX Observer, not to any DUer.

Nice job justifying some of the most blatant and disgraceful censorship at DU in years, though--you're really doing the twist to make this argument.

No sale, though. You should be embarrassed.

[Cha]

49. Exactly, BB. Why do they find some of BS's past so distasteful they want to censor it!!?

[Scootaloo]

155. I wondered about that hide

Don't suppose anyone is sitting on the results, around here...

[BainsBane]

162. I haven't seen them

I would like to though.

[MADem]

171. Who would admit to serving on that kangaroo court? nt

[SoapBox]

31. Where is this from?

And there is no year on it...it only says June 30.

I'm curious when all this is supposed to have transpired? What rally?

EDIT: Oh....I now see...the Garvin Democratic Party Facebook page is a drum beating Hillary support page! Now a lot makes sense.

[MADem]

37. It was way back when VT was shipping their shit to TX--in the 90s, when Sanders was a Rep.

He refused to listen to those people who didn't want that stuff buried in their backyard, but he told them that he wasn't going to change his mind, and even VT environmentalists were embarrassed.

The site in question ended up being decertified, or something, and VT's nuclear garbage was then re-routed to some other hellhole in TX (I think that one was on top of an aquifer or something).

The whole NIMBY thing, it really does fall on the backs of the poor--and they're not going to get any justice any time soon.

The day they find a way to make a fortune from nuclear waste, these same places that shipped their shit away from THEIR homes will be suing to get THEIR property back....

[azurnoir]

43. Lol Texas had to permit such a dump to be located there actually 2 such dumps

and perhaps you should be aiming your venom at the Texas state government for choosing those particular locations,

[Rose Siding]

94. TX oligarchy was willing to subject citizens to it so

it's ok for progressives to take advantage?

[azurnoir]

95. No one took advantage of anything Vt needed to dispose of largely medical waste

and found a place, it's not as if they looked for specifically a place where non-whites lived as 'some' wish us to believe

[MADem]

121. And absolve the congressman who told the TX activists to

pound sand? The activists covered all the bases--and Sanders not only ignored them, he threatened to not show up if they were on the platform with him--is that childish, or what? When the people of VT have to apologize for the behavior of their OWN officials, there's something awry here.

Did you even pretend to read the article? Sanders was the ONLY Congressmen representing all of VT, he held extraordinary influence greater than the average politician in that state.

It is, deservedly, coming back to bite him all these years later. The perception is that he told the Hispanic people of a small town from the far-away TX state to stuff it, too-bad/so-sad, and he could not give even a crap about their concerns. He comes off as imperious, rude, condescending, and not really living up to his charge or his "persona" -- he comes across as someone who only cares about his own voters, not "the people."

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?id=144212115605882&story_fbid=1181624378531312

To speak for West Texas, these three were driving 2,000 miles to Montpelier, the Vermont capital, to address the Senate Natural Resources Committee chair, and to make the case against a plan to ship low-level nuclear waste from the Vermont Yankee plant in Vernon to Sierra Blanca, hard by the Rio Grande, in Hudspeth County, Texas. Maine's nuclear waste is also part of the deal. ..... So badly do environmentally sensitive Vermonters feel that about forty of them listened for two hours while Oliver, Flanders, and Curry delivered their message in no uncertain terms: Sierra Blanca, which was chosen for purely political reasons, is environmentally no better suited than Vermont for burying nuclear waste. And after the West Texans got through lambasting federal, state, and local politicians from all three Compact states, as well as the nuclear utility lobbyists whom they hold responsible for arranging things this way, several of the Vermonters in the audience stood up and apologized.

....The marchers from Vermont were careful to restrain the West Texans from protesting aloud on any platform occupied by Bernie Sanders, Vermont's independent Socialist candidate for re-election to the U.S. House. Sanders' campaign committee had warned march planners that Bernie wouldn't show if the West Texans were on the platform. ....Before the rally Sanders invited the three West Texans to meet with him privately, and the Texans eagerly agreed. The meeting was no longer than Sanders' attention span - when it comes to Sierra Blanca. "He didn't listen," Curry said. "He had his mind made up." Afterward, Bernie was giving his pro forma campaign speech, never mentioning nuclear power or nuclear waste. Sierra Blanca activist Bill Addington, who'd arrived just that morning to join the march, along with his neighbor María Méndez, had had enough, and he yelled from the crowd, "What about my home, Bernie? What about Sierra Blanca?"
Several others joined in. "What about Sierra Blanca, Bernie?"
Sanders left the stage, which surprised no one in the small Texas delegation. Earlier, he had told them, "My position is unchanged, and you're not gonna like it." When they asked if he would visit the site in Sierra Blanca, he said, "Absolutely not. I'm gonna be running for re-election in the state of Vermont."....

[Bluenorthwest]

113. You know NY literally shipped their shit to Sierra Blanca for years, by train.

New York's Sewage Was a Texas Town's Gold
"It is hard to imagine places more different than New York and Sierra Blanca, and the contrast has always underscored the mercenary marriage between the nation's largest city and the small town where it has dumped its sewage since 1992. That year, after Congress had prohibited the city from dumping its sludge in the Atlantic Ocean, New York signed contracts with several companies to treat and transport its sewage. One of them was a Long Island joint venture, which began shipping up to 250 tons every day on the 2,065-mile journey to West Texas. The Texas Observer, the political journal, recently called it ''the poo-poo choo-choo.''

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/27/us/new-york-s-sewage-was-a-texas-town-s-gold.html

[arcane1]

116. It's OK when New York does it. Because of reasons.

Or something

[MADem]

130. Yeah, I am not feeling that "excuse" at all. Two Wrongs Makes a Right is usually abandoned in

grammar school, or when your mama said something like "If (insert name of era-appropriate teen idol) jumps off a bridge, does that mean you're gonna do it, too?"

[MADem]

117. And? They shouldn't have done that either--but two wrongs do not make a right.

And Clinton wasn't a NY resident during those years (she was living in Washington, DC, if you recall) until she ran for office after her husband left the WH. There was no nexus between NY's bad behavior and Clinton's representation of that state.

She never championed the practice or told those objecting to it to, in essence, shove it. The sludge farm closed the same year Clinton took office.

What's most troubling about this article isn't even Sanders' stance on the issue (though that is kind of troubling--very NIMBY for someone who is supposed to be a former peace-love-hippie type, in all the POSITIVE aspects of that characterization), it's the fact that he was just so mean, dismissive and uncaring of those with a valid and sincerely held beef about the matter. When VT activists are "disgusted" by his approach to the complainers from TX, there's a problem.

His "My way or the highway" attitude just sucks. It's revealing about his character, and not in a good way. Sometimes, it's a shitty thing to be so resolutely consistent--especially when you're dead wrong.

That "laser - driven focus" stuff is fine and dandy if one is a minor functionary, one of many. It's a shitty look for a leader, though. IMO, anyway.

