[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
Renwick Vel Eros' LiveJournal:
| Sunday, November 28th, 2004 | |
| 7:13 pm | Superman is a big dick     http://www.viewaskew.com/theboard/viewt |
| Sunday, November 21st, 2004 | |
| 7:49 pm | |
| 7:15 pm | Brazil to decriminalize drugs http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/11_16_04 |
| Tuesday, November 16th, 2004 | |
| 4:45 pm | Ayahuasceros:2 Ashcroft: 0 In your face: http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2 "There is no reason to think that the "general maxim" that "the purpose of a preliminary injunction is to preserve the status quo between the parties pending a full trial on the merits" is one that "should not be taken merely at face value" or disregarded except insofar as it "impacts the balance of harms between the parties and the public interest." Opinion of Seymour, J., at 6, 7. A judicial version of Hippocrates' ancient injunction to physicians ? above all, to do no harm ? counsels against forcing changes before there has been a determination of the parties' legal rights. The settled rule of our tradition is that losses should remain where they fall until an adequate legal or equitable justification for shifting them has been demonstrated. McCONNELL J, Nov 2004 - UDV v Ashcroft " As of November 2004, the DEA is barred from seizing the UDV's hoasca in the U.S. |
| 11:57 am | "Also, my girlfriend is awesome. She passed the bar and has done much celebrating, and took me out on a date last Saturday night. She is hot and mine. Sucks to be all of you suckers." |
| Monday, November 15th, 2004 | |
| 6:20 pm | Shooting game tells you your political affiliation. http://www.loveinwar.com/game.cfm |
| 5:45 pm | Ohioans- Please call Senator Mike DeWine, and urge him to support Senator Arlen Specter Please call Senator Mike DeWine, and urge him to support Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) for chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee: Senator Mike DeWine Washington, DC 202-224-2315 Columbus 614-469-5186 Cincinatti 513-763-8260 Cleveland 216-522-7272 Toledo 419-259-7536 Marietta 740-373-2317 Xenia 937-376-3080 The right wing's top priority now is to pack the Supreme Court with right-wing extremists. With Chief Justice Rehnquist's health failing, the fights over who will replace him, and potentially 2 or 3 other aging justices too, could start any day now. The playing field is being defined right now, with the question of who will head the Senate Judiciary Committee. This committee will have huge influence over whether President Bush's nominees are confirmed, and even whom he nominates. Senator Arlen Specter is in line to chair the committee. Specter isn't great, but he says he's pro-choice, and he recently said President Bush would do better not to nominate anti-choice judges for the Supreme Court. With the right to reproductive choice, defined by Roe vs. Wade, hanging in the balance by just one vote, the right wing is mounting a full-court press for justices certain to vote to overturn it. Specter's chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee represents one of our best hopes of stopping them. So they're trying to keep Specter from getting the post. Senator DeWine will have a lot of influence over this matter, since he also sits on the Judiciary Committee. Please call him right now, at: Senator Mike DeWine Washington, DC 202-224-2315 Columbus 614-469-5186 Cincinatti 513-763-8260 Cleveland 216-522-7272 Toledo 419-259-7536 Marietta 740-373-2317 Xenia 937-376-3080 Urge him to demand that Senator Specter chair the Judiciary Committee. Please make your call now -- a decision on Specter is expected imminently. |
| Sunday, November 14th, 2004 | |
| 1:03 am | More Bad News for US Stem Cell Research US stem cells tainted by mouse material 14:25 01 November 04 NewScientist.com news service The stem cell lines available for federally-funded research in the US have characteristics which mean they may never be used for medical treatments in humans, a new study suggests. Fred Gage at the Salk Institute in La Jolla, California and Ajit Varki at the University of California, San Diego, US, have shown that human embryonic stem cells (hESC) cultivated on a scaffolding of mouse “feeder” cells take on the properties of the rodent cells. Consequently, if implanted in a human they would provoke an immune response that would kill the hESCs, they say. The finding reinforces calls by US stem cell researchers for their government to free up federal money to research fresh lines of human ESCs, grown on non-biological scaffolds. Stem cell research in the US is currently limited to 22 lines, following a policy introduced by President George W Bush in 2001. These lines were derived before August 2001 and all of the cells were grown on a scaffolding of mouse cells. “It’s a new twist on why