Yeah... read this:
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/12/01/spam_sites_crippled_by_lycos_screensaver_ddos.html

"A distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack launched by users of Lycos Europe's MakeLoveNotSpam.com screensaver has succeeded in crippling several spammer sites, but some of the targeted sites remain available."

Ok, intrepid f-listers... maybe one of you can find that which stumps even the Grat me.

I want a watch that has a compass built in, and also syncs its time off of the atomic clocks (i.e. is auto-setting and ridiculously accurate). That's it. Other nifty features gladly accepted, but those are really the only two that I'm intent on finding. Being waterproof, or having a heart-rate monitor, or a thermometer, or an altimeter, or being able to connect to a computer, or having a walkie-talkie built in, or any of those things are all nice but really not necessary.

All I want is a watch with a compass and atomic time. Compass. Atomic time. That's it.

I can't find one that does both, anywhere, at any price. HELP!

Ah yes, my favorite part of the day... the part where I bring despair and pain to my millions of fans. Muahahahah!

Link one, in which a young, innocent LJ'er kills her mother (bummer):
http://www.glassdog.com/archives/2004/11/26/heavenly_creature.html

Link two, in which you are grossed out by horrific medical images (hey, I warned you):
http://asylumeclectica.com/malady/

My job here is done.

(Credits: First story relayed to me by dormando, second link found here: http://alenaswebpage.blogspot.com/ )

I know, I'm a few hours early, but HAPPY THANKSGIVING!

(To all of my non-American friends: to Hell with you and your non-thankful country.)

I leave you all with 21 Reasons to Give Thanks:
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b;=100480

(For some less-partisan laughs, check this out: http://www.livejournal.com/users/kuzanagi_/291660.html - stolen from irnbruise.)

Very cool/funny:
http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/textbookdisclaimers/

Go.

"The Senate voted 65-30 for the legislation late on Saturday that sets aside funds for a range of priorities including a presidential yacht, foreign aid and energy. It is one of the final pieces of work for the 108th Congress and they may return to finish a spy agency overhaul before the end of the year."

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID;=6875356

Sigh. So glad the Senate is thinking of the common American. There's other heart-warming news in that article as well. Some days I hate our government.

In other news, this weekend had miserable weather - it was damp and cold and generally unpleasant - but I still had a wonderful time.

Current Music: Meat Beat Manifesto - Prime Audio Soup

Washington, D.C. -- “We took a strong stand in 1994 to make clear the Republican conference would live by a higher standard than our Democratic colleagues. This was instrumental in winning a Republican Congress for the first time in 40 years and the driving force behind passing the Congressional Accountability Act in the historic 104th Congress. Today, I spoke out against the amendment and voted against it because I believe it is a step in the wrong direction.”

-- Congressman Christopher Shays
http://www.house.gov/shays/news/2004/november/novrule.htm

Current Music: Nick Cave And The Bad Seeds - 06 - The Curse Of Millhaven

I think everyone is agreed that higher divorce rates are probably a bad thing, and not in tune with the whole concept of marriage being sacred and whatnot... right? That whole moral values thing seems to be a big deal to most conservatives, right? So it stands to reason that since they care about it so much more, that they'd take it much more seriously, right? And it also stands to reason that since gay marriage is supposed to ruin the sacrament of marriage that there'd be more divorce in pro-gay-marriage states, right?

Well, I compiled a little data that I found interesting. I took each state, took its number of divorces (Jan-May 2004, the latest data available), and took its population (as of July 1, 2003, the latest data available), and divided the divorces in Q1 2004 by the population and multiplied it by 4 to get a general annual divorce rate. (Of course that's not incredibly accurate, but I'm tired and it's really hard to find exactly matching data for populations and divorces and so on.) I then compared it to the % of the votes for Bush in that state.


I discovered something interesting. Here are the top and bottom states, in terms of divorce rates.