[Bluenorthwest]

144. The point is that this issue is being exploited by people who are so unaware of Sierra Blanca's

history that they use the term 'sending their shit' metaphorically when NYC actually sent their shit there for years. In Sierra Blanca, if you mean 'sending their stuff' you say that. 'Sending their shit' means sending their shit.
You said "It was way back when VT was shipping their shit to TX--in the 90s, when Sanders was a Rep."

But in reality VT never shipped any nuclear waste there while NY spent the 90's shipping actual shit to Sierra Blanca.
NYC made Sierra Blanca into their outhouse. But that's not what fits today's narrative,which is purely exploitative of Sierra Blanca.

[MADem]

146. Your focus is wrong. Turn AWAY from Sierra Blanca.

Turn back around, and look at how a candidate for the Presidency dealt with sincere people seeking redress--people who were treated so poorly by this man that citizens of VT apologized.

THAT's the story.

This harsh, abrasive, rude, and flat-out unkind manner is a poor fit for the highest office in the land.

[Bluenorthwest]

158. Ah so the people of Sierra Blanca are props to you.

You want me to ignore the people and the facts and focus on gossip and political squabbles. That's not going to happen.

I could post, if I was of a mood to do so, a video of Bill Clinton shouting and yelling at an activist who did not have a year to live at the time, about the disease that was killing him, wagging his finger and getting in the man's face. I've seen plenty of very disrespectful politicians. This does not always make them ineffective. Bill was still the right choice. In spite of the shouting at the terminal and all. Because what it was about were facts and people, not gossip and characterization.

[MADem]

172. You do realize that you're gish galloping away from the point

and purpose of the post--and it's obvious what you're doing?

No one on this board is talking about Sierra Blanca in the POLITICAL PRIMARIES GROUP--they're talking about Democratic candidates for the Presidency.

THAT is the purpose of the group, and that was the focus of the post.

Now, if you want to revisit the historical issues of the sludge farm, the closure, the move to the new facility (over an aquifer), I'll bet you could get a slow, liesurely conversation moving over at one of the environmental groups. But you're not going to fire that up in the GD-P venue.

You can, of course, play the "Ewww, you're being mean to the people of Sierra Blanca" card all you'd like, but I don't think anyone would buy that, given WHERE the article was posted.

AND, you sure could--as you direly threatened--post a video of Bill Clinton--but guess what? He's NOT RUNNING. If his wife wins, he gets to be FMOTUS, or FDOTUS, or FGOTUS (man/dude/gentleman), depending on what moniker takes hold--but all you're doing is digging your own hole when you say stuff like that. It's clear you're more about deflecting any criticism from Sanders in terms of how he deals with people, and you're happy to use a candidate's spouse in prosecuting that effort.

The purpose of the post was to show the temperament of a guy who is now running for the POTUS gig. The article showed how people who disagreed with this candidate were treated. That was the focus--and to pretend that the issue surrounding that article, posted in GD-P, was a nearly two-decades-old waste disposal issue, is disingenuous.

You know this. Stop playing like you don't.

[RandySF]

41. 1998

[azurnoir]

44. 2 years after the Bill Clinton campaigned to be re-elected on the backs of those same

poor that now are being peddled to us as Bernies victims

[VanillaRhapsody]

71. but he didn't dump waste on their heads...

[azurnoir]

72. Neither did Bernie odd how Hillary's people are willing to give Texas's Republican State

government a pass on this, as they were the ones that okayed the site in the first place

things that make you say hmmmmm

[VanillaRhapsody]

74. Yeah he did....

Texas has Conservatives....we EXPECT it out of them....

But Bernie Sanders not caring about brown people? Say it isn't so...(but it is)

[azurnoir]

75. Lol maybe you need to read the entire thread he did not

because the site was closed prior to dumping

buh bye it's been so fun

and oh do not PM me again

[VanillaRhapsody]

81. He still voted for it....Politifact...

[azurnoir]

87. yes he did the rest is extrapolation and IMO giving repukes an undeserved break

as they chose where the site was located

[VanillaRhapsody]

89. Oh yeah...a break!

And Sanders supported it.....is that some tarnish I see on his halo?

[azurnoir]

96. Bernie wears a halo? that's a rather out of place comment don't you think?

[VanillaRhapsody]

97. Some on DU seem to think so.....

and that just electing him will magically make Republican obstruction disappear.

[azurnoir]

98. Can you link me up to a comment from a Bernie supporter saying that?

[VanillaRhapsody]

99. hang around....

but no...not falling for you bait sorry!

[azurnoir]

100. In other words you can't

that's okay

[VanillaRhapsody]

101. No in other words I am not going to...

just as I said...

Call outs are automatic hides dude.....you should have used better bait.

[azurnoir]

102. first I'm not a dude I'm a woman and second just for the record I' almost 60

[VanillaRhapsody]

103. Just for the record...I am in my 50's

and yes...I call everyone dude....

[questionseverything]

133. didn't clinton sign it into law?

i am against nukes because of the waste but seems silly to blame sanders for a bill clinton signed into law?

[PotatoChip]

186. Yes. Bill Clinton did sign it into law. (nt)

[PotatoChip]

188. If that is your argument, then Bill Clinton apparently did not care about brown people either.

Since he signed the bill into law as POTUS.

[PotatoChip]

184. Yes he did. He was POTUS at the time, and signed the bill into law. (nt)

[VanillaRhapsody]

185. For a state?

[PotatoChip]

187. Bill Clinton signed it as POTUS.

Now that this nuclear deal has passed the U.S. Congress and been signed into law by President Clinton, “low level” nuclear waste from the three states — actually all of the nuclear waste except for spent nuclear reactor fuel rods — can be shipped across the nation’s highways to the town of Sierra Blanca, Texas.
http://social-ecology.org/wp/1998/10/the-texas-vermont-maine-nuclear-dump-bringing-environmental-racism-home/

[JDPriestly]

42. Bernie opposes nuclear energy because, in part, of the waste.

But the geology in Vermont is even less safe for storing nuclear waste than the particular area of Texas in which the waste was sent.

This has been thoroughly discussed on DU.

Hillary supporters are desperately rehashing old news and resolved issues to fight Bernie.

But Bernie will prevail because he has common sense and is down to earth.

Bernie vigorously fought the intervention of the Justice Department into the attempts of a nuclear power company to keep a nuclear plant in Vermont open. He opposes producing more nuclear waste when we have no safe way to store it.

This has been discussed on DU before. That is how I know about Bernie's stance on it.

Hillary voted for the Iraq War Resolution. I can understand why her supporters so desperately try to put Bernie's wise decisionmaking in a bad light.

But storing nuclear waste anywhere is a bad idea. Storing it in Vermont would mean it could easily get into the groundwater. In the area of Texas in which the waste was stored, contamination of the groundwater from the waste was less likely. That are of Texas is very dry. It normally gets very little rain. Obviously, Vermont not only gets a lot of rain most years. It also gets a lot of snow. Thus it is not good for storing nuclear waste.

I also oppose the use of nuclear energy.

[BlueCaliDem]

140. "geology in Vermont is even less safe for storing nuclear waste than the particular area of Texas"

Not according to the Sierra Club back then.