it can’t be done,” says Richard Hynes, a biologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of the National Academy of Sciences’ committee on guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research. Red meat ESCs are primitive, unspecialised cells which have the potential to develop into any cell in the body – so they could theoretically be used to replace damaged cells and tissues. In 1998, Varki showed that a sugar present on the surface of most mammal and rodent cells is lacking in humans. Called N-glycolyl-neuraminic acid, or Neu5Gc, it differs from a sugar humans do express, N-acetyl neuraminic acid, or Neu5Ac by a single oxygen atom. In 2003 he showed that humans absorb Neu5Gc molecules when they eat red meat and milk products and have consequently developed antibodies against it. Varki also found that human cells in culture absorb Neu5Gc from any surrounding sources and incorporate it into their own cell surfaces. Now Varki and Gage have added human blood serum to samples of cells derived from the 22 approved lines and shown that the hESCs trigger an immune response which kills them. “When they are transplanted into the body these cells are perceived as being animal cells,” Gage told a meeting at the National Academies of Science on 12 October, 2004. The details of the work are to be published later in 2004. Jelly-like matrix “It’s always been known that these would not be ideal candidates for clinical trials,” says Evan Snyder, director of the Stem Cell and Regeneration Program at the Burnham Institute in La Jolla. But up until now the main fear was that pathogens from the mouse could pass to humans. “I don’t think anybody is even thinking of putting these cells into people,” adds Hynes. Subscribe to New Scientist for more news and features Related Stories Stem cells mend hearts at a distance 07 October 2004 The US battle over stem cells 06 October 2004 'Clean' human stem cells grown 04 August 2002 For more related stories search the print edition Archive Weblinks Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research, National Academies of Science Fred Gage, Salk Institute Ajit Varki, UCSD Carol Ware, University of Washington International Society for Stem Cell Research So privately-funded US scientists are actively searching for non-biological alternatives to the mouse cell scaffolding. Contenders include a jelly-like matrix, and human muscle or blood cells. But because Bush-approved research is limited to the older lines, federally-funded scientists cannot take advantage of newer stem cells grown on alternative scaffoldings. This “significantly” limits the value of the federally-funded research, says Snyder. “It renders [the government-approved cells] incredibly suspect. All work should be done with fresh lines,” he says. A second unpublished study by Carol Ware at the University of Washington, Seattle, US, also revealed that cells derived from five of the 22 lines were so difficult to grow and separate that they may not be clinically useful. |
| Saturday, November 13th, 2004 | |
| 10:42 pm | When did Liberal become a curse word? I've been wondering for a while now when did the word Liberal start to mean something bad? I mean "Liberal Portions" are generally a good thing and who has a vendetta against "Liberty". As my friend Jeremiah pointed out: "Technically Liberal refers to any democratic style of governance. As opposed to a monarchial style of governance popular when the term came into regular use. It is in fact derivative of the same root as Liberty." so when did it come to mean "nutty, often marginally employed hippie "? People talk about the "liberal media" and (insert random politician name) being too liberal. How can you be "too liberal"? Using the original definition If you are against people being liberal doesn't that automatically make you pro-monarchy? Who the fuck is pro-monarchy? Who started this trend of describing politicians as too liberal, etc.? Does anyone know? |
| 10:26 pm | Amerikka - A Fascist State? An aticle from Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 23, Number 2. ——————————————————————————– Free Inquiry readers may pause to read the “Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles” on the inside cover of the magazine. To a secular humanist, these principles seem so logical, so right, so crucial. Yet, there is one archetypal political philosophy that is anathema to almost all of these principles. It is fascism. And fascism’s principles are wafting in the air today, surreptitiously masquerading as something else, challenging everything we stand for. The cliché that people and nations learn from history is not only overused, but also overestimated; often we fail to learn from history, or draw the wrong conclusions. Sadly, historical amnesia is the norm. We are two-and-a-half generations removed from the horrors of Nazi