Red and Blue Economies Are Heading in Sharply Different Directions

I have long maintained that part of the economic problems facing "red states" and red rural areas is that their social reactionary nature and hostility towards non-whites, non-straights and non-Christians makes them unattractive to the business of the 21st century and the future.  Here in Virginia, Southwest Virginia is a prime example.  That region continues to demand that state monies be used to turn around the region economically yet the residents (and, yes, there are exceptions) continue to embrace social, religious and political views that are anathema to the economic change they claim to want.  Now a study, as reported in the New York Times looks at the diverging paths of so-called blue economies associated with rising urban areas and those of red economies associated with rural and reactionary regions.  And yes, the red areas tend to be far more white and perhaps more racist.  Here are article highlights:

At a quick glance, red and blue metropolitan areas are performing equally well on average in the most watched indicators of labor market health. . . . Silicon Valley (blue) is booming. So is Provo, Utah (red).

But below the surface, red and blue local economies are worlds apart on enduring, fundamental measures that determine their future prospects and their biggest economic challenges.

The correlations between deeper economic measures and how the contrasting metro areas voted in 2016 are striking.

In bluer metros, more residents have college degrees: The 10 large metros with the highest educational attainment each voted for Hillary Clinton by at least a 10-point margin. Median household incomes are higher in bluer metros even after adjusting for the cost of living, which is higher in bluer metros as well. (Metro area is a better measure for a local labor market than a neighborhood, city, county or state.)

And bluer metros have a more favorable job mix for the future, with fewer manufacturing jobs, a higher share of harder-to-automate “non-routine” jobs, and a higher share of jobs in occupations projected to grow faster.

These measures — education, household income, cost of living, non-routine jobs and projected job growth — are highly correlated with one another, and with voting Democratic.

Other economic measures are less strongly correlated with partisanship but still show a pattern. Bluer metros have less year-to-year volatility of job growth. In part that’s because goods-related sectors like manufacturing and mining are more volatile and are clustered in Republican-leaning areas.

Home values have risen more in bluer metros than in redder ones. And blue metros have a higher prime-age employment-population ratio, even though the unemployment rate varies little by partisanship. That’s because red metros have a higher share of prime-age adults who are not in the labor force and therefore aren’t counted in the unemployment rate.

But there are a few places that vote differently than you’d expect from their local economic fundamentals. Colorado Springs and the Provo-Orem area, for instance, have education levels and an occupation mix more typical of blue metros but voted for Donald J. Trump in 2016 by a wide margin. On the flip side, Stockton, Calif., and El Paso look more like red metros economically but voted for Mrs. Clinton.

Why do some metros vote differently than their economics might suggest they would? Race, ethnicity and religion. Metros that vote Democratic despite having lower education and a job mix more typical of redder metros tend to have large Hispanic populations, including many in inland California and on the Texas border. Metros that vote more Republican despite having higher education and a blue-metro job mix tend to be whiter.

[I]ncome inequality — and all the social and political challenges that come with it — tends to be lower in redder metros. And while cost-of-living-adjusted household incomes are higher in bluer metros, cost-of-living-adjusted salaries for a given occupation are typically higher in redder metros.

There’s a reason for this difference: Bluer metros tend to have higher-paying occupations and fewer prime-age adults out of the labor force, which increases household incomes. But if you move from a bluer to a redder metro and find a job in the same occupation, you’re likely to get an increase in salary after taking living costs into account.

The economic challenges of blue metros — unaffordability and inequality — are different than those of red metros, which face lower living standards and greater risks of job loss. Even if the economy takes a back seat in the 2020 election to health care, immigration and President Trump’s record, these economic differences won’t be far from the surface. And if national economic conditions soften, these differences will become more reason for partisan disagreement on urgent policy priorities.

If the places that moved left between 2012 and 2016 continue getting bluer — and the places that swung Obama-to-Trump keep getting redder — the local economies of red and blue America will keep growing further apart.

Innovation and progressive thinking gravitates to blue regions while "conservatism," closed mindedness and an unwelcoming atmosphere toward those who are different concentrates in red regions. Both bring economic consequences. 