From The Texas Observer article:

So badly do environmentally sensitive Vermonters feel that about forty of them listened for two hours while Oliver, Flanders, and Curry delivered their message in no uncertain terms: Sierra Blanca, which was chosen for purely political reasons, is environmentally no better suited than Vermont for burying nuclear waste. And after the West Texans got through lambasting federal, state, and local politicians from all three Compact states, as well as the nuclear utility lobbyists whom they hold responsible for arranging things this way, several of the Vermonters in the audience stood up and apologized.

JDP: Hillary voted for the Iraq War Resolution. I can understand why her supporters so desperately try to put Bernie's wise decisionmaking in a bad light.

Wise decision-making?? Give us a break.

Sanders voted for the September 14, 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force Against Terrorists - something his supporters tend to want to forget. The AUMF Against Terrorists that he voted for and what was signed into law 09/18/2001, gave President Bush broad war powers because it "granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom he determined "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups."

Sanders no less of a warhawk than Hillary Clinton, so let's stop pretending he is. That's why Hillary supporters don't take the self-righteous cries from Sanders supporters seriously when trying to attack Hillary Clinton on the AUMF Against Iraq vote - and in addition to his vote for the 2001 AUMF and his votes to protect unfettered gun ownership and shielding gun manufacturers from lawsuits - a privilege NO OTHER American business may boast - Sanders is no anti-war non-violent Socialist. Can we now dispense with that myth once and for all?

By the way? Since 1968, more Americans are killed by guns than in ALL U.S. Wars. Although Sanders has flip-flopped (since Sanders supporters continues to call Hillary Clinton's evolution, flip-flopping I'll use it here) on gun safety laws and he's been pretty consistently pro-NRA and pro-gun manufacturers before deciding to run for president, and if your concern is for American lives and are therefore pissed at Hillary Clinton's IWR vote, rethink your support for Sanders.

Edited because I pushed the wrong button and had to finish my post.

[JDPriestly]

142. We should not use nuclear energy because we have no place that is really safe for the waste.

On that I will agree with you and the Sierra Club. But Vermont is a particularly vulnerable place for waste. No one wants nuclear waste.

I am so happy that San Onofre was closed down. Unfortunately, I believe that the nuclear material is still there.

What locations does the Sierra Club recommend for storing nuclear waste? Highly populated areas like Vermont in a wet climate with underground and surface water in close proximity?

As for the September 2001 authorization to attack terrorists. Bernie has said that war is in his view to be approved in cases in which a) we are attacked (that was the case in the authorization to use force against terrorists in September 2001) and b) in case of genocide (as in Rwanda, as in Serbia's attacks on Kosovo which Bernie also supported).

I agree with Bernie. We should always try to negotiate a settlement and bring peace, but we should respond with force to attacks on our nation, and we should respond with force to genocide when negotiation does not stop the killing.

[Thinkingabout]

161. Very good post, the war hawk has to apply to Sanders since he has more than one time voted for

military action and has stated recently he would take military action.

Also, the gun violence in the US has taken more American lives than American lives in Iraq, something I am not proud to have.

As others have said, facts needs to be pointed out, the vetting of candidates has happened for years, and we know Hillary Clinton has had more than other candidates in the vetting. We expect these thing to happen.

[MADem]

174. Superb post. Just superb.

[BlueCaliDem]

189. Thank you, MADem.

[Autumn]

159. Interesting. I saw your post, clicked the link, logged into FB, searched the group and never found

that article. It was posted on June 30 but it's not there. I wonder if someone got caught posting nonsense and had to remove the post.

[MADem]

175. The problem is yours, I'm afraid--I just clicked a second ago, on the same link,

and the post was still there.

Maybe you're blocked from that group, or something?

FWIW, that link goes straight to the post...no need to search for it.

[Autumn]

191. The post is there on your link. When you click Like on the page belonging to

The Garvin County Democrats, scroll through their page to June 30, it's not there. Your link shows 4 shares so it came from there, you can click on the shares and see the post but it's not on the GCD FB page. It's been removed. This is the only post on their page on June 30.

Garvin County Democratic Party shared a link.
June 30 ·

Why the most liberal candidate for president opposes strict gun control
The presidential candidate has voted against gun-control advocates on several…
WASHINGTONPOST.COM|BY MAX GABRIEL EHRENFREUND
Like Comment Share
Buddy Thigpen likes this.
2 shares

That's their only FB posting on June 30.

[MADem]

195. When I click on the link, it goes straight to the post.

It doesn't go to the main page of the group--it goes direct to the actual post I am talking about. No "scrolling" required.

Good grief, you're going to make me do the screen shot thing, I suppose...





If a post is removed from FB, you can't link to it. It stops existing. You get a message saying that something went wrong, that the link is no longer there.

[Autumn]

196. That's exactly what I said in my post.

But when you go to the main page of the group and scroll through their posts it's not there on that date on their FB page. Not before that date or after that date. You can click on the shares on the post you linked to and see it. When you go to the FB page belonging to The Garvin County Democrats, and scroll through their page to June 30, it's not there on their FB page. You wasted your time with the screen shot that came from your link that is clear to see. I made it very clear in my post that your link shows that post. However that post is not on the actual FB page belonging to The Garvin County Democrats. It may have been there on their FB page at one time because it got a whole whopping 4 shares but it's not there now. I know that I can remove a post from my FB page and it's not there, it's gone. Nothing shows up, not an error, nothing. It just gone. Just like that post is gone from FB page belonging to The Garvin County Democrats

[MADem]

197. But the post is still in their newsfeed. If the post was "removed"

the link would not work. What would be the point of removing a post if it could still be retrieved?

The link works because the post is still up on FB, even if it's not on their "main page" after five months.

[Autumn]

198. The post was shared by 4 people so yes it is still on FB. Somewhere. That post is not on

The Garvin County Democrats page. It had to have been removed from their page. There is one post on June 30 and it's not that one. That article was written Sep 11, 1998 and published in the Observer. It looks like to me the Garvin County Democrats at least had some integrity and pulled it. But whatever, this conversion is boring me. Have a nice day.

[bravenak]

2. So they DUMPED nuclear waste on poor brown folks? I refuse to believe Bernie would stand for that!

Last edited Tue Nov 3, 2015, 03:04 AM - Edit history (1)

He is the only hope for the poor and minorities, if he is involved, do we have ANTHING hopeful in our future? Please, say it ain't so!!! Where is my vinaigrette?!? I need my smelling salts, I do get so emotional and my fainting couch fell on me in September and I have not repaired it. I feel much woe.

[Art_from_Ark]

29. They didn't dump nuclear waste on poor brown folks

The Sierra Blanca site was rejected on October 20, 1998-- 17 years ago-- by Texas officials after opposition to it was voiced by, ironically, then-Texas governor George Bush, who had originally been one of the site's biggest backers.

http://www.umich.edu/~snre492/blanca.html

[bravenak]

30. So nothing is there? I knew he wouldn't do such a thing!

[azurnoir]

73. Nope there isn't but do keep up the efforts

[bravenak]

76. It takes absolutely no effort. That is the sad part. None.

Hopefully I will see a change soon so I can maybe not put so much lack of effort into it. But after the poc thingy today. I think that adds like a week just on it's own. Plus the photos of fire hoses and police dogs shot at me to abuse me. Add one more day for that. I only do what I need to do to bring about change. Once I see it, no need to do anything more. I see no change.

