Sex Lives of Supreme Court Justices:
Now that the sex lives of Supreme Court justices have become grist for commentators, we are finally free to discuss a question formerly only whispered about in the shadows: Why does Justice Antonin Scalia, by common consent the leading intellectual force on the Court, have nine children? Is this normal? Or should I say “normal,” as some people choose to define it? Can he represent the views of ordinary Americans when he practices such a minority lifestyle? After all, having nine children is far more unusual in this country than, say, being a lesbian.
The GSS can answer this question. Sort of. It turns out that the highest number of children it asks about are “8 or more.” Limiting the sample to 1998-2008 so it has some contemporary relevance, ~1% of respondents in the GSS has 8 or more children. But that’s not quite fair, since many respondents are young adults, or just starting their families. Limiting the sample to those who are 60 years or older you have ~3.5%. Limiting to 70 and above it goes up to ~4.5%. Scalia is 74 years old, so I think it might be appropriate to judge him by his generation, though the relative gerontocracy of the Supreme Court, and American politics in general, might warrant examination. In 2008 in the GSS asked about sexual orientation, and ~2% of women stated they were lesbian, gay or homosexual. So whether Scalia is more abnormal than a lesbian measured against the general population depends on the reference population you use. For his generation, probably not, but for this generation, perhaps.




Please don’t just wander into your local store and take the “expert” advice of the 17-year old sales assistant. A little research in advance will pay you dividends, and at the very least will save you from being one of the bewildered souls in the store staring at a wall of boxes wondering what on earth a Gigabit cable router with MIMO access is. Read on for the three key things you need to know.

Keith's note: It is becoming increasingly apparent that every hearing on the topic of President Obama's space policy - especially when Charlie Bolden is in the hot seat - is designed to be an ambush announced in advance. The witness panel is usually stacked numerically with opponents. In this case this hearing is a blatant attempt to pick up the food fight where it left off last week on the other side of the Hill. Since it is fair game to repeatedly have Apollo astronauts testify who are publicly against the plan, why not have a few Apollo vets testify who are publicly for it - like Buzz Aldrin and 




Reader note: I have a habit of scouring through NASA procurement notices looking for interesting things - as well as comedic relief. love this one: "


