Some people say the Internet discourages communities and that some people spend more time with virtual friends and activities than with “real” ones. I think the Internet vastly expands the number of people we can connect with, on just about any topic you’re interested in. In fact, on the Web design mailing list I belong to, there are people I’ve known for up to 12 years, and some I’ve met in person at conferences.

I happen to be interested in food and cooking, among other things. There’s a food blogger named Bri, of Figs with Bri, whom I have never met, and probably never will, but the food blogging community has come together to raise money to help her pay for cancer treatment. If that doesn’t demonstrate the generosity of friends, I don’t know what does.

So this month, the food bloggers Jai and Bee of the blog Jugalbindi, who host the monthly food photography event called Click, have linked this month’s event to a fundraiser to help pay for Bri’s treatment. Since the color yellow is associated with cancer research, thanks to Lance Armstrong, the theme is yellow food. So here’s my entry - yellow onions from our garden:

Some interesting fallout from the Bush administration’s illegal activities over the last several years:

• European and American rights groups file torture complaint against Rumsfeld
• What Lies Beneath: Alberto Gonzales’ legal troubles may just be beginning

So our former secretary of defense is accused of torture and our former attorney general is accused of perjury, among other crimes. I wonder what other former, and possibly current, administration officials might be guilty of?

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.

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?

I just have to say, I’m immensely proud to be a constituent of Congressman Bobby Scott of the third district of Virginia. Here are his remarks last summer on the House floor regarding the war in Iraq.

An excerpt: “Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the resolution on the Iraqi war.

Mr. Speaker, as we discuss what to do now, we must first acknowledge the fact that we cannot discuss an exit strategy for leaving Iraq without first stating what the entry strategy was, and then stating what we are trying to accomplish now.

We were originally told that we invaded Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction; that turned out not to be true. We were then told we invaded Iraq because the Iraqi leaders were connected with the 9/11 attacks; that turned out not to be true. The rationale that Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States was exposed as untrue even before the invasion. A letter from the Director of the CIA to the Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, dated October 7, 2002, specifically stated that the CIA believed that Iraq and Saddam Hussein did not pose a terrorist threat to the United States, and would not be
expected to pose such a threat, unless we attacked Iraq.”

Of course, we attacked Iraq and it is now the nexus of terrorism in the world.

He repeated most of this speech in a local radio interview last week. Here’s hoping the Dems take back at least one house of Congress in this election and are able to start hearings to finally exercise some oversight of the power-mad Republicans.

Disappointing a lot of people, Mark Warner announced that he won’t be running for president in ‘08 after all. Bummer. I think he did a great job as governor and would make a great president. Maybe he’ll be back in ‘16, after his daughters are all over 18.

Wonkette, a political commentator in D.C., inspired some really funny comments on her post on this topic. I laughed out loud at a couple, especially the one that says Virginia peaked early in her production of presidents

It’s hard to imagine that George Allen can be taken seriously as a presidential candidate anymore when there’s video of him calling his Senate opponent’s campaign aide “macaca,” and now this: Slate magazine’s George Allen Insult Generator.

Pick one of a number of personal characteristics and see George Allen insult all of them! Way to project gravitas.

Could it be the end of the George Allen campaign for president, more than two years before the election?

Slate magazine reports today that he took a moment at a campaign rally in western Virginia to make fun of the only person of color at the event, who, amazingly enough, was there to videotape the event on behalf of Allen’s opponent for senate this fall, James Webb.

If I didn’t think before this that he was too stupid to be senator, much less president, I sure do now.