Why is the National Guard fighting in Iraq?

Here is a powerful editorial about one National Guardsman in Iraq. It's short and well worth reading -- all the way to the end. Here's a quote:

"When he enlisted, he explained, the major emphasis of the recruiter was on the college education. Nothing was said about the possibility of war, let alone deployment in an optional pre-emptive action halfway around the world."

"He was assigned to traveling up and down the highways to locate roadside bombs. It was a dangerous mission and the equipment was inadequate. Instead of an armored vehicle, he was assigned a heavy gravel truck insulated with boxes of sand. Not only was he in constant danger of running over bombs but he was a ready target for snipers along the road."

summary of recent gay rights stories

In the past couple days there has been some interesting news about gay rights. A ruling from the Army Court of Appeals "overturned the guilty plea of an Army specialist who had oral sex with a female civilian in the barracks." The crime here is based on the Army's sodomy law that prohibits "unnatural carnal copulation," including oral and anal sex. The law extends to homosexual or heterosexual couples. (The same sort of law existed in Virginia until the Lawrence vs Texas ruling overturned it last year.) Anyway, this ruling may be appealed, but as it stands, it seems to "uphold the right to sexual privacy" which would apply to homosexuals as well. And that could (should) affect the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. There's currently a lawsuit challenging "don't ask, don't tell." Simianbrain describes the lawsuit pretty well and presents a nice, common-sense solution to the problem.

In other news, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage is consistent with their constitution and it it's likely that the Canadian Parliment will legalize same-sex marriage throughout Canada next year. At the moment 6 of Canada's 10 Provinces and 1 of the 3 territories allow same-sex marriage. Other countries allowing same-sex marriage are: Belgium and the Netherlands.

Also yesterday New Zealand passed a Civil Union bill.

"The bill allows same-sex couples and common-law spouses to have the same rights and obligations as married couples once it goes into effect April 26. The bill does not change New Zealand's Marriage Act, which claims marriage is only between a man and a woman."

moving day

Well, things are getting busy with the move. The U-Pack guy just dropped off the truck. I'll write a review of U-Pack once the move is finished, but so far I give it an A+. The guy who dropped off the truck was friendly and very helpful. Tomorrow is officially moving day and today I'm busy packing. I'll try to get a few new posts out today during packing breaks. What a lot of work!

efficiency isn't everything

This story is worth posting for the title alone Study: Chicken Genome Fills Crucial Knowledge Gap. Apparently, chickens and humans share more than half of the same genes. Both species have about the same number of genes in total, but chickens fit everything into a genome that's about half the size of the human genome. I think that says something important about efficiency and higher brain function.

It certainly helps me rationalize my cluttered desk.

Rumsfeld, what a smart aleck

Excellent story by Fred Kaplan at Slate.com about Donald Rumsfeld and what his reappointment says about Bush's second term (hint: it's not good). Definitely worth reading.

intelligence reform or reshuffle?

Here's an article about the new intelligence bill. There is a controversy over whether the new "chief intelligence advisor" will have enough power to accomplish what's needed. The initial version of the bill gave much more power to the position, but Republicans in the House held up passage of the bill until they could scale back some of those powers. Now, I'm not an expert, but if this new bill does amount to a bureaucratic reshuffling that does nothing to protect our country from terrorism, I do know that there is one man to blame for that: Dennis Hastert. The original bill would have passed easily, but House Speaker Hastert wouldn't bring the bill up for a vote until it would win a majority of Republican votes. (They really are doing their best to pretend like Democrats don't exist, aren't they?) Here are some excerpts from the article:

"Above all, the new structure has the president's chief intelligence advisor several bureaucratic layers removed from the analysts and clandestine operatives who actually gather and try to make sense of enemy secrets."

"But Congress whittled away at other powers that the Sept. 11 panel had urged. For example, although the commission said the director should have the power to hire and dismiss the agency chiefs, the final bill gave the director only "the right to concur in [their] appointment."

"And rather than have explicit control over how agencies spend their money, the director is to "monitor the implementation and execution" of such spending and report problems to the president and Congress."

On the plus side, the article quotes Roemer, one of the members of the 911 panel, as saying: "I'm sure there will be things that need to be ironed out in the future. But I'm confident this is the way to begin better communications among intelligence agencies, better cooperation and better sharing of intelligence."

go undercover as a Canuck

Going on a trip overseas? Worried that admitting you're an American will incite harassment and abuse by crazed foreigners? What you need is a Canadian disguise!