Poll: Gays Prefer to Work in Gay Friendly States

Click image to enlarge

Duh!  Common sense would dictate that gays prefer to work in gay friendly states that avoid gay marriage rights and provide employment non-discrimination protections.  Now, this truism - which is lost on the Virginia GOP which continues to make daily life hell for LGBT Virginians - that is increasingly important in attracting progressive and innovative businesses and entrepreneurs has been has been confirmed by a poll.  Think Progress reports on the findings.  Here are excerpts:

A new poll from Out & Equal and Harris Interactive demonstrates that LGBT equality laws have a huge impact on businesses’ ability to attract talent to their states. LGBT respondents overwhelmingly expressed their desire to work in states that have marriage equality and employment protections and also said they’d be more likely to come out if they knew doing so wouldn’t put their job at risk:

• 34 percent of LGBT adults would feel comfortable coming out at work if Congress passed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).
• 60 percent of gay and lesbian adults would reject a job promotion if it required them to move to a state where their marriage is not recognized (up from 33 percent last year).
• 79 percent of gay and lesbian adults would prefer a job with an employer in a marriage equality state (up from 68 percent last year).

The benefits of coming out have been well documented, improving mental health, personal health, and overall happiness. Moreover, studies have found that out employees are more likely to flourish at work — including transgender employees — and even improve the productivity of their coworkers. Likewise, businesses with LGBT protections are more likely to recruit and retain employees with high morale.

Only 21 states currently offer sexual orientation protections and only 16 offer gender identity protections, while no such protections are guaranteed at the federal level.

Virginia's economy is dangerously dependent on federal spending.  Yet what do Virginia Republicans do when not trying to disenfranchise minorities and/or return to the Jim Crow era?  The put up a de facto "not welcome" sign for countless businesses and talented individuals that could enhance the state's economy.  Worse yet, they drive talent from Virginia as well. 

When Will Obama and Congress Be Honest With the Public

Far to many politicians on both sides of the aisle would rather tell Americans what they think they want to hear as opposed to the honest truth.  Of course on the Republican side of the aisle the situation is compounded by the fact that far too many in the GOP, including many Republican members of Congress, lost touch with objective reality years ago and have been living in a fantasy world ever since.  But that doesn't mean the objective truth isn't the truth.  A piece in the New York Times looks at America's future economic prospects and the reality is that just doing for the most part more of the same is not going to address the urgent problems facing the nation.   Here are some highlights:

[T]he only way to break out of this deadly cycle is with extraordinary leadership. Republicans and Democrats would have to govern in just the opposite way they ran their campaigns — by offering bold plans that not only challenge the other’s base but their own and thereby mobilizes the center, a big majority, behind their agenda, to break the deadlock. If either party does that, not only will it win the day but the country will win as well. 

What would that look like? If the Republican Party had a brain it would give up on its debt-ceiling gambit and announce instead that it wants to open negotiations immediately with President Obama on the basis of his own deficit commission, the Simpson-Bowles plan. That would at least make the G.O.P. a serious opposition party again — with a platform that might actually appeal outside its base and challenge the president in a healthy way. But the G.O.P. would have to embrace the tax reforms and spending cuts in Simpson-Bowles first. Fat chance. And that’s a pity. 

As for Obama, if he really wants to lead, he will have to finally trust the American people with the truth. I’d love to see him use his Jan. 21 Inaugural Address and his Feb. 12 State of the Union Message as a one-two punch to do just that — offer a detailed, honest diagnosis and then a detailed, honest prescription. 

On the diagnosis side, Obama needs to explain to Americans the world in which they’re now living. It’s a world in which the increasing velocity of globalization and the Information Technology revolution are reshaping every job, workplace and industry. As a result, the mantra that if you “just work hard and play by the rules” you should expect a middle-class lifestyle is no longer operable. Today you need to work harder and smarter, learn and re-learn faster and longer to be in the middle class. The high-wage, middle-skilled job is a thing of the past. Today’s high-wage or decent-wage jobs all require higher skills, passion or curiosity. Government’s job is to help provide citizens with as many lifelong learning opportunities as possible to hone such skills. 

In the State of the Union, I’d love to see Obama lay out a detailed plan for tax reform, spending cuts and investments — to meet the real scale of our problem and spur economic growth. We’ll get much more bang for our buck by deciding now what we’re going to do in all three areas, and signaling markets that we are putting in place a truly balanced approach, but gradually phasing it in. If you tell investors and savers that we’re going to put our fiscal house in order with a credible plan, but one that is gradually phased in, all the money now sitting on the sidelines paralyzed by uncertainty will get off the sidelines and we’ll have a real stimulus.