[azurnoir]

77. no poo flinging doesn't take much effort at all does it?

that's why so many engage in it you're right it's sad

[bravenak]

80. I do not need to fling poo. Just be extra polite.

That is all. I recieve much more flinging of anything than I give. They stop. I stop. Easy peasy. But no, they wanna keep the right to fling, while I have to shut up. Never. No matter how many rude comments, nasty accusations, lies, and bullcrap, I will only take as much as I decide to. And I decide none.
I am merely a finisher, not a starter. I will not be abused without fighting back in any way that will work the best and be the most effective. I am the type to keep on ones side. I am effective.

[VanillaRhapsody]

82. Indeed you are!!!

[bravenak]

83. Thank you!!

[azurnoir]

86. when who stops? but I agree you have all the right in world to fling poo

[bravenak]

90. When the stupid stops. I simply cannot take it anymore.

The very next time somebody trots out their white friend with a drop of black blood from 1850 to out black me for Bernie, please show up and stop them. Please. It just makes me start up again. Once people start Rachael Dolezaling to win an argument with me? I just can't. Simply infuriating as all get out. It seems like a pattern, constantly something so dramatically stupid that it is impossible to me that it is not just an attribute of that group. But I do realize that it is a small minority, but they like to find me, post ops in AA because I did not answer their post trying to get something I do not want to give. Look at the locked threads in AA, the most recent. Tsk tsk. I just do not get it. If my mind did not get blown on a daily basis, I would stop. But I constantly get my mind blown. Cannot take it. I think they should just get together and ask what they did. I can write a book on it in a week and still have stories. Quite shocking the things I have seen. Yep.

[riderinthestorm]

110. You are spreading delusional lies. I am a bi-racial woman

You are unhinged. You've stalked me in real life without any basis in reality. I have no "website". Any pictures you've decided are me, are not me from some random Google search. I have no online presence - zero. You've stalked me in real life. It's beyond creepy - with your own history of posters taking things into real life, it's downright scary.

Your PMs to me are deranged. You alert stalked me as is evident by my post history and hide (by you). You're actually starting to frighten me. If any person dared to question your authenticity as a black woman you'd go apeshit, and rightly so. Now you've decided to become your own arbiter about who I am, taking real facts you've stalked from my real life and distorting them into lies. It's sick.

Seriously. I know this is hide worthy but I'll risk it. I have no other explanation for your bizarre behavior. Stop. Please.

When this is juried, please note jurors, bravenak is stalking me in real time. She's now assigned a fictional persona to me and is working that on DU. I don't deserve this for crossing her. Thanks in advance.

[Bluenorthwest]

109. Ironcially, New York literally dumped their poo in Sierra Blanca from 1992-2001. Trainloads of it.

New York's Sewage Was a Texas Town's Gold
" It is hard to imagine places more different than New York and Sierra Blanca, and the contrast has always underscored the mercenary marriage between the nation's largest city and the small town where it has dumped its sewage since 1992. That year, after Congress had prohibited the city from dumping its sludge in the Atlantic Ocean, New York signed contracts with several companies to treat and transport its sewage. One of them was a Long Island joint venture, which began shipping up to 250 tons every day on the 2,065-mile journey to West Texas. The Texas Observer, the political journal, recently called it ''the poo-poo choo-choo.''
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/27/us/new-york-s-sewage-was-a-texas-town-s-gold.html


Between 1992 and 2001, as many as 45 train cars per day brought sewage sludge from New York City to this 129,000 acre West Texas property, where it was spread out on the ground like peanut butter. The waste site was a former resort called the Mile High Ranch, and was owned by a Long Island New York company, Merco Joint Venture. The contract with New York City was terminated in June of 2001 (two of the company's owners were found guilty of bribing New York mafia bosses in the hope of influencing union officials), and the sludge ranch - one of the largest in the world - now sits idle. Merco filed for bankruptcy in 2002, resulting in the state of Texas purchasing the site from them.

http://clui.org/ludb/site/sierra-blanca-sludge-ranch


Did they get dumped on? Yes. Was it nuclear? No, it was pooplear. Was it from Vermont? No, it was from New York City.
Charming stuff, all of it.

[MADem]

129. Why is that ironic? You don't explain that bit.

It's ironic because Bernie lived in NY before he moved to VT?


Or is it ironic that the Clintons moved to NY right around when they STOPPED doing that?

Not sure what your point is, there.

Spread out on the ground like peanut butter....real nice, I'm sure.....

[Bluenorthwest]

149. It's ironic because you and others keep saying 'VT sent their shit to Texas' and 'flinging poo'

in a thread that is allegedly about the toxic degradation of a town in which the actual toxic degradation that happened was shit being sent, poo being flung. The imagery is a bit callused considering the actual waste dumping history at Sierra Blanca. It is also ironic that you say VT sent 'their shit' when it was actually NY that sent their shit there. The point is, VT did not. Although you say they did.

Maybe it's not ironic. It's really more farcical.
It's tacky to talk about shit when you don't mean shit when the subject is dumping in Sierra Blanca. That should sort of be obvious. And if you claim an interest in dumping that might have but did not take place there, you should at least fake an interest in the actual dumping that did take place there. If that interest is authentic, I would suggest keeping an eye on it because there are constant threats to start dumping there again.

It is ironic however that when I bring up actual toxic dumping there in a thread about toxic dumping there that is seen as off topic.

[MADem]

150. As I've said elsewhere, in the context of this candidacy, the

issue is not "who dumped what when," but how a candidate treated people who were asking for redress.

The article is very revealing in that regard.

[azurnoir]

47. yep in 1998 2 years after Bill Clinton won re-election on the backs of the poor across the board

but Bernies the villain, tell us why would the state of Texas allow such dumps to be located where they are?

[bravenak]

48. I said I refuse to believe it

[eridani]

66. Wonder why all the nuke dumps are in dry western states?

I suppose you object to the Nevada proposals as well. Sanders doesn't want more waste, but Clinton does

At a February 18, 2007 campaign rally in Columbia, South Carolina, Clinton stated, "I think nuclear power has to be part of our energy solution... We get about 20% of our energy from nuclear power in our country... other countries like France get much much more, so we do have to look at it because it doesn't put greenhouse gas emissions into the air."[

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Hillary_Clinton#Nuclear_power

[Armstead]

68. You'd prefer that they dump it on MILLIONS of brown, blackfolk in the northeast corridor?

[progressoid]

151. Poor white folks.

As of the 2010 United States Census, there were 3,476 people in the county.

78.8% White
1.4% Black or African American
1.1% Native American, 0.5% Asian
16.1% of some other race
2.2% of two or more races

[Cali_Democrat]

3. K&R

[jfern]

4. I'm not a fan of nuclear fission power

But when you have to dump the waste, it has to go somewhere dry like west Texas and not Vermont.

