Bits 'n Pieces, from Here 'n
Ground Rules: We
will add to this page "from the top down," thus the newest
pieces will appear at the beginning, and as they are added,
items at the bottom will move to "The In-Box Archives," and
eventually out altogether. (The same rules applies to "The
Chamber of Horrors.")
A Warning from 100 Nobel Prize Winners
The most profound danger to world peace in the coming years will stem not
from the irrational acts of state or individuals but from the legitimate
demands of the world's dispossessed. Of these poor and disenfranchised,
the majority live in a marginal existence in equatorial climates. Global
warming, not of their making but originating with the wealthy few, will affect
their fragile ecologies most. Their situation will be desperate and
It cannot be expected, therefore, that in all cases they will be content to
await the beneficence of the rich. If then we permit the devastating
power of modern weaponry to spread through this combustible human landscape,
we invite a conflagration that can engulf both rich and poor. The only
hope for the future lies in cooperative international action, legitimized by
It is time to turn our backs on the unilateral search for security, in
which we seek shelter behind walls. Instead, we must persist in the
quest for united action to counter both global warming and a weaponized world.
These twin goals will constitute vital components of stability as we move
toward the wider degree of social justice that alone gives hope of peace.
Some of the needed legal instruments are already at hand, such as the
Anti=Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Convention on Climate Change, the Strategic
Arms Reduction Treaties, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. As
concerned citizens, we urge all governments to commit to these goals that
constitute steps on the way to replacement of war by law.
Joseph E. Stiglitz, Economics, 2001
Edmond H. Fischer, Physiology/Medicine,1992
Herbert Kroemer, Physics, 2000
Richard R. Ernst, Chemistry, 1991
Guenter Blobel, Physiology/Medicine, 1999
Mikhail S. Gorbachev, Peace 1990
Horst L. Stormer, Physics, 1998
His Holiness, The Dalai Lama, Peace, 1989
Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Physics, 1997
Robert Huber, Chemistry, 1988
Peter C. Doherty, Physiology/Medicine, 1996
Oscar Arias Sanches, Peace, 1989
Paul J. Crutzen, Chemistry, 1995
Dudley R. Herschback, Chemistry, 1986
Bertram Brockhouse, Physics,
Klaus von Klitzing, Physics, 1985
Joseph E. taylor, Physics,
... And 85 other Nobel Prize Winners
The Shrub Giveth, and The Shrub Taketh Away.
Recently I fell into a heated argument about Bush's Tax Giveaway
with my cousin, a southern California conservative.
"So, if you feel that way," she said, "why
not just give back the $300 that Bush gave you!"
Well guess what, cuz? It looks like I will do just that --
and so will you, and the rest of us poor suckers. Just take a close look
at Line 47 of your 1040 form.
The New York Times' Paul Krugman explains: "Most
taxpayers, when they reach line 47 of their 1040s, will discover that they owe
$300 more in taxes than they expected. In other words, [that] one piece of
the Bush tax cut ... is about to be snatched away." (2/22/02)
In other words, it wasn't a "rebate" at all. It
was an advance!
And now it's gone.
Gee, thanks for nothing, Dubya.
A survey was conducted in the world. Respondents
were asked to "please write down your opinion about food shortages in
The results were disastrous. In Africa they did not
know the meaning of "food'" in Western Europe they did not know
the meaning of "shortage;" in Eastern Europe they did not know the
meaning of "opinion;" and in the United States they did not know
the meaning of "other countries."
Linda Deak, "International Ignorance"
From a Gift Tee Shirt: Some Oxymorons
(QQ to the Legal Department: Can one copyright a Tee Shirt?)
And above all: "Compassionate
"A Funny Thing Happened to Al Gore
on his Way to
Imagine if the Media Weren't "Liberal"
A "Lisa Ramsey" reported the following to "Media Whores
Wish we could say we were surprised to read this.
I'd like to let you know about my experience as a participant on
"Hardball" in November 2000 during the recount fiasco. I was
part of Frank Luntz' "focus group" that pitted ten Republicans
against ten Democrats.
We were told to come to a hotel in West Palm Beach an hour before the
show. Upon arrival, we were checked off a list and segregated by
party. I was close enough to the Republicans to see a man passing out
"talking points" to his fellow panelists -- telling them that it would
be great if they could incorporate them into whatever they said -- and to make
it sound personal.
I was outraged and tried to get a copy. I must have looked like a
liberal, so they sent me back to my corner. I approached one of the
producers about it, only to be blown off.
About a half an hour before the show, we were taken to the room with the
cameras. Each side had a few more people than they actually needed, so
Frank and the producer started to hand pick the participants and show them to
Interestingly, I was passed over initially (perhaps they smelled a trouble
maker). I made it on when a gentleman had to recuse himself. I could
have sworn that he said that he was a lawyer and they said they didn't allow
lawyers, but I could be wrong.
So here we sat for what was said to be a "sound check."
The guy next to me explained in whispers that this was actual an "attitude
check" and that the producers were identifying who might possess a brain
along with an attitude. During the show, those folks would be avoided and
interrupted at all costs, my new friend said, unless they sat on the Republican
All said, the show looked like a one-sided Jerry Springer show ... with
the well dressed and rehearsed Republicans winning sizable airtime with the
facist talking points. I found the whole experience very disturbing.
Recently, I read an article which identified Mr. Luntz as a GOP pollster.