 
I still believe that America’s rich and the middle classes would pay more taxes and trim entitlements if they thought it was for a plan that was fair, would truly address our long-term fiscal imbalances and set America on a journey of renewal that would ensure our kids have a crack at the American dream.

If only we had a second-term president, unencumbered by ever having to run again, who was ready to test what really bold leadership might produce.

 Sadly, I am not holding my breath.

The Proud Embrace of Ignorance

With the world, the scope of knowledge and technology changing at breath taking speed, nations and societies that embrace change and strive to meet the new challenges through innovation will prosper.  Those that do not will be doomed to fade to second tier status.  After World War I, many in Britain - especially conservatives - failed to grasp that it would never be possible to return to the pre-war era.  One consequence was that Britain began its slide from world super power status even though the full result wasn't realized until after World War II.  Here in America we stand poised at a similar cross roads where we can try to pretend it is still 1950 or face and embrace the new world we face.  Sadly, the Christofascists and Tea Party and their political prostitutes in the Republican Party seem determined to pursue the path to decline and second tier status.  The image above from Joe Jervis' blog sums up the mindset that these people who in their self-congratulatory piety are working diligently to lead the nation to long term disaster.  I find these people frightening. 

The GOP and the Plight of the Under 40 Americans

A column in the Washington Post looks at the less than bright future of many in the under 40 generations.  A plight that would be only worsened by the policies favored by Mitt Romney which would shift massive amounts of wealth from the already struggling middle class to the extremely wealthy such as himself.  With three children of my own, I very much worry that my children will have less prosperity than I have had (at least until a homophobic judge took everything away from me) and far, far less than what my parents enjoyed.  Yes, there is still opportunity to succeed, but the deck is increasingly stacked against average Americans.  Hence why the much derided "Old Europe" now offers more chances for upward mobility than here in America.  Frighteningly, the cretins in the GOP base who are cynically manipulated by pandering to their religious and racially based bigotry just cannot grasp that they are supporting a party that nowadays cares nothing about their prosperity .  Here are some column highlights:

I worry about the future — not mine but that of my three children, all in their 20s. It is an axiom of American folklore that every generation should live better than its predecessors. But this is not a constitutional right or even an entitlement, and I am skeptical that today’s young will do so.

The young (and I draw the line at 40 and under) face two threats to their living standards. The first is the adverse effect of the Great Recession on jobs and wages. Even if this fades with time, there’s the second threat: the costs of an aging America. It’s not just Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — huge transfers from the young to the old — but also deferred maintenance on roads, bridges, water systems and power grids. Newsweek calls the young “generation screwed”; I prefer the milder “generation squeezed.” 

Already, batteries of indicators depict the Great Recession’s damage. In a Pew survey last year, a quarter of 18-to-34-year-olds said they’d moved back with parents to save money. Getting a job has been time-consuming and often futile. In July, the unemployment rate among 18-to-29-year-olds was 12.7 percent. Counting people who dropped out of the labor market raises that to 16.7 percent  .   .   .   .   Among recent high-school graduates, unemployment rates are near half for African Americans, a third for Hispanics and a quarter for whites, notes the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank.

The weak labor market hurts even job holders. From 2007 to 2011, “real” (inflation-adjusted) wages fell nearly 5 percent for recent college graduates and 10 percent for recent high-school graduates  .  .  .  .

And then there are the costs of aging. Gains in productivity — from new technologies or better skills — that would normally flow into paychecks will be siphoned off to pay for retiree benefits, underfunded state and local government pensions and infrastructure repair. Taxes will rise; if not, public services will fall. Or both.  .  .  .  .  Chances are the young will still pay for today’s elderly without themselves receiving comparable support.

Peering into the unfathomable future, we [parents] don’t like what we think we see. We’re dispatching them into a less secure and less prosperous world. These parental anxieties, I think, are the presidential campaign’s great, unacknowledged issue. Many voters will decide based on a calculus of which candidate would minimize the economic perils for their grown children. 

There are real conflicts between the young and old; so far, the young are losing.

While neither Republicans nor Democrats seem willing to face the reality ahead, the GOP's obsession with prioritizing the shift of benefits to the wealthy and the elimination of even a semblance of health care security make the choice easy for me.  I'll hold my nose and vote Democrat because the alternative is far worse. 

