This is a reminder for next year: Don’t get an Eastern white pine tree. The wood is too soft - it almost fell over last night. Luckily we were right there, but as we were trying to reposition it, the screws from the tree holder were digging into the soft wood. So we’ll look for a hardwood next year.

As George Allen concedes defeat to Sen.-elect James Webb, I raise my glass to the newly powerful Democratic Party. I’m looking forward to the oversight hearings the Democrats are sure to have. At last, the president and his staff will have to answer for their catastrophic mistakes.

They say now that impeachment is off the table. We’ll see after some of the Bush administration’s tactics come to light.

Taking back one house of Congress for the Democrats is huge, and it’s still possible to take the Senate, too.

I have one word for you: Oversight.

…here’s something fun

Someone on my Web design mailing list sent this:

Are you a Yankee or a Southerner? Try the http://www.alphadictionary.com/articles/yankeetest.html”>Yankee test.

Since I grew up in Michigan, but have lived in Virginia lo these many years, my score is about right, I think: 44% Dixie, bordering on Yankee.

What’s yours?

I did - bright and early. There was actually a line forming when I left. Great to see that

Portsmouth still has almost all optical scanning voting machines, which I really appreciate. Considering all the problems there have been with electronic voting machines, I just can’t believe the government rushed states into buying them. Here’s hoping it’s such a wipeout for the Democrats that recounts won’t be needed.

Because really, what kind of meaningful recount can be done with an electronic machine - a computer, essentially - that doesn’t print out votes as they are cast? You tell it to print out the results again - the same results it already printed. What’s the point?

I think that unfortunately, the billions spent on new voting machines in the last few years will have to be re-spent, on machines that really work. Like this.

Next Tuesday, Virginians will vote on whether or not to enshrine in the state Constitution the removal of the right of unmarried people to make contracts with each other. This is being sold as the “gay marriage ban,” but that’s not really what it will do.

Here’s what the first sentence of the proposed amendment says:

That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.

It’s already illegal in Virginia for gays to marry, and Virginia is not exactly a hotbed of so-called “activist judges” that would overturn it. So this provision wouldn’t accomplish anything new.

The real problem, though, is the rest of the proposed amendment:

This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.

Take a close look at that second sentence. Do you know anyone who is not married and has dependent children? Do they have wills and custody agreements with anyone else specifying what will happen to their children and property if something should happen to them?

As “benefits” or “effects” of marriage, these agreements and wills could very well be invalidated if challenged. Is this what Republicans mean when they say government should stay out of our private lives?