[RandySF]

5. Near the poor he claims to champion.

[bravenak]

6. Those poor brown souls.

[RandySF]

9. Maybe some merit his attention more than others.

[bravenak]

11. Sure seems like it

[jfern]

10. Look, ideally we wouldn't have nuclear fission power with all its radioactive problems

But what would have a better option been?

[RandySF]

15. There's an excuse for everything, isn't there?

There's always a way to explain away his shortcomings while Hillary is a demon.

[jfern]

19. My question you didn't answer was an excuse?

[JaneyVee]

16. How about the hundreds of thousands of square miles in America where...

Nobody lives.

[jfern]

21. I don't know if they pick the middle of nowhere for low level radioactive waste

Look, neither of us are waste experts. I know they later chose Yucca Mountain for high-level, but maybe it's too expensive to use for low-level.

[LuvLoogie]

14. It is more authentic to dump in the West ban-- I mean Texas

West Texas...

[BainsBane]

17. Absolutely

People like that just have to accept that their lives don't matter compared to the whiter, more affluent residents of states like Vermont. I mean, we don't want the little people to start to get the idea that their lives actually matter or, worse yet, that they might have rights. Places like that exist to be the toxic waste dumps of the white bourgeoisie, who can't be expected to live with the consequences of their own consumption.

[jfern]

26. I'm pretty sure Vermont was too wet

Not putting nuclear waste in Vermont had nothing to do with their race. I mean they could have dumped it in rural Mississippi if they wanted it to be just where poor minorities are, but they didn't do that either.

[JackInGreen]

28. Shhhh

None of that logic about appropriate disposal or storage climate now...

[BainsBane]

50. It had nothing to do with their race

It's just completely coincidental that toxic dumps end up in poor communities of color.

If VT can't handle nuclear waste, they shouldn't use nuclear power. Creating a first-third world dynamic within the US, where the toxic waste of the affluent and white (and it's just like totally coincidental there is such a high correlation between those two) is dumped on the poor, black, and brown. That is THE NATURE of inequality in the US.

[jfern]

54. Vermont did just shut down their nuclear power plant

And Bernie was one of the politicians who really pushed to have it shut down.

[Bluenorthwest]

143. Sierra Blanca never saw any waste from VT, NY however sent them sewage from 92-2001 hundreds

of tons a day. If the issue really is abut dumping in poor communities, why are we not talking about the actual dumping done in that community?
If NYC can't handle even their own feces in a sanitary way, perhaps they have become too bloated and unsustainable, driven by greed and profit as NYC is. Can't even process their own poo. They send it to the border towns.

So there you go. First-Third dynamic as a way of life there for years. It's not about VT or Bernie, it's systemic. Why is Manhattan unable to run a sewer system? Been that way for a quarter of a century not that you or anyone on DU noticed or cared.

I've seen at least two OP's about Sierra Blanca by affluent NYC dwellers who sent them train loads of shit every day for a decade. I bet none of them even knew that was going on. It's very telling.

[SunSeeker]

7. K & R

[BainsBane]

12. Obviously those Texans are corporatists

tools of the oligarchy for believing their lives could possibly compare to the convenience of Vermonters.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

20. But I'm sure she would have voted against it. Right?

[blackspade]

23. This again?

Sigh.

[SoapBox]

27. Hmmm...

Regarding the chart in the article,

"The creator is not listed, but it seems to have been put together by a supporter of Sanders’ rival, Hillary Clinton, since it highlights some of Sanders’ past positions that break with Democratic (and even mainstream) orthodoxy."

Ok.

Why didn't Politifact (in September, when this article was written) fact check the Clinton side of the chart. Just curious.

And that scary, scary NUCLEAR waste,

"The low-level nuclear waste would include "items such as scrap metal and worker’s gloves… as well as medical gloves used in radiation treatments at hospitals," according to the Bangor Daily News."

Just say'n...this is not NUCLEAR waste from a power plant...no heavy metals or water. He also didn't do this alone...1998, The House of Representatives. How did Politifact determine that he "ushered" it through the House...also just curious about that.

And the actual title of the article might have been nice,

"Fact-checking a viral graphic critical of Bernie Sanders"

[RandySF]

34. Then it should have been perfectly safe to keep it in Vermont.

[SoapBox]

35. Or Maine!

[SoapBox]

36. Or Texas! Since they were involved too!

[JDPriestly]

39. This has been explained a number of times.

In fact, Bernie Sanders spoke in, I think, Congress explaining why he did this.
Bernie Sanders opposes the use of nuclear energy precisely because we have no safe way to dispose of the waste.

But, Vermont had nuclear waste and geologists determined that it could not be safely stored in Vermont because of the geology of Vermont and the danger that it could if stored in Vermont get into the groundwater.

The area of Texas is which the waste is stored is very dry and the geology is safer for storing nuclear waste than Vermont.

But Bernie opposes nuclear power because of the waste problem.

Why is this being rehashed?

[jfern]

45. Because they run out of things to attack Bernie with

There's not much to work with. He doesn't have a long record of being a 3rd way hawk. They'll cycle back, oh he didn't get an F rating from the NRA. Oh he's not a Democrat in some sense. And then have to come back to this again.

[SoapBox]

53. Thank you!

I had a gut feeling that this was rehashing something...they just keep trying.

Man, reading about that area...amazing that there is really nothing there including jobs. When the sludge plant closed, the town lost 40 jobs...it was the town's biggest employer.

And you most certainly were correct about it being dry...

"According to the United States Census Bureau, the CDP has a total area of 4.1 square miles (11 km2), of which 4.1 square miles (11 km2) is land and 0.04 square miles (0.10 km2) (0.73%) is water. Soil in the surrounding area is mostly non-arable and cannot sustain large scale farming. Due to the high altitude of the city, it has a cooler climate than other areas of the Chihuahuan Desert.

Summer days are hot with cool summer nights. The city occasionally experiences high winds and dust storms. June is regularly the warmest month with the highest recorded temperature in town was 109 °F (43 °C) in 1994. During the winter the jet stream will periodically dip far south and bring extremely low temperatures. December is usually the coolest month and the lowest temperature recorded was ?10 °F (?23 °C) in 1985.

Normally, the city receives less than 1 inch (25 mm) of snow annually. During the hurricane season large tropical storms can sometimes bring large amounts of precipitation to the arid mountainous region and can cause flash flooding. The city on average has 293 sunny days and 43 days of precipitation. Rainfall is low; the town and vicinity receive an average of 11.27 inches (286 mm) of rainfall annually."

I'll stop wasting my time with this.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

69. Probably the same was true of Maine. Environment is virtually the same as Vermont.

They closed that Maine Yankee Plant almost 20 years ago now. I don't know if that nuclear waste ever got removed from the site. It is probably still sitting there in Wiscasset.