It's Not Just Jeb Bush - Good Bye to the GOP

I noted just the other day how Jeb Bush - perhaps the most intelligent and rational member of the Bush family - had some very unkind but wholly true things to say about the Republican Party and its descent into a party of lunacy and irresponsibility.  As David Frum - another rare commodity: a sane conservative - takes up the issue and notes that the Palmetto Queen, Lindsay Graham, has finally grown a spine and come out against the GOP demagoguery on never, ever raising taxes.  In fact, this piece at Yahoo News lays out some of Graham's belated resistance to his party's insanity:

As a conservative Republican, Lindsey Graham has never had a problem promising not to raise taxes. Like almost every other Republican member of Congress, he has signed the anti-tax pledge put forth by Grover Norquist's group Americans for Tax Reform.  But now Graham says the debt crisis is so severe that the tax pledge — which says no tax loopholes can be eliminated unless every dollar raised by closing loopholes goes to tax cuts -- has got to go.

"When you eliminate a deduction, it's okay with me to use some of that money to get us out of debt. That's where I disagree with the pledge," said Graham.

Graham said eliminating some deductions should free up money to lower tax rates — but also to pay down U.S. debt.  "I just think that makes a lot of sense. And if I'm willing to do that as a Republican, I've crossed a rubicon," said Graham.

This puts Graham at odds with his party's leadership. Just last August, when the eight Republican presidential candidates were asked if they would reject a deal with $10 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue, all eight said they would walk away. But Graham is now raising his hand for increased revenues — he says he could support a plan that included $4 in spending cuts for every $1 in increased tax revenue.

"We're so far in debt, that if you don't give up some ideological ground, the country sinks," said Graham.

Obviously, if he keeps it up, Graham will find himself subject to a primary challenge unless he  decides to leave the GOP like one Delaware GOP official has decided to do.   Here are highlights from David Frum's coverage of this departure that was described as necessary to "maintain personal integrity"  (needless to say, truth and integrity are mutually exclusive with most of the GOP and its Christianist overlords):

Michael Stafford, a former official of the Delaware Republican Party, explains his decision to reaffiliate as an independent:

From the moment the Tea Party emerged on the scene, I had a premonition that I would eventually have to leave the GOP. But my mind conjured innumerable reasons for delay- for putting off the day of reckoning in the desperate hope that some game-changing miracle would occur, such as a victory by Governor Jon Huntsman in the Republican presidential primary.

But no miracle happened. Among all the difficult truths I’ve had to face, perhaps none has been harder than the realization that I, and those dissidents like me, are unrepresentative outliers far removed from, and largely unable to influence, the main currents of opinion within the GOP.

Ultimately, leaving the GOP was necessary in order to maintain my own integrity. Leaving is also a public act of personal protest. I am under no illusions about its broader significance- it will have no impact on the trajectory of the political narrative in this nation. But that does not make it futile. On the contrary, as the shadows lengthen, such minor individual acts of defiance and dissent are more critical now than ever before.

I myself reached a similar decision well over a decade ago.  I knew that I could not stop the insanity and religious extremism that was becoming the hallmark of the GOP.  And I knew I could not be true to myself - not to mention morality and decency - if I remained.  Thus, like Stafford, I left the GOP.  As did almost my entire extended family.

Hampton Roads/Virginia's Achilles Heel - Social Backwardness

Both the Virginia Pilot and Daily Press are awash today with articles and columns about economic doom and gloom and the impacts that defense budget cuts could have on the Hampton Roads region and the Commonwealth of Virginia as a whole. Missing from the conversation is the elephant in the room that is a major obstacle to the recruitment of progressive and innovative entrepreneurial businesses: social policy backwardness and religious based bigotry. While Northern Virginia has flourished largely because of nearby Washington, D.C., and its bountiful government jobs and social progressiveness, the remainder of the Commonwealth is largely a different world where government policy under the current GOP/Christian Right administration is dictated as much by The Family Foundation, a falsely named Christian Right quasi-hate group, as by anything else. Add to that reality the sad fact that many people in the rest of the nation - and the world - think of Pat Robertson/Regent University and/or Jerry Falwell/Liberty University (and Matt Barber and Matt Staver) when they hear the name "Virginia." In short, not an image that would entice very many innovative and future facing businesses to want to relocate to the Commonwealth or Hampton Roads in particular.

What does Hampton Roads do to counter this unappealing image? Basically little or nothing. One hears much about the need to "diversify" the economy, but the mind set remains largely unchanged with no one willing to counter the regular pandering to Christianist sensibilities. Bigotry and religious based prejudice goes unchallenged. Local cities and representatives in the General Assembly do nothing to condemn the poison coming out of Richmond and the offices of Governor Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell and Attorney General Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli who have brought Virginia vast amounts of negative news coverage around the globe.

