It appears that the Nov. 2 election was even more divided by color than we realized...

So color-driven, in fact, that Jim Crow got a major woody. Believe it or not, Alabama citizens voted to keep racism in their state Constitution. The Alabama Legislature put up Amendment 2 this fall, an effort to remove the three most glaring remnants of racism in their state Constitution, and the voters voted it down. Aparently, the majority of Alabama voters believe that schools must be segregated, a poll tax must be paid, and Alabama children do not have the right to an education at taxpayer expense, because they voted to keep these items as a part of their state Constitution.

Of course, federal law trumps their pointlessly racist state laws, but this was a symbolic move that I think makes a very profound statement about the status of civilization (or utter lack thereof) in Alabama. I won't even go in to the fact that the opposition to Amendment 2 was led by the Christian Coalition, because you all know exactly what I would have to say about those buggers.

Sometimes a total stranger will write something that is absolutely, positively aimed directly at me.

On The Utility Of Minneapolis-St. Paul As A Base Of Opperations For Various Well-Known Superheroes or Super Teams.

[An exerpt] "Spider-Man: Poor. The lack of a single, concentrated downtown area would greatly hinder Spider-Man's preferred method of transportation. Given that there's not much higher than three stories after you get out of the two downtowns, swinging from building to building isn't going to work. It's not difficult to imagine Spider-Man standing on Nicollet Mall in downtown Minneapolis, hearing that thugs have taken over the Xcel Center over in St. Paul, and cursing under his breath as he runs to I-94, forced to affix a web to the top of a bus and ride it across town."

I suppose this particular work of genius could be just as much in tune with all other superhero-loving Twin City natives, and not just to myself, but I would far rather assume a more ego-centric perspective and conclude that the authors were directly channeling my subconsious when they penned it.

Pro-life at any price:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Women seeking abortions in Mississippi must first sign a form indicating they've been told abortion can increase their risk of breast cancer. They aren't told that scientific reviews have concluded there is no such risk.

Similar information suggesting a cancer link is given to women considering abortion in Texas, Louisiana and Kansas, and legislation to require such notification has been introduced in 14 other states.

I understand if people feel strongly about abortion, and I respect the right of all people to voice their opinions, but what I don't understand is why they would feel the need to lie if they really believe they are in the right. Shouldn't they be able to convince women not to have abortions using the truth, if that is the better choice? Why should they need to promote blatant lies to get their way, and how can they feel comfortable with themselves knowing they are using dishonest means and deceiving women about what is one of the most important decisions a human can make?

I'll bet most people don't realize how appropriate the label "Red state" really is. Though one usually pictures the denizen of a Red state as a gun-toting fag-hating Capitalist cowboy, it turns out that only 75% of that stereotype is accurate...rather than living up to the Capitalist ideals they claim to cherish, the Red states are actually redder than Communist tomatoes. (Though that's not really a good bit of imagry, because Communist tomatoes would be devoured by the starving proletariat masses long before they could ripen into redness.)

Red states tend to be the states that benefit most from our federal tax/aid system, becoming the "winners" in our wealth-redistribution lottery. For instance, states that voted for Al Gore in the 2000 election received an average of $0.87 for every dollar they paid in Federal taxes in fiscal 2002, while states that voted for Bush received an average of $1.12. Interestingly, the two closest states in the 2000 election (Florida and Oregon) each received an even $1.00. In the 2000 election, 76% percent of the "winning" states went to Bush, with 17 of the top 20 winners voting for Dubya. The "loser" states were predominantly Blue, supporting the Anybody But The Chimp ticket. Granted, the District of Columbia is a solid Blue state that is the biggest "winner" of them all--with around $6.00 in for every dollar out--but I think we can all see why DC might be a special case.

So it seems that the Red states should really be counting their blessings that those godless baby-eating liberals are also pinkos, because only pinkos would be okay with footing the bill for the failed economies and third-world social service SNAFUs of Red America. Small wonder that the neo-con movement is quickly leaving behind the philosophy of fiscal responsibility their party once campaigned upon; they are the ones reaping the greatest rewards for irresponsibility, and they know that the foolish Commies of the liberal Northeast will pick up the tab.

Republicans also seem to be surprisingly inept in the very areas that popular lore tells us are their strong points. If you look at statistics from the last 60 years, the averages for unemployment, GDP growth, and inflation under Democratic presidents are significantly healthier than the averages for those indicators under Republican presidents. Contrary to "Spend-o-crat" myth, the average increase in Federal spending is higher for the Republican presidents than for the Democratic CICs, and the average yearly deficit increases are higher under Republican presidents. The proverbial buck doesn't stop with the President, either; recent numbers on the state level show that state legislatures controlled by Republicans increased spending an average of 6.54% per year from 1997 to 2002, compared with 6.17% for legislatures run by Democrats. Even the average number of new Federal employees is higher for Republicans than for Democrats, which seems odd when one considers that conservatives supposedly favor smaller government.

What I find especially funny is that the word "liberal" is used as a smear against the very sort of fiscal irresponsibility that the neo-cons are practicing, while a classic liberal is far more fiscally conservative than the GOP has been in decades.

Got sent a really fun article by an old Boston buddy, just a little something that shoots down the common conservative distain for the lack of family values among "Massachusetts liberals."

According to the US census Bureau, Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate of any state in the union, 2.4 per 1,000 population. Texas has a rate of 4.1. Don't feel like trusting the government stats? Well, even a company run by a born-again Christian couldn't get different results; the George Barna Research Group found that not only do the infamous baby-eating liberals of Massachusetts have the lowest rate of divorce, but also that born-again Christians have one of the highest divorce rates of any demographic. The Associated Press also found that Bible Belt states have the highest divorce rates, with the average rate being roughly 50% above the national average. 10 out of the 10 highest divorce rates are found in Red states, as a matter of fact.

These results are unsurprising, especially in view of statistics showing that education level and marital stability are related. Bible Belt states have significantly lower high school graduation and college attendence rates than the national averages, while states like Massachusetts are above the average. Per capita income is also higher in states like Massachusetts, even adjusting for regional differences in prices and cost of living, and studies have repeatedly indicated that financial concerns are among the most common causes of marital problems.

So the next time some cowboy tries to smear your values by comparing you to a Massachusetts liberal, remind him that he is "insulting" you by telling you that you have better education, higher income, and a more stable marriage.

UPDATE: Special thanks to Jay, for sending me an article that also points out how the highest murder rates in the country are also found in Bible Belt states. Great American family values they have down there, what with all the murder, divorce, third-world literacy rates, and Communistic draining of the Federal economy.

We all are now very familiar with (and sick of) the infamous $87 billion that President Bush asked Congress to grant him for the war on terror, the $87 billion that Kerry apparently has voted for, against, over, under, and adjacent to. But DID YOU KNOW:

A stack of single dollar bills totalling $87 million would be over 5,492 miles long. This is the same distance as a round trip between Washington DC, where I currently live, and Los Angeles, California, where my hetero life partner hangs his hat.

Yep. Too much time on my hands. Tooooooo much time.