Highest divorce rates:

State	% voting for Bush	Winner	% divorce	% marriages	div/mar
Arkansas	54%	Bush	0.97%	1.32%	0.58
Nevada	51%	Bush	0.90%	10.56%	0.09
Idaho	68%	Bush	0.87%	1.46%	0.59
Tennessee	57%	Bush	0.85%	1.63%	0.52
New Mexico	50%	Bush	0.85%	0.91%	0.94
Kentucky	60%	Bush	0.83%	1.38%	0.60

Lowest divorce rates:
0.64%

State	% voting for Bush	Winner	% divorce	% marriages	div/mar
Pennsylvania	49%	Kerry	0.43%	0.73%	0.58
Illinois	45%	Kerry	0.43%	0.79%	0.55
Massachusetts	37%	Kerry	0.41%	0.55%	0.75
Maryland	43%	Kerry	0.39%	0.78%	0.50
Maine	45%	Kerry	0.38%		0.60
DC	9%	Kerry	0.23%	0.77%	0.29

Well, golly. That's weird.

Sources:
Bush votes: CNN (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/)
Population: Census.gov (http://www.census.gov/popest/states/NST-EST2003-ann-est.html)
Divorce Rate: NCHS - part of the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr53/nvsr53_09.pdf)

Update: I put in two new figures into the tables - marriages divided by population, and divorces divided by marriages.

Some interesting trends, based on this new info: the ratio of divorces to marriages is about the same across red and blue states, it looks like (at least judging by the top and bottom ones). There are a few that are markedly different, but overall they seem to hover around a 55% rate (55% as many divorces as marriages). However, the marriage rate is considerably different in the blue states - it's much lower. The divorce rate is correspondingly lower by the same ratio. What does this imply? I'm not sure. Maybe it just implies that people take marriage more seriously in the blue states - fewer marriages, and correspondingly fewer divorces. It could also be argued that blue staters tend to be in more non-married relationships - we date longer before getting married. (Again, whether that means we're godless whores or just that we think marriage is too important to be rushed into is open for interpretation.)

Republican members of the House voted today to change party rules to allow Tom DeLay to get indicted on corruption charges and still remain as majority leader.

Yes... you read that right... they decided to allow him (or any other future leader) to retain their post even if indicted for criminal corruption. Of course, at some point (say, when jail time was imposed) he'd probably have to step down, since it's awfully hard to rule with an iron fist from within prison walls (hard, but not impossible) and I doubt if they'd want to go through that trouble.

Sigh. It's amazing, every time you think the party has sunk as low as it can go, they find a way to get even lower. This is the party of moral values?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/17/delay.ap/index.html

Update: Great quote:
"And I think, frankly, we should adopt the rule the Democrats have prospectively, which I think is a sound rule that once indicted you step down." - Newt Gingrich, 7/26/93

Found here: http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2004/11/index.html#004834

Current Music: Miranda Sex Garden - Sunshine

I know all of my Republican friends (and some Democratic ones, to be fair) have been talking about how recounts and fraud investigations and all of that are wastes of time and money and are just the last, futile flailings of a bunch of sore losers. And, in some cases, that's true.

But what's also true is that every American citizen with the right to vote deserves to have that vote counted, and even if it doesn't overturn the Presidential election results, it's already resulted in some potential shifts in other, smaller posts - local and state-level elected officials. Hell, last I heard Washington State still hadn't settled the matter of who their new Governor is - and it's down to 19 votes (or was this morning). Many local elections come down to similarly small numbers, and to say a few hundred votes here and there are expendable is immoral and un-American, frankly. Everyone's vote is supposed to count, remember?

So support the investigations of voter fraud, and support the efforts for recounts, don't mock them. Our Democracy depends on it. (Sadly, the defenders of the Democratic party can't be bothered to actually live up to their promises of making sure every vote counts - it's the Green and Libertarian Parties that've been leading the effort. That's so sad, but says good things about them, anyways.)

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
http://www.votergate.tv/
http://www.votecobb.org/
http://helpamericarecount.org/