Yes, the City of Richmond has begun to chase the LGBT tourism dollar by adding an LGBT page to its visitors and convention bureau webpage, but the sad truth is that nothing is improving for LGBT Virginians. We remain 4th class citizens with no recognition of their relationships, no employment non-discrimination protections, burdened by anti-gay adoption regulations, and faced with the fact that many large Virginia based corporations refuse to offer any type of domestic partner benefits. Candidly, I can't in good conscious recommend that anyone who is LGBT - or progressive for that matter - move to the state.

I've written before about socially conservative states falling behind economically. Bigotry, be it racially based or religiously based, is not good for business. Localities and the state can offer all the incentives to businesses that they want, but when the social atmosphere in the state remains one where progress and forward thinking people will find the state uninviting, such incentives will do little to "seal the deal" for corporate relocation. To prosper, Virginia and Hampton Roads need to place equality for all citizens and the embrace of modernity ahead of appeasing backward thinking religious conservatives.

City of Hampton Seeks to Lose "Old, Slow and Not Too Bright" Status

Back in May, 2010 I wrote about a Brookings Institute report that might be summarized as describing Hampton Roads region as "old, slow, and not too bright" given its aging population and net brain drain of college educated residents. While a few groups are disturbed by the Brookings Institute classification, far too many residents and city leaders seem to be just fine with the status quo where ignorance and bigotry - typically championed by local religious leaders who one can only assume want their congregations dumb and gullible. Surprisingly, to my knowledge my adopted home, the City of Hampton, is striving to be an exception. Hampton is revising and updating its comprehensive plan and one of the components is how to increase diversity and create a city where diversity is valued and an attractive destination/home for the so-called "creative class" will exist. How do I know? Because yours truly has been tapped to represent the LGBT community of the diversity committee portion of the larger task force. I look forward to educating city planners and others as to the talent and contributions that our community can bring to the city.

*

Hampton has some good things going for it - Hampton University has landed a Proton Therapy Institute which will provide world class and unique medical treatment; NASA Langley continues to bread innovative research; the city is located in the virtual center of the large number of historic sites in the region; and the City Council - particularly the mayor - seems to grasp that more of the same will not move the city to where it needs to be socially, culturally and economically. Based on comments on a story in today's Virginian Pilot that looks at the non-discrimination bills pending in the Virginia General Assembly that I addressed yesterday, there are still plenty of Pat Robertson loving, knuckle dragging Neanderthals in the region.

*

Does the City of Hampton have a long way to go in its endeavor? Most definitely, but at least the city leadership understands - unlike the Virginia State Bar, for example - that diversity means much more than simple a mix of black and white residents. I hope to use that recognition to educate other committee members and others as to why smart planners seek to attract LGBT residents and LGBT tourists.

Economist Predicts Sour Decade for Hampton Roads- Closed Mindedness Carries a Price

The economic outlook for the Hampton Roads area of Virginia is not looking good for the balance of the decade. Given the outlook, the question is whether or not the business leaders and elected leaders of the region will wake up and try new development approaches and techniques or merely continue doing the same failed approaches over and over again and somehow expecting a miracle to occur that will yield a different result. The self-anointed "leaders" of Hampton Roads are long on bigotry and closed mindedness and short on innovation, tolerance and progressive ideas which might actually attract new businesses to the area. On the south side of Hampton Roads(pictured at left), the mindset can be summed up by Norfolk International Airport which greets newcomers with a huge hideous display of Pat Robertson and Regent University - one cannot help but wonders if some arriving travels turn around and leave as a result. And I might add that the Region wide chamber of commerce scoff at the idea of a LGBT chamber.

*

Only the City of Hampton has so far shown any open mindedness and willingness to think remotely outside the box and court the LGBT business community. While the staid city of Richmond has begun to court the LGBT travel dollar, no city in Hampton Roads has yet awakened to this passed up opportunity. Then, of course, to add to the problem we have the strong anti-progressive message emanating from Taliban Bob McDonnell and the certifiably insane Ken Cuccinelli that certainly must be scaring off many businesses contemplating relocating. Personally, I am not optimistic that things will change, but one can always hope. Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot on the sour economic forecast:
*
Hampton Roads faces a “mediocre” economic outlook over the next decade, weakened by a decline in defense spending and the after-effects of the recession, according to Old Dominion University’s annual state of the region report, released this morning.

