If the goal is to get the best artists actors and filmmakers in the world to create the best movies Hollywood does a decent job. And I think no one would disagree with me that it also makes a ton of bad movies and employs a bunch of hacks.

You can't work in the movies. Movies are all about lighting. Very few filmmakers will concentrate on the story. You get very little rehearsal time so anything you do onscreen is a kind of speed painting.

Young film makers should learn how to deal with the money and learn how to deal with the power structure. Because it is like a battle.

Who gets the risks? The risks are given to the consumer the unsuspecting consumer and the poor work force. And who gets the benefits? The benefits are only for the corporations for the money makers.

I'm knocking our pitiful pathetic lawmakers. And I thank God that President Bush has stated we need a Constitutional amendment that states that marriage is between a man and a woman.

As this body of knowledge has evolved a much more critical job for researchers and scientists has evolved into explaining and educating policy makers and the public to the risks of global warming and the possible consequences of action or of no action.

We do not need to be shoemakers to know if our shoes fit and just as little have we any need to be professionals to acquire knowledge of matters of universal interest.

The resistance of policy-makers to intelligence is not just founded on an ideological presupposition. They distrust intelligence sources and intelligence officials because they don't understand what the real problems are.

Here's the teaching point if you're teaching kids about intelligence and policy: Intelligence does not absolve policymakers of responsibility to ask tough questions and it doesn't absolve them of having curiosity about the consequences of their actions.

And I argued with that intelligence estimate and I think it is a responsibility of policymakers to use their best judgment on the basis of the intelligence they've received.