(In the Shenandoah Valley area of Virginia, in case you were wondering)
•I can carry everything for a four-day stay (clothes, laptop, books) in my carry-on backpack and computer bag, but it’s sure heavy. Possibly I should have confined my reading material to paperbacks.
•Coming in three hours late on the return trip is no fun at all.
•We really don’t have seasons here, do we? The trees were still turning fall colors up there when I arrived.

It used to be “treason” was used for people who betrayed their country by working with its enemies: Kim Philby, who spied on his native Britain for the USSR; American-born Nazi propagandist Mildred Gillars, AKA Axis Sally; Benedict Arnold, whose name become synonymous with betrayal.
Since 9/11, however, the word has been stretched out of shape to attack people (or more precisely, Democrats and liberals) who do nothing but question Bush’s performance or the chance of success in Iraq.
Then in this morning’s “Spout Off” in the Daily News, a writer announces that Congress passing a resolution stating that Turkey committed genocide against the Armenians a century ago (a charge history backs up) constitutes “treason” because it will alienate an ally in the war on terror.
Certainly it may be a bad strategic decision to bring up the Armenian genocide just now (even though I have no sympathy for Turkish denials), but if anyone can imagine that constitutes treason, the word has completely lost all meaning.

Thursday, the Dalai Lama is scheduled to receive the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest civilian honor lawmakers can afford.
China is having hissy fits, since it considers Tibet to be part of China rather than a conquered country, and sees the Dalai Lama as a revolutionary fighting China’s rightful control. Nevertheless, neither Congress nor Bush (who will attend the ceremony) is changing their plans.
There’s nothing we can do to free Tibet, but we shouldn’t let China get away with claims that it’s the rightful owner of the Tibetan plateau. Gestures such as this are worthwhile, if only to spit in the conqueror’s eye.
Besides, the Dalai Lama’s cool.

Fla. Rep. Dan Gelber on the disarray in the special session in Tallahassee: “All we’re missing is John Belushi screaming ‘Toga party!’”

A lot of the time I agree with syndicated columnist Stephen Chapman, but not today.
In response to Sen. Jim Webb’s proposal to create an updated G.I. Bill as a benefit for America’s military, Chapman raises some valid questions—what about troops that don’t want to go to college?—but he also raises one I strongly disagree with: It might discourage members of the military from re-enlisting, because they could go off to college.”Given the intense strains on the military,” Chapman says, “this is not time to be enticing its best soldiers to leave.”
It seems to me that helping the military get a start on their post-service lives is a good thing. Chapman seems to be arguing that we should keep them from getting a leg up. By this logic, should we also drop the law that requires employers to keep reservists’ jobs open? That makes it a lot easier for them not to re-enlist too.
And if Chapman is really concerned about the military bleeding people, shouldn’t his real focus be private contractors such as Blackwater? I’ve read plenty of accounts from soldiers who say the high pay the contractors offer entices a lot of seasoned, skilled soldiers to leave the armed forces for the private sector.
And let’s not forget, the reason we have these “intense strains” on the military is Glorious Supreme Leader Bush’s stubborn commitment to keep fighting in Iraq. Bring the troops home and the strains will ease up. I’d prefer that as a solution to stinting on benefits.

Our mako shark video—which you can see elsewhere on this site—has been picked up by CNN.
I love it when local stories generate national attention. I love it even more when it’s a Log story, even one I had nothing to do with.

I didn’t think helping out with the real-estate section (since our R.E. reporter left, we’ve all taken turns contributing)—including writing stories about high-end homes—had affected my thinking much until a guy in a recent interview mentioned that houses in his subdivision were only around $1.4 - 1.9 million and I thought “Wow, is that all?”
I need help.

Once again, John Stossel this week shows that he doesn’t grasp the whole free-market thing he says he believes in.
First, Stossel explains that it’s people who have health insurance who “are the problem … they make medical care more expensive for everyone.” Isn’t arguing that people’s choices have to be curtailed for the public good exactly the kind of collectivist argument that usually gives Stossel hissy fits?
Then Stossel lectures us (I can see his finger wagging as he types—well, so to speak) that we should all have high-deductible insurance because it will not only make costs lower for everyone (collectivist again) but it’s “putting you in charge of your own health care.”
Guess what, Mr. Stossel, I’m already in charge of my health care, that’s why I go with a no-deductible policy rather than the high-deductible ones available in my plan. The premiums are higher, but my medical bills aren’t usually large enough in any year that I’d benefit by going with a cheaper high-deductible program. Stossel objects to my using health insurance for anything but major emergencies, but isn’t that my choice in a free market?
Apparently Stossel—who suggested in a previous column that people who don’t share his views on the free market shouldn’t be allowed to vote—also believes that people shouldn’t buy health insurance unless it’s the kind he approves of.
Stossel grumbles a lot about the “nanny state” but apparently he’s just fine with being a nanny pundit.

According to Bill O’Reilly this week, John Edwards is too “far left” to ever become president because under his authority we’d have “no coerced interrogation, civilian lawyers in courts for captured overseas terrorists, no branding the Iranian guards terrorists, and no phone surveillance without a specific warrant.”
So respecting the Bill of Rights is now not merely left-wing but FAR left wing?
Fascinating.

It’s a pleasant surprise when I can say that with sincerity.
In brief: International law, spelled out in treaties our government signed, guarantees Americans arrested overseas, or foreigners arrested here, the right to contact their consul. In one Texas case, José Medellin, a Mexican citizen (though a lifelong Texas resident) was convicted of a brutal rape murder without the opportunity to contact the Mexican consul. The same has happened to 50 other Mexican nationals.
After the appeals courts rejected that as an issue in the Medellin case, the Mexican government filed suit in the International Court of Justice, which called for court hearings to determine if the lack of consular consultation prevented a fair trial.
The White House opposed the Mexican government’s claim, but now that the court has sided with Mexico, Bush is calling on Texas to comply (the state is fighting this, and a Supreme Court decision will settle things).
I think this is a good thing. In the admittedly unlikely event I was arrested for murder in Mexico, I’d certainly like the option to call my embassy. It’s a principle worth preserving (quite aside from y’know, treaties being the law of the land and all that), if only for our self-interest.
So I’m glad Bush isn’t contesting the ICJ ruling. Good job.