*
In addition to the loss of the Joint Forces Command, or JFCOM, and its 6,000 jobs, Koch said the probable shrinkage in defense spending could cost the area at least one aircraft carrier.
*
“We’ve seen our best years in the first part of this decade,” said James Koch, an economist and former president of Old Dominion, who served as editor of the report. “It appears that those are circumstances we’re not going to repeat.”
*
His dour forecast said rising water levels and a net loss of population also would inhibit growth. Companies such as Norfolk Southern Corp. and Northrop Grumman Newport News “have to be thinking whether locating themselves here is viable in the future,” Koch said during an interview.

Southwest Pennyslvania, Family Reunions, and Anabaptist Bigotry

We got back t0 the hotel room last night after Phase Two of the family reunion weekend (which involved a family picnic in the mountains) and the "Yah Yah Brotherhood" reunion dinner at the home of local friends. This part of the country is truly physically beautiful, many of the people are sincere and nice, but I have to concede that if I had to live here, suicide might well be an attractive option after a short while. I hate to think what like must be like for those growing up gay, lesbian or transgender in this region of Pennsylvania. In Somerset, there are no gay bars (the nearest gay bar is about 30 miles away unless one makes the trek into Pittsburgh) and it seems many gays by necessity live closeted and fearful lives. In relative terms even the Hampton Roads area of Virginia seems like a bright spot in the larger gay universe. Worse yet, there are religious elements in the area that continue to actively strive to torment and demonize local gays. One such element are the Anabaptists who are improbably based worldwide in nearby Johnstown, Pennsylvania.

*

Over a decade ago The Advocate did a story on the Johnstown Anabaptist groups' ultimately successful effort to drive a local gay bar, Casa Nova, out of business. According to The Advocate, the Anabaptists' efforts were aided by the Klu Klux Klan. While it seems the local Jenner County authorities refused to close Casa Nova as demanded by the Anabaptist bigots who picketed the bar and harassed its patrons, they likewise failed to aggressive utilize the power of the civil and criminal laws to stop the activities of these self-righteous religious merchants of hate and division. Much like Southwest Virginia, this region of Pennsylvania needs modern, progressive businesses to bolster its economy. And again, much like Southwest Virginia, the impression that I get is that the local municipal authorities do not seem to grasp that modern, progressive businesses are not going to desire to locate to areas where Bible thumping religious extremists are allowed to harass law abiding citizens and denigrate the civil liberties of other citizens.

*

As for the Anabaptists, from some brief research on the Johnstown sect - actually, it seems more like a cult, if you ask me - seems to epitomise the anti-knowledge brain dead mindset and hypocrisy of the worse elements of the Christian Right. To get a feel for just how whacked out these folks are, here's a portion of the sect's scriptural beliefs:
*
1.01 We believe the Holy Bible to be “The Holy Scriptures” as set forth in 2 Timothy 3:15, and as such are “given by inspiration of God” (vs. 16), and therefore are Holy, infallible, perfect and without error.
1.02 By “Holy Bible” we mean that collection of sixty-six books “containing the Old and New Testaments translated out of the Original tongues and with the former translations diligently compared and revised by His Majesty’s special command and appointed to be read in churches”, commonly called the King James Bible, or Authorized Version of 1611 A.D.1.03 We believe all other English and multi language versions and translations to be erroneous and fallible, and products of the age long attack by Satan upon the pure word of God (Genesis 3:1).
*
Obviously, the Anabaptists are in true la la land when it comes to having an accurate knowledge of history. They appear to engage in virtual idolatry of a version of the Bible compiled under the auspices of a flaming gay English monarch who probably would have sought to have the sect stamped out. While hardly alone in this baffling adherence to a version of the Bible compiled and promoted by a gay man, the Anabaptists seem to take the lunacy to higher levels than many. In fact, I sent an e-mail to Ron McRae, the presiding bishop in Johnstown pointing out this inconvenient bit of historical fact. Not surprisingly, nor response has been forth coming. Here are highlights of the information forwarded to McRae that some readers may not have seen previously:
*
One area of the life of King James that for many years remained clouded in controversy was allegations that James was homosexual. As James did father several children by Anne of Denmark, it is actually more accurate to say that he was allegedly a bi-sexual. While his close relationships with a number of men were noted, earlier historians questioned their sexual nature, however, few modern historians cast any doubt on the King's bisexuality and the fact that his sexuality and choice of male partners both as King of Scotland then later in London as King of England were the subject of gossip from the city taverns to the Privy Council. His relationship as a teenager with fellow teenager Esmé Stuart, Earl of Lennox was criticized by Scottish Church leaders, who were part of a conspiracy to keep the young King and the young French courtier apart, as the relationship was improper to say the least. Lennox, facing threats of death, was forced to leave Scotland.
*
In the 1580s, King James openly kissed Francis Stewart Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell. Contemporary sources clearly hinted their relationship was a sexual one. When James inherited the English throne from Queen Elizabeth I in 1603, it was openly joked of the new English monarch in London that “Elizabeth was King: now James is Queen!” If there is still any doubt, it should be noted that George Villiers, also held an intimate relationship with King James, about which King James himself was quite open. King James called Villiers his “wife” and called himself Villiers' “husband”! King James died in 1625 of gout and senility. He is buried in the Henry VII chapel in Westminster Abbey, with one of his favorite male suitors on his right, and another on his left.

