#63 May/June 2003
The Washington Free Press Washington's Independent Journal of News, Ideas & Culture
Home  |  Subscribe |  Back Issues |  The Organization |  Volunteer |  Do Something Directory 

Regulars

Reader Mail

Global Warming Update

Nature Doc

Workplace

Bob's Random Legal Wisdom

Issues On Film

Rad Videos

Features

Rubber Ducky Sweepstake Winners

Challenge to Government Secrecy on "No Fly" List
from the ACLU

Scooping 'em in America
The Free Press got there first
by Doug Collins

SWEEPSTAKES RULES
Ducky contest is extended

Challenge to Government Secrecy on "No Fly" List
from the ACLU

My Japanese Protest
by Joel Hanson

Imprisoned for Peace
personal account by Jean Buskin

Iraq War Quiz
by Stephen R. Shalom

Bush's War: Orwellian Symmetry
opinion by Donald Torrence

Winner-Take-All Politics Feeds Militarization
by Steven Hill

Labor's Enron
Labor leaders used insider positions to rake off millions
opinion by Charles Walker

Attorney general: WEA ignored law

Michael Moore In Shoreline
He nominates Oprah for President
by Chris Jones

Mysteries of the Twin Towers
Will the National Commission reveal the truth?
by Rodger Herbst, BAAE, ME

Create Your Own Tax Cut
opinion by Joel Hanson

Fish or Farms?
Salmon die in the Klamath due to Bush administration decisions
by Hannah A. Lee

King County Passes Mercury Thermometer Sales Ban
by Brandie Smith

Welcome to the Pesticide Free Zone
by Philip Dickey

Road Kill
State's DOT is mainly to blame for roadside herbicides
by Angela Storey

Real Faces
At protests, people usually see each other shoulder-to-shoulder;photoessayist Kristianna Baird helps us look face-to-face

Rubber Ducky Sweepstake Winners

Here are two winning answers to last issue's Rubber Ducky Dilemma question: "Why do most rubber duckies not float right, and what does this say about us?"

There's no ducking this issue, even if the tub holds water. Like the Iraq occupation, ducks which don't float, or tip over from the weight of their empty plastic heads, quack of a bigger global mess. Only bonds seem to be able to float in this morass of corporate profit-centeredness. There's no heart or solid base upon which duckie is centered enough to float. [Small detail: If duckies were really made of rubber (but that wouldn't use hydrocarbons, would it, and they would last longer) their bigger butts would sit right down and do the job.]

Made in factories where labor is way cheaper than the US, (where there are few factories left) millions of duckies get pooped out of a tube, then glide on conveyor belts past overworked operators in a shockingly small amount of time, without the benefit of baths. Non-renewable packaging is the major material cost of one of these toys. Spruced up real cute, sold real cheap; you buy it. You're disappointed, but you figure you haven't time to make it worth your while to return it and get your money back. The plastic goes to the landfill, and we need another war. Returned by the millions these ducks could really stir the pond.

But, better left on the shelves. Instead of taking a bath from these toy's marketeers, we can splash around without them and have a real good time.
--Susan Laughlin

Yes, we consider the fate of the once wide ranging wild and roaming disposable now they are domesticated, disposible, decorative and multiplied to fashion each demographic group such as devil ducks celebs ducks and more--they now cant float--it is the sign of the end of the world--the nice floating ducks have been spoiled by competitions to fit the 31 flavors of ducks instead of buoyantly and longevity--use once and throw or stay on the shelf is the new role of the rubber ducky--no longer part of the bath at all--the end is near because of it--
--caren beecher


Search the Free Press back issues:    

The Washington Free Press
PMB #178, 1463 E Republican ST, Seattle WA 98112 [email protected]

Donate free food
Home |  Subscribe |  Back Issues |  The Organization |  Volunteer |  Do Something Directory