Unbelievably vile.

New York State GOP flyer: Vote Republican or darkies will rape your white wife. Apparently, they've decided, "Y'know what? Screw the black vote. We'll win with the racists." Unforgivable.

Today's Cultural Warfare Update

In these final hours... there isn't really all that much going on, by recent comparison. Several last cries to go vote GOP, that the Supreme Court hangs in the Balance, and by the way, there's a Rumour that John Paul Stevens is Sick, This Could Be Our Chance. Oh, and Andrew Sullivan and other out lesbian and gay people are much worse than Rev. Ted Haggard, and it's their fault - and Charles Darwin's - that Rev. Haggard went out looking for a drug-dealing gay hooker.

But now, today's news.

Focus on the Family: fundamentalists have a particular duty to vote; Gary Bauer says, "We're just one Supreme Court vote away from overturning Roe and stopping the radical gay-rights movement's attempt to redefine marriage";

Focus on the Family picks up the Missouri case of a fundamentalist student refusing to write a letter in support of gay adoption as part of a class assignment;

Focus on the Family pushes several anti-gay initiatives, the attempt to overturn South Dakota's comprehensive abortion ban, and medical marijuana laws;

FotF: being gay is "not only breaking God's law, it's robbing God of his glory";

Dr. George Tiller - who performs abortion services in Kansas and has been a long-term target of Atty. General Phill Kline and the anti-abortion movement - wants an investigation of what he says are leaks to Fox News of medical data;

Human Events: John Paul Stevens is sick, for the love of god go vote GOP, the Supreme Court hangs in the balance;

American Family Association happy that Air Force Academy lawsuit thrown out, cranky about the Episcopal Church USA's new Presiding Bishop, who is GBLT-friendly;

LifeNews notes that the US Supreme Court "will again weigh health exception on partial-birth abortion," also condemns health exemptions in abortion bans;

American Family Association: Boise, Idaho referendum is "actually a referendum on God's Word";

AFA articles pushing anti-marriage amendments in several states, predicting victory in all of them;

AFA article pushing Wisconson's anti-marriage/anti civil unions initiative;

Looking ahead to the 2008 elections already, the Family Research Council pushes a Florida effort to get an anti-marriage amendment on the ballot that year;

FRC ACTION ITEM to vote Yes on California Proposition 85;

National Review runs an article on Ted Haggard, blaming out GBLT people in general and Andrew Sullivan in particular for Rev. Haggard's problems; also blames Charles Darwin and evolutionary theory. Also, we need to institute a "divine" image of marriage law to help heterosexuals "resist temptation."

( Articles and Excerpts )

Before the election, a final word (Yes on I-937)

I've talked about this a lot here, and if you know me, you know I don't volunteer for initiative efforts very often - I'm usually too busy fighting them - but I did for one initiative this year.

If you live in Washington State, please vote Yes on Initiative 937.

If you're an environmentalist, this is a no-brainer. Hie thee off and vote. I don't need to convince you. However, if you aren't - if you think that's all bunk - then there's another reason to vote for it. Specifically: high-energy societies do better than low-energy societies, and I want to stay a high-energy society.

We are, in the not-very-distant future, going to be needing new technologies to meet our power needs. North American natural gas has supply issues, and importing natural gas is damned difficult. Oil is - well, oil is quite the mess, that should be obvious to most everyone. The "500 year supply" of coal is only 500 years if we never use more than we used in 2005; if even recent-historical growth rates are assumed, that drops down to 70-odd years; if we try to replace oil consumption with it, well, we just can't do it fast enough. We'll be short. Lots short. And I, for one, do not want to live energy-poor.

I-937 will mandate - and I hate mandates, but I'm making an exception for this one - new energy technology development from renewable sources. The definition is reasonably flexible; it sets generation goals, but doesn't dictate the technical issues of how to reach them.

This mandate means that we'll be refining and developing technologies now, while we aren't in outright desperate need for them just to keep the lights on. Developing power technologies while you have lots of power around is much easier than the alternative. Just as importantly, it also means we'll be building the skillsets we will need now, when there's less immediate, critical pressure on us to do so. The value of these skillsets should not be ignored.

I-937 is imperfect, but it is nonetheless good. I support I-937, and hope you will too. Please vote Yes for I-937 Tuesday. Thanks.

ETA: As you know, there is massive flooding. More polling stations have been closed, and several more are in danger of flooding. If you can't get to your polling station because of floods, go to the nearest station you can reach and vote by provisional ballot. More information is at the Seattle Times web page, here, or King County voters can call 206-296-VOTE.