really mean anything to the average voter? My sense is that it does not and will not unless enough of those voters are touched personally by the issues which the Nobel Laurettes are proposing policy changes for.
My guess is that the price of gasoline at the pump and any lingering impact that high or lower energy prices have on people's daily lives will mean far more than this endorsement to most people. Such is the way that life works.
An Open Letter to the American People
---------------------------------------------
June 21, 2004
Presidential elections present us with choices about our nation's future. We support John Kerry for President and urge you to join us.
The prosperity, health, environment, and security of Americans depend on Presidential leadership to sustain our vibrant science and technology; to encourage education at home and attract talented scientists and engineers from abroad; and to nurture a business environment that transforms new knowledge into new opportunities for creating quality jobs and reaching shared goals.
President Bush and his administration are compromising our future on each of these counts. By reducing funding for scientific research, they are undermining the foundation of America's future. By setting unwarranted restrictions on stem cell research, they are impeding medical advances. By employing inappropriate immigration practices, they are turning critical scientific talent away from our shores. And by ignoring scientific consensus on critical issues such as global warming, they are threatening the earth's future. Unlike previous administrations, Republican and Democratic alike, the Bush administration has ignored unbiased scientific advice in the policy-making that is so important to our collective welfare.
John Kerry will change all this. He will support strong investments in science and technology as he restores fiscal responsibility. He will stimulate the development and deployment of technologies to meet our economic, energy, environmental, health, and security needs. He will recreate an America that provides opportunity to all at home or abroad who can help us make progress together.
John Kerry will restore science to its appropriate place in government and bring it back into the White House. He is the clear choice for America's next President.
Signed,
Peter Agre Chemistry 2003
David H. Hubel Medicine 1981
Sidney Altman Chemistry 1989
Louis Ignarro Medicine 1998
Philip W. Anderson Physics 1977
Eric R. Kandel Medicine 2000
David Baltimore Medicine 1975
Walter Kohn Chemistry 1998
Baruj Benacerraf Medicine 1980
Arthur Kornberg Medicine 1959
Paul Berg Chemistry 1980
Leon M. Lederman Physics 1988
Hans A. Bethe Physics 1967
Tsung-Dao Lee Physics 1957
Michael Bishop Medicine 1989
David M. Lee Physics 1996
Günter Blobel Medicine 1999
William N. Lipscomb Chemistry 1976
N. Bloembergen Physics 1981
Roderick MacKinnon Chemistry 2003
James W. Cronin Physics 1980
Mario J. Molina Chemistry 1995
Johann Deisenhofer Chemistry 1988
Joseph E. Murray Medicine 1990
John B. Fenn Chemistry 2002
Douglas D. Osheroff Physics 1996
Val Fitch Physics 1980
George Palade Medicine 1974
Jerome I. Friedman Physics 1990
Arno Penzias Physics 1978
Walter Gilbert Chemistry 1980
Martin L. Perl Physics 1995
Alfred G. Gilman Medicine 1994
Norman F. Ramsey Physics 1989
Donald A. Glaser Physics 1960
Burton Richter Physics 1976
Sheldon L. Glashow Physics 1979
Joseph H. Taylor Jr. Physics 1993
Joseph Goldstein Medicine 1985
E. Donnall Thomas Medicine 1990
Roger Guillemin Medicine 1977
Charles H. Townes Physics 1964
Dudley Herschbach Chemistry 1986
Harold Varmus Medicine 1989
Roald Hoffmann Chemistry 1981
Eric Wieschaus Medicine 1995
H. Robert Horvitz Medicine 2002
Robert W. Wilson Physics 1978
The views of expressed in this letter represent those of the signers acting as individual citizens. They do not necessarily represent the views of the institutions with which they are affiliated. The Medicine award is for "Physiology or Medicine."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Are YOU Really Better Off Today Than You Were Four Years Ago ?"
-- Modified on 6/22/2004 2:14:55 PM
No question that George W. has been a nightmare for AIDS researchers in the U.S. As one example, almost all research to develop a chemical "barrier" to HIV, which would serve as an adjunct to the well known physical "barrier" provided by condoms, has been suspended.
Indeed, George W. has thrown a bone to his conservative supporters, by inappropriately and inaccurately emphasizing the failure rates of condoms in preventing STD's.
really mean anything to the average voter? My sense is that it does not and will not unless enough of those voters are touched personally by the issues which the Nobel Laurettes are proposing policy changes for.
My guess is that the price of gasoline at the pump and any lingering impact that high or lower energy prices have on people's daily lives will mean far more than this endorsement to most people. Such is the way that life works.