[arcane1]

132. You're granting the attackers a presumption of sincerity that is not justified n/t

[Feeling the Bern]

40. So next time, dump it Arlington.

[SoapBox]

51. Sierra Blanca, TX...more interesting by the moment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/27/us/new-york-s-sewage-was-a-texas-town-s-gold.html

Population in 2010, 550.

"New York's Sewage Was a Texas Town's Gold"

By JIM YARDLEY
Published: July 27, 2001

SIERRA BLANCA, Tex.— There is not much here anymore, if there was ever much of anything to begin with. The town's main street is coated in dust, and the old movie house is long shuttered. The one sign of activity -- the traffic moving along elevated Interstate 10 -- is a reminder that the modern world rarely stops here.

The other reminder can be found on the outskirts of this tiny town, where freight cars are being unloaded for the last time. The last sludge train from New York City arrived this month, leaving its last shipment of what officials describe as ''bio-solids'' but what others call treated sewage.

The dump in Sierra Blanca, one of the biggest sludge dumps in the world, is going out of business.

...snip

The news came unexpectedly in June and was greeted with a mixed response in this town of 600 people in the vast, empty country about 90 miles southeast of El Paso. For local critics and environmentalists who have fought the sludge operation and recent efforts to build a nuclear waste dump here, it is a long-awaited victory. For others, it is an economic blow, resulting in the loss of 40 jobs and the planned closing of the town's biggest private employer.

[McCamy Taylor]

52. So...Sanders represented VT on nuclear waste. And Clinton represented NY on Iraq.

Not sure that either action has a lot to do with the current election. All politicians represent their constituents.

[jfern]

57. No, New Yorkers aren't a bunch of dumb warmongers

[Bluenorthwest]

112. But NYC did send tons of human waste to Sierra Blanca Texas by the trainload instead of processing

their own shit in their own State. Read it. Of course Texas was in that business, of accepting NYer's shit for a fee. But still. It's sort of gross behavior, subcontracting your own sewage to a State far far away.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/27/us/new-york-s-sewage-was-a-texas-town-s-gold.html

[SoapBox]

56. OMG! The Low Level Nuclear Waste site, was NEVER built!

The permit to build it was denied...it was never built.

And NOTHING was ever shipped there.

[jfern]

58. Biggest scandal ever!

[Bluenorthwest]

105. Well, no nuclear waste was ever shipped there but NYC sent human waste to Sierra Blanca by train

for years, 92-2001. NY had been ordered to stop dumping it in the ocean and rather than deal with it in NY, they shipped it off to Sierra Blanca Texas.

"Between 1992 and 2001, as many as 45 train cars per day brought sewage sludge from New York City to this 129,000 acre West Texas property, where it was spread out on the ground like peanut butter. The waste site was a former resort called the Mile High Ranch, and was owned by a Long Island New York company, Merco Joint Venture. The contract with New York City was terminated in June of 2001 (two of the company's owners were found guilty of bribing New York mafia bosses in the hope of influencing union officials), and the sludge ranch - one of the largest in the world - now sits idle. Merco filed for bankruptcy in 2002, resulting in the state of Texas purchasing the site from them."
http://clui.org/ludb/site/sierra-blanca-sludge-ranch

The people roiling about this on DU seem utterly unaware of the actual environmental injustices that have gone on there. It is almost as if they are just exploiting bits of a story for their own agenda rather than to support the people there.
The State of Texas has discussed doing the sewage thing again in Sierra Blanca as recently as 2008.

[SoapBox]

60. Well, well...President Clinton!

I'm so glad now that this OP was put up...I've gotten a good education on this whole thing, the more I've been digging.

A little snippet of another article about this waste disposal facility...this will be a little disjointed because the article was long:

"On 16 September 1997, the U.S. House of Representatives stopped the Texas-Vermont-Maine compact in a vote of 243 to 176. This marked the first time nuclear disposal had even been debated as a possibly negative solution. Governor Bush wanted the compact reintroduced; his forces combined with that of the nuclear lobby made sure it was passed when next voted on in 1997.

When President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law, Addington and allies went directly to the media. Sources such as the Washington Post and the New York Times reported on the “environmental racism” of the Sierra Blanca case. 60% of the town’s residents were poor and Latino, yet the compact and the TLLRWDA’s environmental report had not been translated into Spanish and distributed. The state department had already been receiving pressure from the Mexican government, and the negative American press did not help."

[JI7]

61. as Senator representing Vermont it was his job to do what he could to help Vermont

this often ends up hurting others. but it's not like his purpose was to hurt others.

[Live and Learn]

63. Hillary voted for the Iraq war! nt

[riversedge]

88. go start your own thread. Try to keep this one one topic.

[LostOne4Ever]

64. I Remember that! My county was one of the finalist competing for that site!

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]Or rather their attempt the next year. It came down to Ward, Loving and Borden county that time. Please pardon me for not stating which one of those was my home county at the time.

It was back when I was a sophomore in high school there was a big debate about bringing a low level waste dump to my home county. People had all sorts of signs saying don't waste Texas and the like.

They even had school assemblies on the topic and I remember them saying that the dump site would produce less radiation than the oil wells and pump-jacks we have out here while producing about 50 or so jobs which given that we were suffering from the oil bust at the time was a very attractive offer. But that was sponsored by the company so i don't know how trust worthy that was.

I think I was sick for the second assembly. I know I missed the pro-environmental one but the other students all told me it sucked. Being a teenager and with no say in the matter I really was apathetic to the whole thing though I felt people were freaking out more out of fear of the word nuclear than anything else.

IIRC they settled on Loving but that attempt failed too. I think they finally got something built out around Andrews? [/font]

[djean111]

67. We all can remember this, failing to convert even one Sanders supporter, from a couple of months

ago. Recycling?

For me, does not cancel out Hillary's zest for war, increased H-1B visas, the TPP, fracking, cluster bombs.

There is literally nothing you could post that would induce me to support Hillary. Nothing.

[Renew Deal]

70. Why would this be a scandal?

It sounds like it was out in the open and Texas was accepting of the waste.

[jberryhill]

127. The multi-state "compact" proposal was part of a larger scheme

The legislation that set up these deals basically gave states a deadline to enter into a multi-state compact or find a place for it on their own.

Texas was among several states that were looking to get this business from smaller Northeastern states.

[workinclasszero]

78. Whoops Bernie's halo needs a little adjusting

Sanders "Actively Ushered" Bill to Dump Nuclear Waste Near Poor West Texas Town

[Cha]

91. From The Texas Observer.. posted on FB..

June 30 · 1998
.
Sanders to Sierra Blanca: "Drop Dead!"

BY OLIVE HERSHEY

"Habla por mi," one of Gary Oliver's neighbors called out, as Gary stepped into Susan Curry's car a couple of weeks ago. West Texans Curry, Oliver, and Hal Flanders were bound for Vermont to deliver this message to officials and citizens of the Green Mountain state: don't nuke West Texas. Gary's neighbor lives in Sal si Puedes, a suburb on the east side of Marfa that sometimes floods so badly that its residents are cut off from the rest of the town by a deep-running arroyo. "Sal si puedes" means, "Get out if you can."