Germany, although constant reminders jog the consciousness. German and Italian fascism form the historical models that define this twisted political worldview. Although they no longer exist, this worldview and the characteristics of these models have been imitated by protofascist1 regimes at various times in the twentieth century. Both the original German and Italian models and the later protofascist regimes show remarkably similar characteristics. Although many scholars question any direct connection among these regimes, few can dispute their visual similarities. Beyond the visual, even a cursory study of these fascist and protofascist regimes reveals the absolutely striking convergence of their modus operandi. This, of course, is not a revelation to the informed political observer, but it is sometimes useful in the interests of perspective to restate obvious facts and in so doing shed needed light on current circumstances. For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities, cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all followed the fascist or protofascist model in obtaining, expanding, and maintaining power. Further, all these regimes have been overthrown, so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and abuses is possible. Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level of similarity. 1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia. 2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation. 3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly. 4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite. 5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses. 6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses. 7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous. 8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion. 9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens. 10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice. 11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist. 12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power. 13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population. 14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite. Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not. Note 1. Defined as a “political movement or regime tending toward or imitating Fascism”—Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary. References Andrews, Kevin. Greece in the Dark. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1980. Chabod, Frederico. A History of Italian Fascism. London: Weidenfeld, 1963. Cooper, Marc. Pinochet and Me. New York: Verso, 2001. Cornwell, John. Hitler as Pope. New York: Viking, 1999. de Figuerio, Antonio. Portugal—Fifty Years of Dictatorship. New York: Holmes & Meier, 1976. Eatwell, Roger. Fascism, A History. New York: Penguin, 1995. Fest, Joachim C. The Face of the Third Reich. New York: Pantheon, 1970. Gallo, Max. Mussolini’s Italy. New York: MacMillan, 1973. Kershaw, Ian. Hitler (two volumes). New York: Norton, 1999. Laqueur, Walter. Fascism, Past, Present, and Future. New York: Oxford, 1996. Papandreau, Andreas. Democracy at Gunpoint. New York: Penguin Books, 1971. Phillips, Peter. Censored 2001: 25 Years of Censored News. New York: Seven Stories. 2001. Sharp, M.E. Indonesia Beyond Suharto. Armonk, 1999. Verdugo, Patricia. Chile, Pinochet, and the Caravan of Death. Coral Gables, Florida: North-South Center Press, 2001. Yglesias, Jose. The Franco Years. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1977. http://www.secularhumanism.org/libr |
| 10:05 pm | Investigate the Vote The following is an email I got about investigating the vote. It doesn't mention a few big things that I think are important. The two best sites for this info are http://www.blackboxvoting.org/ and http://www.blackboxvoting.com, then here is a site that has over 200 links to various incidents of voter fraud http://www.linkcrusader.com/vote_machin For those of you who want to call it a "conspiracy theory" - http://www.newstarget.com/002355.ht ---------------------- Dear MoveOn member, Questions are swirling around whether the election was conducted honestly or not. We need to know -- was it or wasn't it? If people were wrongly prevented from voting, or if legitimate votes were mis-counted or not counted at all, we need to know so the wrongdoers can be held accountable, and so we can prevent this from happening again. Members of Congress are demanding an investigation to answer this question. The decision on whether or not there will be an investigation could come as soon as Monday. Join us in supporting the call for one now, at: http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevot Then please invite your friends and colleagues to sign, as well. We need to show Congress that hundreds of thousands of Americans are serious about protecting the integrity of the