Here is a CNN story that describes what all is offered in the kit.

drafting doctors

I saw this story which described "a little-known contingency plan for drafting physicians." When I first read that I thought, "Duh, haven't you ever seen MASH?? Of course they can draft doctors." Then I read the article more closely and saw that this is a newer plan that was authorized in 1987. The key part is that they can draft doctors and other medical types without reinstating a general draft. Note especially this line: "though a general draft is not likely to occur, a physician draft is 'the most likely conscription into the military in the near future.'"

things to do before the inauguration:

Americablog has an amusing list of things to do before the inauguration.

My favorites:
7. Get that gas mask you've been putting off buying.
11. Come out - then go back in - FAST!
23. Pass on the secrets of evolution to future generations.
26. Take photographs of animals on the endangered species list.
27. Take photographs of Democrats.

artificial intelligence?

This is way cool! It's a computer program that will guess what object you are thinking of by asking you questions about it. It's pretty good at it, too.

Individual social security accounts

Finally! They admit that privatizing social security will put our nation even more in debt! I am actually completely in favor of privatizing social security-- I know that's the only way I will see any of it. But it still seems like a bad idea to pile up more debt without having any plan whatsoever to pay for it.

federalism, it's not just for Republicans anymore

Here's an interesting article about state's rights.

Selected quotes:

"We are all aware that the United States is now a divided country, that cultural polarization is at an all-time high, that red and blue states are growing further and further apart, blah blah blah. And all this is trotted out with a tone of desperate resignation, as if there is nothing we can do about it.

"But the joy of the American constitutional system is that we don't actually need to. The whole point of federalism is that different states can have different policies on matters of burning controversy--and that this is OK. Actually, better than OK. The U.S. Constitution was devised not as a means to avoid social and cultural polarization, but as a way to manage it without splitting the country apart."
....

"There are, after all, many matters of deep moral and political import that are simply immune to simple political compromises. The death penalty, stem-cell research, abortion, gay rights: All these involve moral judgments that can--and should--elude political half-measures. And you can see why: If you believe that a fetus is a human being, how can you compromise on abortion? If you believe that homosexuality is morally equal to heterosexuality, how can you deny gay couples the same relationship rights? If you believe that all killing is wrong, how can you support capital punishment?

"These are, indeed, nonnegotiable issues. Which is where federalism provides a imperfect but pragmatic solution. Choose both sides! Let Ohio prevent gay couples from having legal protections. But let California enact a sweeping civil-unions bill that brings gay couples very close to marriage rights. Let Washington ban federally funded embryonic stem-cell research. But allow Sacramento to set up a huge research program. Not only do you give both sides something--finding a compromise where no compromise seemed possible--but you also get a chance to see how social experiments succeed or fail in practice. Within a few years, we will have a much better idea of the real promise of embryonic stem cells and the social impact of gay marriage. Then the discussion can actually move forward, instead of in increasingly tight and bitter circles."

backdoor draft

I've read several stories about the backdoor draft the military is running. It's hard to believe that people are being called to duty because of clerical errors and "hidden charges."

Here's another article that's a little more hard-hitting.

Update: And yet another.

NASA

An article about NASA funding in the Washington Post. I'm really of two minds on this. It is exciting to consider sending manned missions to the moon and to Mars, and I think that is part of what NASA should be doing. The budget approval is great. However, it still looks like this new "vision" will take a big chunk out of the science that NASA funds. O'Keefe, the current administrator of NASA, does not seem interested at all in science. He wants to move NASA to an "operations" organization rather than a scientific one. His plans seem to involve phasing out science entirely. As a space scientist this scares me on a very basic level (what about my career? will I be able to get funding?), but even stepping back from that the plan doesn't make sense to me. Science drives operations. New discoveries open up the way for more experiments. If you cut science out of the picture you'll get by for a couple years, but then what? Without basic research setting down the foundations, future operations will have no direction, and that seems pointless to me.

children of congressmen

Here is an interesting story about congressmen who have children fighting in Iraq.

Grand larceny in space!!

Images of Saturn reveal kinks, theft

Americans and prescription drugs

So, have you read the latest on prescription drugs? 40% of Americans are on prescriptions. It sounds bad at first, but after giving it some thought, I'm really not sure why it's a big deal.

I'd guess a high percentage of women 18-40 use birth control pills, which are prescriptions. It's not surprising that many people over the age of 40 are taking some sort of blood pressure, cholesterol-lowering medication. I have allergies and I take prescriptions during the spring and fall allergy seasons.

These are all reasonable uses of prescription drugs which affect a large number of people. So what's the big story?