To speak for West Texas, these three were driving 2,000 miles to Montpelier, the Vermont capital, to address the Senate Natural Resources Committee chair, and to make the case against a plan to ship low-level nuclear waste from the Vermont Yankee plant in Vernon to Sierra Blanca, hard by the Rio Grande, in Hudspeth County, Texas. Maine's nuclear waste is also part of the deal.

The Vermont Chapter of the Sierra Club had arranged for this hearing, held in the stately granite building that looks like a small prototype of the Texas Capitol. Apparently, some Vermonters are waking from their long utopian dream of environmental purity and moral rectitude, and they're having second thoughts about shipping their nuke waste to Texas. The committee chairman, state Senator Elizabeth Ready, acknowledged, "Some of us don't feel very good about it."

So badly do environmentally sensitive Vermonters feel that about forty of them listened for two hours while Oliver, Flanders, and Curry delivered their message in no uncertain terms: Sierra Blanca, which was chosen for purely political reasons, is environmentally no better suited than Vermont for burying nuclear waste. And after the West Texans got through lambasting federal, state, and local politicians from all three Compact states, as well as the nuclear utility lobbyists whom they hold responsible for arranging things this way, several of the Vermonters in the audience stood up and apologized.

During the following week, the West Texans joined an anti-nuclear weapons march from Montpelier to Springfield, sponsored by the Unitarian Church and the American Friends Service Committee. The marchers from Vermont were careful to restrain the West Texans from protesting aloud on any platform occupied by Bernie Sanders, Vermont's independent Socialist candidate for re-election to the U.S. House. Sanders' campaign committee had warned march planners that Bernie wouldn't show if the West Texans were on the platform.

Nonetheless, spirits were high on Thursday morning, August 20, as the West Texans, along with about twenty Vermonters, trudged up and down the lush green hills on their way to a Springfield rally, where Bernie was scheduled to speak. They'd driven two thousand miles and walked nearly a hundred, and they'd had a wonderful time, meeting Vermonters, talking with them about the Sierra Blanca dump, and changing quite a few minds. Gary Oliver explained some of the group dynamics this way: "There'd been all this tension on the walk, because it's been planned since February, and we just got invited two months ago. But the issues [nuclear power and nuclear weapons] are two warts on the same hog."

Before the rally Sanders invited the three West Texans to meet with him privately, and the Texans eagerly agreed. The meeting was no longer than Sanders' attention span - when it comes to Sierra Blanca. "He didn't listen," Curry said. "He had his mind made up." Afterward, Bernie was giving his pro forma campaign speech, never mentioning nuclear power or nuclear waste. Sierra Blanca activist Bill Addington, who'd arrived just that morning to join the march, along with his neighbor María Méndez, had had enough, and he yelled from the crowd, "What about my home, Bernie? What about Sierra Blanca?"

Several others joined in. "What about Sierra Blanca, Bernie?"

Sanders left the stage, which surprised no one in the small Texas delegation. Earlier, he had told them, "My position is unchanged, and you're not gonna like it." When they asked if he would visit the site in Sierra Blanca, he said, "Absolutely not. I'm gonna be running for re-election in the state of Vermont."

A few people took Bill Addington to task for being so rude. Then all the marchers took the stage, to sing a unique version of "Down by the Riverside." One of the new verses was, "I'm gonna lay down my nuclear waste, down by the riverside." The West Texas marchers sang along.

Asked how he felt about the rally, Hal Flanders summed it up: "I'm disgusted."

The Texas Observer
307 West Seventh Street
Austin, Texas 78701
[phone]
[phone] (Fax)
E-mail: [email protected]

[SoapBox]

104. Repeat! It was never built! And the measure was signed by President CLINTON!

And Texas spent $900,000 buying land in the area. Unfortunately, this WAS a good place to place this waste.

Activists were indeed successful in getting the permitting process stopped...good on them.

So...what is your point? Other than trying to slime him, personally and only him, and make it appear that he was trying to literally dump nuclear plant type heavy water, etc. down Main Street.

This was with Vermont, MAINE, TEXAS and the United States House of Representatives all involved. And why aren't you folks chasing after who was involved from Maine?

The Politifact article, the "chart" (provided anonymously by a Mrs. Clinton supporter), the failure of Politifact to examine the Clinton points show the dishonesty of the article and regarding trying to make Sen. Sanders into some kind of polluter.

Dishonest.

[Sheepshank]

141. Bernie's stand and attempts at pushing this forward is a big fucking deal

http://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/texans-defend-sierra-blanca-community-against-nuclear-waste-disposal-1996-1998

It was a very big deal. A lot of activism went into the final failure of that project's launch. A lot of people speaking out, sitting in, protesting, signing petitions and going on hunger strikes.

Bernie was on record for voting for, lobbying for, promoting and herding the bill through, and making a moral deternmination for this site. No it wasn't a non issue...just as those opposing TPP (even though it looks like it's failed) don't consider that a non issue.

[RandySF]

152. Not the point

Sander's showed the back of his hand to poor Texans of color when he walked out on them, after telling them he said he made up his mind that they would have to cope with his state's radioactive waste.

[99Forever]

160. Actually randy, it is exactly the point.

Here's your sign:


FAIL

[Vinca]

118. This particular item was posted once before.

For those not familiar with the area, the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant sits alongside the Connecticut River. Storing waste onsite not only imperils residents of Vermont, it threatens big cities further south. The issue of nuclear waste storage in Texas has more to do with location in a fairly isolated area than anything else. I've been existing within 10 miles of VY ever since it was built in the 1960's. During that time, spent fuel has been housed in pools onsite. OMG - I'M STILL ALIVE! The fact nuclear waste might be going to a poor area is good news for that economy. It creates jobs at the site and jobs at businesses supporting workers at the site. Vermont Yankee has recently stopped operating. I'm happy about it because I'm opposed to nuclear energy because the waste has to be protected forever. The town the plant resides in is not so happy. Jobs have gone, taxes have gone up, small businesses have closed. Don't try to make reasonable, safe storage of nuclear waste a "Bernie hates poor people so he's going to expose them to radiation" story. It's just not true.

[MADem]

128. Bernie's fellow Vermonters, many of them, agreed with the people from TX and apologized to them.

That's in the article, too.

"Reasonable, safe storage?" It wasn't that. READ the doggone article--the place was subject to floods. It was NOT a safe place.

And the replacement facility? Built over an aquifer?

They're real smart down there in TX.

smh.

[Vinca]

135. So you think a site abutting the Connecticut River isn't subject to flooding?

But at least there is now one post on the Internet claiming Texans are smart. That's something.

[MADem]

137. You're telling me that VT has NO real estate to stash their own shit?

That the entire state of VT is just one big old "flood-y" kind of place?