Old, Slow and Not Too Bright. Welcome to Hampton Roads?

A new Brookings Institute report paints a less than attractive image of the Hampton Roads area of Virginia. Actually, I am not surprised because the things that attract innovation and the so-called "creative class" - tolerance and diversity - are largely lacking. Christian fundamentalism and progressive politics and cultural progressiveness are more or less mutually exclusive. While Norfolk's Old Dominion University is striving to be an engine for modernity and progress, the presence of Pat Robertson and Regent University in Virginia Beach does nothing to invite progressives and the creative class to the region. What's really scary is the fact that despite its negatives, this region is progressive compared to the southwest area of Virginia which in many areas is still "Deliverance country." Of course, the efforts of Taliban Bob McDonnell and Ken Kookinelli to take Virginia back to Confederate days is a negative for Virginia as a whole.

*

How can this state of affairs be turned around? First, Norfolk needs to take down the leering image of Pat Robertson out of the concourse at Norfolk International Airport. Second, city leaders need to realize that kissing the asses of Christian conservatives does nothing to further the economic interests of the region. Third, LGBT Virginians need to be made full, first class citizens. Virginia treatment of gays sends a loud "not welcome" message to many other segments of the population. Fourth, the city leaders need to work to make the area more progressive so fewer talented youth and progressive residents leave the area for Washington, D.C., New York City, Atlanta and other areas that do not shun modernity. Here are some highlights from the Virginian Pilot:
*
A report released today by the Brookings Institution lumps our region into a group of "the most demographically disadvantaged" of the nation's 100 largest metro areas, and it warns that an aging population and low education levels could hamper the region's growth. The report, based on numbers from U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey, came as a shock to some regional leaders.
*
The report suggests that Hampton Roads will need to address issues of brain drain and economic diversification to keep up with other regions in coming years. "Maybe this is the wake-up call the area needs in becoming a lot more aggressive in thinking at a regional level," said Associate Professor Larry Filer, an economist at Old Dominion University in Norfolk.
*
"What this study is doing is being very forward-looking and saying who has the best potential for high economic growth going forward, and I don't think we have the best potential for that," Filer said. "That's the cautionary tale here - it's not where we are now. It's where we're going. The good thing is we have a chance to make some changes."
*
The study from Brookings, a Washington-based think tank, looked at immigration, education, aging and transportation. It then ranked the 100 largest metro areas on each issue and lumped together those regions facing similar problems. The "success stories" of the decade - cities with the most growth, highest educational attainment and most diversifying populations - were deemed "Next Frontier" regions. Those included Seattle; Washington, D.C.; San Antonio; and Denver.
*
At the other end of the seven-category spectrum - cities with low rates of growth, educational attainment and diversity - were clustered under the "Industrial Cores" designation. Those include Wichita, Kan.; Grand Rapids, Mich.; Memphis; and Hampton Roads.
*
[W]ith 27.4 percent of Hampton Roads' adults holding four-year degrees - less than the national average - the area isn't well-equipped to diversify its economy, Berube warned. "That sort of sets the boundaries for your long-run growth," Berube said. "There are limits to the sorts of jobs and industries that a region can attract and grow if it doesn't get more educated over time."
*
With teabaggers, conservatives and far right religious elements (e.g., creationists) increasingly rejecting knowledge and objective fact, I am not optimistic about the areas' prospects unless city leaders grow some balls and push for more tolerance and diversity. That includes localities doing more to attract and keep their LGBT populations rather than have them leave the area for more tolerant and accepting areas. As I have said before, but for the boyfriend's successful business, we'd be out of here in a heartbeat.