vote. We're all hearing the stories and wondering what's true and what isn't. But at least two cases of serious problems are accepted beyond doubt: In Broward County, Florida, electronic voting machines counted backwards: as more people voted, the official vote count went down. [1] In one Columbus, Ohio suburb, election officials have acknowledged that electronic voting machines credited Bush with winning 4,258 votes, even though only 638 people voted there. [2] These are just cases where we know something went wrong. There were also lots of reports of people being denied ballots on Election Day. So far, these reports remain anecdotal, but they must be compiled and examined. And the Internet is abuzz with theories about why the official counts were so different from the exit polls. Do you have a story? Were you prevented from voting? Tell us, at: http://www.moveon.org/investigatethevot Six prominent members of Congress have called for an investigation. Representatives Conyers (D-MI), Holt (D-NJ), Nadler (D-NY), Scott (D-VA), Watt (D-NC) and Wexler (D-FL), have demanded that the U.S. General Accounting Office: immediately undertake an investigation of the efficacy of voting machines and new technologies used in the 2004 election, how election officials responded to difficulties they encountered, and what we can do in the future to improve our election systems and administration. [3] We've got to support their call by asking our own Representatives and Senators to join them. If you have a personal story of disenfranchisement, tell us. These members of Congress have agreed to include our stories and comments in their call for an investigation. Please sign now -- we'll deliver our compiled statements to them on Friday. Even if you don't have a personal story, your signature on our petition will still help build support for an investigation. To keep our faith in democracy, we need to know the facts. Your signature, and your story if you have one, will help. Thank you. Sincerely, --Carrie, Joan, Lee, Marika, Noah, Peter, Rosalyn, and Wes The MoveOn.org Team November 11th, 2004 Footnotes: 1. Broward Machines Count Backward, Palm Beach Post, November 5, 2004 http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/c 2. Glitch Gave Bush Extra Votes in Ohio, AP carried on CNN, November 5, 2004 http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/1 3. Letters from members of Congress to David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States, demanding an investigation of the election: November 5th, 2004 & November 8th, 2004 http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrat http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrat |
| Tuesday, November 9th, 2004 | |
| 9:01 pm | Just in case you were wondering, the bible is Pro-CHOICE http://home.att.net/~Resurgence/L-bible http://www.libchrist.com/other/abor (this one by christians) On the other side we have articles by nut-jobs writing crap like this: http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/m My point on posting these things is that the christian right claims to be christian but they don't even know any other interpretations of the bible besides their own. I would guess most of them DON'T know ancient hebrew. These people just use Jesus to further their own political agendas, they care less about god and more about making themselves feel "morally" superior to other people -------- "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you. (Matthew 7:22-23) |
| 4:51 pm | The Standar Version of the 10 Commandments Every time I hear someone quote something from the Bible I always think "Which Bible"? Apparently many people think there is only one bible. The President included" "President George W. Bush marched into a hornets' nest by proposing that a "standard version" of the Ten Commandments be posted in schools and public places. "I have no problem with the Ten Commandments posted on the wall of every public place," Bush told reporters. Asked if he preferred the Protestant, Catholic or Jewish version of the Commandments, which he must not have realized differ slightly from one another, Bush replied: "The standard version. Surely we can agree as a society on a version that everybody can agree to." The problem which Bush and so many others fail to realize is that there is no such "standard version" of the Ten Commandments - something which theologians are painfully aware of." http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/c |
| 4:49 pm | What does the Second Term Bush Presidency Mean for Us? This is a really great article. http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/c |
| Friday, November 5th, 2004 | |
| 1:43 pm | 1. Grab the nearest book. 2. Open the book to page 23. 3. Find the fifth sentence. 4. Post the text of the sentence in your journal...along with these instructions. The ceremonial consumption of ants to obtain vissions suggest that they may have had hallucinogenic properties |