That when they say they're all "pro-environment" they really mean "their own personal environment" and screw that of TX?

smh

[Vinca]

157. Wow - you're totally overwhelmed with Bernie hate, aren't you?

I'm sure people with expertise beyond yours or mine pick these spots and business people are free to buy 600 acres or whatever it was and charge for the service. I know the people who used to work at the plant made a very good living and that would improve the lot in life for all those Texans. (Psssst . . . almost everyone in Vermont gets their water from drilled wells and as far as I know the residents who live near the plant have never glowed in the dark.) This is nothing more than trying to make an issue out of a non-issue. I'm certain we can nitpick Hillary's record, but why bother? She will be crowned and most likely win the general, then we'll be treated to 4 or 8 years of right wing Hillary hate, investigations and assorted BS that will result in nothing at all getting done for the country. If Bernie won, he'd probably be treated the same way. Neither candidate is going to be able to accomplish much of anything if elected until we undo the gerrymandering after the next census. So calm down already.

[giftedgirl77]

126. But it's Sanders so it's ok.

[BlueCaliDem]

131. Wow. This was an ugly act against a poor Mexican populace.

Why did Sanders have to push to dump nuclear waste in the backyards of poor Mexicans in Texas? Why not in the backyards of Vermonters?

This is a troubling look into his past votes when it concerns Hispanics/Latinos. This should trouble minorities across the nation.

[SoapBox]

148. Really? You going to push that baloney...again? Really?

Where would you like me to start...

It was a measure between Vermont, MAINE, TEXAS and The HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

PRESIDENT Clinton signed it.

Texas spent $900,000 buying up land in a desolate area, that had no land that was usable for farming and had a populace of 500(Govenor BUSH was really pushing for this facility.)

The largest employer finally closed, leaving 40 persons out of work...a sludge dump that was accepting sludge from NYC!

The "nuclear waste site", that was to take low grade waste from medical facilities as well as some low radiation items from power plants (items to be encased in concrete and buried)...WAS NEVER BUILT and the waste was never shipped there. The permit to build it was finally denied.

Noting the Politifact article from 09/22/15 admitted that the chart they were sent, was from a Clinton supporter...it was anonymous and neither campaign responded for comment. Even being anonymous, they ran with it any way. Politifact also did not examine Clinton's stances on the list.

There is more if you want it!

Stop with the Racist Card...it's really, really dishonest.

[Thinkingabout]

164. I got it, Texas will ship Vermont their nuclear waste, now that would be fair.

[BlueCaliDem]

190. As they say, truth matters...and hurts.

Where would you like me to start...

You can start by admitting that Sanders is NO Liberal - not in the traditional sense Liberals are proud to be known by. Actions speak louder than words, and Sanders rhetoric doesn't line up with his actions. He's just another politician who wants to keep his government job and will say anything to secure it. He's no different than any other politician. Time to take off those rose-colored glasses.

It was a measure between Vermont, MAINE, TEXAS and The HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

So? Are any of them running for president? Any of them selling themselves as the only Liberal who stands on principle and is above politics?

PRESIDENT Clinton signed it.

So? Did President Clinton co-sponsor the bill? Did he vote for it in the House? Did he actively usher the bill through the House and then travel to Texas to lobby for it? No? Then you're desperately comparing apples and oranges.

As Sanders supporters like to point out, President Clinton is a Republican-lite/Third-way/Corporatist/whatever-other-derogatory-non-liberal-label-they-can-think-up, right? So his signing that bill would be perfectly in line with those labels, wouldn't it? So does that make Bernie Sanders a Republican-lite/Third-way/Corporatist/whatever-other-derogatory-non-liberal-label-they-can-think-up for co-sponsoring, supporting, voting for and actively lobbying that bill?

Think about it for a minute.

Texas spent $900,000 buying up land in a desolate area, that had no land that was usable for farming and had a populace of 500(Govenor BUSH was really pushing for this facility.)

So? Does that make it a-okay for a Vermont self-proclaimed Socialist and Liberal to co-sponsor, support, vote for, and lobby to have their low-level nuclear waste dumped where poor people live in order to keep the more affluent State of Vermont "pristine"? Hm. Not very liberal nor socialist of Sanders, is it?

Those 500, predominantly Mexican-Americans, were poor people, earning on average $8,000 a YEAR. They needed Sanders' support and defense, but they didn't get it. On the other hand, they couldn't hurt Sanders politically - nor could they protest. For a self-proclaimed Socialist and Liberal icon who's "looking out for the little guy" as I've been told by his supporters here on DU, he sure is acting like a privileged bully.

The largest employer finally closed, leaving 40 persons out of work...a sludge dump that was accepting sludge from NYC!

So? Does that let Sanders off the hook in your book?

The "nuclear waste site", that was to take low grade waste from medical facilities as well as some low radiation items from power plants (items to be encased in concrete and buried)...WAS NEVER BUILT and the waste was never shipped there. The permit to build it was finally denied.

No thanks to that liberal icon, Bernie Sanders. This is in large part thanks to the actions by Sierra Club whose members made a BIG STINK about this, and by The Texas Observer that reported on it, shining a light on this nasty little scheme, making it politically unpopular.

Noting the Politifact article from 09/22/15 admitted that the chart they were sent, was from a Clinton supporter...it was anonymous and neither campaign responded for comment. Even being anonymous, they ran with it any way. Politifact also did not examine Clinton's stances on the list.

So? Is this, in your opinion, suppose to let Sanders off the hook for co-sponsoring, supporting, and voting for this horrible bill?

There is more if you want it!

No. I don't want you to embarrass yourself more than you've already done.

Stop with the Racist Card...it's really, really dishonest.

Claiming that I'm "playing the racist card" is what's dishonest here. The Texas Observer, not I, reported that Sierra Blanca was 2/3rds Latino and poor, and they, not I, reported that Sanders not only voted for the bill but co-sponsored it before he actively pushed it through the U.S. House of Reps. So if a racist card has been played here, it's either through false reporting by the The Texas Observer or by Sanders for co-sponsoring, supporting, voting for, and lobbying that nasty bill instead of understanding the plight of those 40 out-of-work people by trying to pass a bill to give them jobs, rather than pissing on their heads.

[RandySF]

182. Because he never thought he would ever seek their votes.

[William769]

138. Kick & recommended.

[SoapBox]

145. Real clear on the Real Clear Politics...

"I really love RealClearPolitics because they post opinion pieces from all sides and it does help you get a broad world view."

Megyn Kelly Fox News

[Politicalboi]

153. So voting for an illegal war is fine then

And the TPP is a pipeline to health. We all know she supports TPP even though she won't admit it. She's waiting for the polls to tell her how to answer that one.

[Thinkingabout]

165. Maybe you could sign up for some of the nuclear waste in order to support Sanders, show how it is

okay for you to live with Vermont's waste.

[paul ofnoclique]

168. Fighting Amongst Ourselves

Can we at least agree that Sanders, or Clinton, or O'Malley would all be vastly superior as president than ANY of the nutfucks on the other side? Oy!

[Chitown Kev]

178. I have brought this issue up a couple of times

Paul Wellstone was the hero on this specific issue and not Bernie Sanders

The congressional debates on this issue are still on C-span...I have seen them on a couple of occasions.

1 fact here...Don't put this on Bush, it was Ann Richards that approved this.