Two World Views

Now that the presumed candidates for both the GOP and Democrats have been decided, the race largely comes down to depicting the two world views of McCain versus Obama, which to my mind can be summed up as follows. McCain: stay with the past even though the world and circumstances have changed and hope that somehow more of the same miraculously yields a different result. Obama: the same old approaches no longer work and it is time to try new ideas and strategies. Similarly, despite the effort - largely by the MSM - to depict McCain as a maverick and not a standard Republican, McCain represents the "whitebread" GOP and its resistance to anything that is fully inclusive of all citizens. Obama in contrast embraces a multicultural nation and includes gays among the citizens entitled to full civil rights. No matter how disgruntled Hillary supporters may be, they need to wake up to the fact that a McCain victory would be a disaster for those of us who want to move away from the Christianist dominated policies of the GOP. As one who wants to see gay rights expand and also a country that offers opportunity for my three children and their cousins, my view is that McCain MUST be defeated. Frank Rich has a great analysis of these issues in today's New York Times. here are highlights:

*

On one side stands Mr. Obama’s resolutely cheerful embrace of the future. His vision is inseparable from his identity, both as a rookie with a slim Washington résumé and as a black American whose triumph was regarded as improbable by voters of all races only months ago. On the other is John McCain’s promise of a wise warrior’s vigilant conservation of the past. His vision, too, is inseparable from his identity — as a government lifer who has spent his entire career in service, whether in the Navy or Washington.

*

Mr. McCain only reminded voters that he, like Mrs. Clinton, thinks that change is nothing more than a marketing gimmick. He has no idea what it means. “No matter who wins this election, the direction of this country is going to change dramatically,” he said on Tuesday. He then grimly regurgitated Goldwater and Reagan government-bashing talking points from the 1960s and ’70s even as he presumed to accuse Mr. Obama of looking “to the 1960s and ’70s for answers.”

*
Mr. Obama is a liberal, but it’s not your boomer parents’ liberalism that is at the heart of his appeal. He never rattles off a Clinton laundry list of big federal programs; he supports abortion rights and gay civil rights with a sunny bonhomie that makes the right’s cultural scolds look like rabid mastodons. He is not refighting either side of the domestic civil war over Vietnam that exploded in his hometown of Chicago 40 years ago this summer, long before he arrived there.

*

The selling point of Mr. Obama’s vision of change is not doctrinaire liberalism or Bush-bashing but an inclusiveness that he believes can start to relieve Washington’s gridlock much as it animated his campaign. Some of that inclusiveness is racial, ethnic and generational, in the casual, what’s-the-big-deal manner of post-boomer Americans already swimming in our country’s rapidly expanding demographic pool. Some of it is post-partisan: he acknowledges that Republicans, Ronald Reagan included, can have ideas. The Obama forces out-organized the most ruthless machine in Democratic politics because the medium of their campaign mirrored its inclusive message. They empowered adherents in every state rather than depending on a Beltway campaign hierarchy . . .

*

Mr. Obama’s deep-rooted worldliness — in philosophy as well as itinerant background — is his other crucial departure from the McCain template. As more and more Americans feel the pain of spiraling gas prices and lost jobs, they are also coming to recognize, as Mr. Obama does, that the globally reviled American image forged by an endless war in Iraq and its accompanying torture scandals is inflicting economic as well as foreign-policy havoc. Six out of 10 Americans do want their president to talk to Iran’s president, according to the most-recent Gallup poll. Americans are sick of a national identity defined by arrogant saber-rattling abroad and manipulative fear-mongering at home.

*

Mr. McCain’s speech in a New Orleans suburb on Tuesday night spawned a cottage industry of ridicule, even among Republicans. The halting delivery, sickly green backdrop and spastic, inappropriate smiles, presumably mandated by some consultant hoping to mask his anger, left the impression that Mr. McCain isn’t yet ready for prime-time radio. But the substance was even worse than the theatrics. . . . a small, nearly all-white crowd that seconded his attack lines with boorish choruses of boos. On TV, the audience came across as a country-club membership riled by a change in the Sunday brunch menu.