Blue State Madness (Literally?)

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Adam's Apple, Jan 16, 2005.

  1. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Blue State Madness
    By Richard Baehr, theamericanthinker.com
    January 15th, 2005

    Steve Sailer and others have developed lists of factors that appear to correlate fairly strongly with voting patterns in the most recent Presidential election and prior ones (white birth rates, among them). The February 2005 edition of Chicago Magazine (not yet online at www. chicagomagazine.com) offers a new insight.

    The tens states (including the District of Columbia ) with the highest ratio of psychologists per 100,000 residents were, with the exception of Colorado, all blue states which supported John Kerry (D.C, Vermont, Minnesota, Massachusetts, New York, Colorado, Illinois, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania, in rank order from one to ten). The ten states with the lowest ratio of psychologists per 100,000 residents, all were red states supporting Bush (Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Nevada, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Kentucky, Indiana). Louisiana with the lowest ratio is listed first.

    Economists will tell you that the number of psychologists per 100,000 residents is related to the percentage of the population who make use of their services. Psychologists, after all, do not work for free. Are there a higher percentage of people with mental health problems in blue states than red states? The listed red states have much higher regular church attendance ratios, by and large, than the listed blue states. Could religious affiliation be a factor in preserving mental health? Will Michael Newdow sue me for suggesting this?

    Undoubtedly, some sociologists would proffer that the level of psychologists per 100,000 in a state is really a factor of income, and the top ten states in this ranking tend to be higher per capital income states than the bottom ten. But the per capital incomes for the top ten states with high psychologists per 100,000 residents are on average perhaps 1.5 times the per capital incomes for the bottom ten, and the psychologists per 100,000 ratio is almost 4 times as high for the top ten states as compared to the bottom ten, even excluding D.C, which is in another orbit entirely with a ratio that is more than twice as high as that in any state. Something other than income differential is going on here.

    The well publicized story of angry and unhappy Kerry supporters in Florida receiving treatment for the newly named “post-election distress syndrome” suggests that even in the red states, the patients who need mental health treatment may be disproportionately blue.
     
  2. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,542
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,157
    Hehe. good post;)
     
  3. hylandrdet
    Offline

    hylandrdet Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    548
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Ratings:
    +49

    I agree, the blue voters do need therapy; because this reelection made no sense; the red voters don't need therapy, because they're brainwashed; therapy won't help them.
     
  4. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403

    oh i'll bite----how and by whom?
     
  5. theim
    Offline

    theim Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,628
    Thanks Received:
    234
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings:
    +234
    The CIA's prototype Republican-O-Matic brainwash ray of course. Those bastards, that must be it. I mean, how can anyone logically come to the conclusions that sky high taxes lead don't lead to wealth, that pulling out of Iraq won't lead to victory, having loads of important decisions made by unelected, unaccountable judges might be a bad thing, and that perhaps that accidental bump you got from the doctor hitting you too hard for your reflex test was not worth a $10,000,000 settlement without being hit by a CIA brainwash ray? I mean, jeez.
     
  6. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403

    DAMN--so it's TRUE !! :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
     
  7. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    Those tricky psychologists must be the only ones that have the know how to deflect that CIA brainwashing ray. :D
     
  8. fuzzykitten99
    Offline

    fuzzykitten99 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,965
    Thanks Received:
    199
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    You'll have to check the Marauder's Map...
    Ratings:
    +199
    hylanret---make sure you get fitted for your foil hat----with as many people in those blue states as there are, there may be a shortage, due to the fact these people have inflated egos, and it usually shows up as a large head size.
     
  9. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    :tinfoil:
     
  10. hylandrdet
    Offline

    hylandrdet Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    548
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Ratings:
    +49
    OK, I'll bite too...

    You're the president of the United States; you just saw two planes smash into two skyscrapers, killing four thousand people. You're given information that an islamic group in Afghanistan is responsible. There is evidence of Saudi, Syrian, and Iranian participation; meanwhile, there is no evidence of cooperation coming from Iraq, yet you're under political pressure to declare war on Iraq.

    Talk to me as if you're the President of the United States; how and by whom, the rush to war came from? Second, what would you had done different?
     

Share This Page