| Thursday, November 4th, 2004 | |
| 1:18 pm | A really good Article http://www.boingboing.net/2004/11/03/ke Remember what happened to Nixon? Current Mood: Hopeful |
| 1:16 pm | Ohio is now a fascist paradise Issue 1 opponents promise swift challenge to amendment to constitution Wednesday, November 03, 2004 Sandy Theis Plain Dealer Bureau Chief Columbus Ohio voters approved the nation's farthest-reaching ban on gay marriage and civil unions, marking just the second time the state has amended its constitution to limit rights, not expand them. Supporters hailed the vote as a victory for traditional marriage. Opponents called it one battle in a long war and promised a swift constitutional challenge. Although some polls showed the race tightening, Issue 1 enjoyed the support of all regions, races and genders even winning in Northeast Ohio, where opponents had hoped a strong Democratic turnout could ensure its defeat. With 70 percent of the precincts reporting, it led 62 percent to 38 percent. Phil Burress, a Cincinnati activist who championed Issue 1, hopes to secure a similar amendment to the U.S. Constitution. "Our goal is to protect the institution of marriage, and we've done that today in a number of states," he said. "A federal amendment will be a longer process. For today, I'd like to congratulate the people of Ohio." Issue 1 will have broad ramifications. Cleveland Heights' domestic partner registry, authorized by voters last November, will end. Five publicly supported colleges, including Cleveland State and Ohio State, will no longer offer benefits to unmarried couples gay or straight. For gays and lesbians, the impact is immediate, personal and painful. "I know of at least five families who are moving out of this state," said Tim Downing, a Cleveland gay-rights lawyer and president of Ohioans for Growth and Equality. "People who have custody agreements, people who have adoption orders issued by other states . . . know all of those things are now at risk here." A legal challenge is expected soon, he said, and most likely will argue that the amendment violates the equal protection clause. Until Tuesday, Ohio had ratified only one constitutional amendment that restricted the rights of its citizens, when it adopted prohibition in 1918. The amendment was later repealed. Alan Melamed, who led opposition to Issue 1, maintained that Burress' group wants to continue to scale back the rights of Ohio citizens. "Their real agenda . . . is to eliminate all benefits for anyone who isn't married, to throw out the constitutional separation of church and state which they say doesn't exist and to end divorce laws," Melamed said. "In the long run, they won't succeed." Ohio is one of 11 states that voted on same-sex marriage bans Tuesday. Ohio's is the most broadly written. Along with adding a gay-marriage ban to the state Constitution, it prevents state and local governments from recognizing civil unions or any relationship that "approximates" marriage. Some Democrats have viewed the state amendments as a Republican tactic to boost turnout among the president's evangelical base, but supporters have insisted that the initiatives were part of a grassroots movement triggered by the 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Court's decision to sanction same-sex marriage in that state. In Ohio, much of the measure's organizational support came from clergy, and exit polls showed that voters who attend church regularly were Issue 1's strongest allies. |
| 10:12 am |  |
| Wednesday, November 3rd, 2004 | |
| 5:59 pm | IQ and voting by state http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.ht State Avg. IQ 2004 1 Connecticut 113 Kerry 2 Massachusetts 111 Kerry 3 New Jersey 111 Kerry 4 New York 109 Kerry 5 Rhode Island 107 Kerry 6 Hawaii 106 Kerry 7 Maryland 105 Kerry 8 New Hampshire 105 Kerry 9 Illinois 104 Kerry 10 Delaware 103 Kerry 11 Minnesota 102 Kerry 12 Vermont 102 Kerry 13 Washington 102 Kerry 14 California 101 Kerry 15 Pennsylvania 101 Kerry 16 Maine 100 Kerry 17 Virginia 100 Bush 18 Wisconsin 100 Kerry 19 Colorado 99 Bush 20 Iowa 99 Bush 21 Michigan 99 Kerry 22 Nevada 99 Bush 23 Ohio 99 Bush 24 Oregon 99 Kerry 25 Alaska 98 Bush 26 Florida 98 Bush 27 Missouri 98 Bush 28 Kansas 96 Bush 29 Nebraska 95 Bush 30 Arizona 94 Bush 31 Indiana 94 Bush 32 Tennessee 94 Bush 33 North Carolina 93 Bush 34 West Virginia 93 Bush 35 Arkansas 92 Bush 36 Georgia 92 Bush 37 Kentucky 92 Bush 38 New Mexico 92 Bush 39 North Dakota 92 Bush 40 Texas 92 Bush 41 Alabama 90 Bush 42 Louisiana 90 Bush 43 Montana 90 Bush 44 Oklahoma 90 Bush 45 South Dakota 90 Bush 46 South Carolina 89 Bush 47 Wyoming 89 Bush 48 Idaho 87 Bush 49 Utah 87 Bush 50 Mississippi 85 Bush Doesn't look scientific but it does look funny. |
| 5:48 pm | |