I have the impression that this election will be a watershed moment that transcends self interest, and will instead be based upon core values. The debate seems to be not to be about this policy versus that, but more about how trust is allocated. Bush is a known, and people have strong feelings either way. Kerry's supporters likewise are not ambivalent. Several polls have suggested that there are few undecided voters. The winners will be relieved and the losers concerned.
All I can say is, wow.
in Economics. 'Course, Socialists in the academy always forget that it is by virtue of the profits produced by capitalism that they have the luxury of spouting their BS.
Anyone who does not agree with your point of view is a socialist. Also, I am reasonably sure that the Nobel Prizes are not funded by corporations. The government of Sweden, as far as I know, has never went around with hat in hand to corporations for the funds that are handed out with the awards.
Also, since you cannot seem to pull your head out of tight dark spaces easily, I will explain one simple fact to you. The Nobel Prizes in economics have historically gone to economists from all points of the political spectrum.
-- Modified on 6/23/2004 7:37:37 PM
One should also note that james86 is communicating via the internet, an invention in its start-up phase that was funded solely by the U.S. government.
Indeed, without these kinds of "socialist" inventions, james86 would still be scrawling his missives on clay tablets, much like the ancient Sumerians.
Uh- dude
Alfred Nobel the inventor of Dynamite did it! It's like Carnegie- excpet that he was less a robber baron. Made a ton off the Franco Prussian war etc.
I read somewhere that after helping to cause so much destruction, he wanted to be constructive...
But your right about JimIQ- He's a mild middle of the roader and anyone he dislikes is a commie. If fact, he's pretty aligned with the Birchers, so Bush Sr. would be a pinko to him!
That's why I use "reactionary" so much....
About Alfred Bernhard Nobel, inventor of dynamite, funding the first Nobel Prizes. But his original endowment ran out a long time ago. The modern prizes have been funded by the government of Sweden for most of the last century. I had the pleasure of meeting a beautiful (high end model class) Swedish grad student many years ago, through her, I got the sense that the prize is a symbol of their country and a thing of pride for them.
1. As I've noted before, my IQ always tested out at more than half again as much as the number in my handle. So why isn't Sully's missive a "personal attack" inappropriate to the Board?
2. Again, as I've said before, unlike the Birchers, I don't confuse stupidity with conspiracy. Problem with most of today's socialists is that they are too stupid to realize that they're Socialists. That's why Bernie Sander should always be identified as the only admitted Socialist in Congress. There are plenty of them who just won't admit it, but consistently pursue a socialist agenda.
3. I said nothing about Alfred Nobel, but it's telling that you would want to disparage one of those who helped build this country in describing him. You're actually fairly accurate about Nobel's pedigree.
As to the principle message, why should we be surprised when those who feed at the public trough support a many who wants to fill it with caviar, champagne, and prime rib taken from the productive at the point of a gun? Why should we be surprised when they support a man who wants treat human beings like just another commodity?
Because, FYI, mine tested out quite a bit higher than the numbers you've implied that you got on these tests.
But frankly, until you started to trot out these numbers as some type of validation for your opinions, I never paid them much mind, at least not since my SATs helped me get into all of the colleges that I applied to some ~25 years ago.
And if you're really curious about my scores, let me know and I'll PM you with the numbers. Suffice it to say, MUCH higher than anything you've implied you got.
BTW, it's never a good idea to get into a "my dick's bigger than yours" spat in a public forum. Because sometimes, you might discover that you've got the short shaft, by an embarrassing margin.
-- Modified on 6/25/2004 3:28:50 PM
Why the hissy fit over socialism. It is not a discredited theory at all and many parts of Marx's ideas are common currency with many parts of the political spectrum.
I still think your big beef is with Marxist-LENINISM. And National Socialism And with Stalinism. These were authoritarian regimes. It's usually the authoritarianist part that rubs people the wrong way.
On the other hand we often use the term Social Democrats to describe many progressive parties, world wide. The old GOP prpbalby qualified- before screwing the poor, the christian agenda and military adventurism became its currency!
So now you're in favour of the robber barons? You know they got called that because of the many activities they carried out that would be considered illegal now? Restraint of trade? monopolys? Hell, many of them hired gunsels to beat or kill their business opposition or workers! You think that was OK? It was that kind of predation that spawned the union movement and the alternate political movements like socialism and nihilism, anarchism etc.
Man you are one mixed up dude. Even with your heady personal stats.
South Korea vs North Korea
Vietnam vs Singapore
South Florida vs Cuba
Very few residents of Cuba, North Korea or Vietnam would not cut off a body part to move to South Korea, South Florida or Singapore.
The only difference between these models and the socialistic European Union is that Europe went towards socialism slower and will fail slower, as it is now.
Red China is moving towards capitalism, and growing economically.
Oh and "nihilism" is not a political movement, it is a description of John Kerry's religiosity!