The following tale is from the history of the oldest commissioned warship in the world, the USS Constitution. It comes by way of the National Park Service, as printed in "Oceanographic Ships, Fore and Aft", a periodical from the oceanographer of the US Navy.

[Note - and it's been modified slightly by someone along the way ]

On 23 August 1779, the USS Constitution set sail from Boston, loaded with 475 officers and men, 48,600 gallons of water, 74,000 cannon shot, 11,500 pounds of black powder and 79,400 gallons of rum. Her mission: to destroy and harass English shipping.

On 6 October, she made Jamaica, took on 826 pounds of flour and 68,300 gallons of rum. Three weeks later, Constitution reached the Azores, where she provisioned with 550 pounds of beef and 2,300 gallons of Portuguese wine.

On 18 November, she set sail for England where her crew captured and scuttled 12 English merchant vessels and took aboard their rum. By this time, Constitution had run out of shot. Nevertheless, she made her way unarmed up the Firth of Clyde for a night raid. Here, her landing party captured a whiskey distillery, transferred 13,000 gallons on board and headed for home.

On 20 February 1780, the Constitution arrived in Boston with no cannon shot, no food, no powder, no rum, and no whiskey. She did, however, still carry her crew of 475 officers and men and 18,600 gallons of water. The math is quite enlightening: Length of cruise: 181 days Booze consumption: 1.26 gallons per man per day (this does NOT include the unknown quantity of rum captured from the 12 English merchant vessels in November).

Naval historians say that the re-enlistment rate from this cruise was 92%.

-- John Joss heard Joel Schumacher say on ``Fresh Air'' the other day that there is no homophobia in Hollywood. ``If you make money for them, they don't care what you do. You could be (action for which one uses a screwdriver) yaks in the street. They'll buy you a yak. They'll give you their yak.''

Dear Friend,

I have been asked by Jim Nicholson, Chairman, Republican National Committee to send you the following important information;

As you know, the coming election is projected to be the closest race in 40 years. And the future of our great country literally hangs in the balance. That's why I want to tell you about [A GOP web site]

Please take a few seconds to sign-up at [URL here]. Once you've registered as an eChampion, you will receive fact-filled e-mails twice a week on the upcoming election, the candidates' stands on issues, etc.

Blah Blah Blah

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Paid for by the Republican National Committee
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

P.S. I am appealing to you, as part of a select group of eChampions to SPREAD THE WORD BY FORWARDING THIS MESSAGE to your own email list today! Please feel free to add a personal message to the top of the message you forward.

P.S.S. You can help the GOP reach more people by contributing online. Click here to help the Republican Team!

The article on MS from ACT was obviously self serving, but I agree with one part of its conclusion: splitting MS into two new monopolies isn't the right solution. We'll be back in court in a few years doing this again (unless Bush is elected :-) ).

If we truly want to increase competition, trim and improve products and lower pricing in the Windows market (albeit with inevitable balkanization) MS will need to be broken into multiple (4 or 5) vertically integrated companies, each with access to the same initial source code (Windows, Office, etc.).

Furthermore, I believe Bill is making a strategic blunder by not voluntarily breaking up MS along different lines of his own choosing. MS could settle the case and reinvigorate the stock in one quick move, much as the Baby Bells have surpassed the former AT&T while avoiding any serious re-regulation.

The government has already condoned Windows and Office monopolies. MS would have free reign to design a viable breakup that would leverage key technologies and initiatives. Through Bill's paralysis and control paranoia, MS is increasingly likely to lose key employees the longer the stock price remains stalled.

Just as not finishing the job in Iraq has left us with a very dangerous situation in the Middle East today, settling for two new monopolies that would still require continuous monitoring by the Feds is not a solution that does justice to all the work done by David Boies.

From the creator of "The Critic" and Icebox's own "Hard Drinkin' Lincoln" comes the story of a left-wing hero: "Queer Duck." Featuring the voices of RuPaul, Jim J. Bullock, and Estelle Harris (of Seinfeld).

He's here, he's queer, he's a duck - and he couldn't be prouder. Watch Queer Duck and his friends Openly Gator, Bi Polar Bear and Oscar Wildcat live it up on Icebox.

Q: What does HMO stand for?
A: This is actually a variation of the phrase, "Hey, Moe!" Its roots go back to a concept pioneered by Doctor Moe Howard, who discovered that a patient could be made to forget about the pain in his foot if he was poked hard enough in the eyes. Modern practice replaces the physical finger poke with hi-tech equivalents such as voice mail and referral slips, but the result remains the same.

Q: Do all diagnostic procedures require pre-certification?
A: No. Only those you need.

Q: I just joined a new HMO. How difficult will it be to choose the doctor I want?
A: Just slightly more difficult than choosing your parents. Your insurer will provide you with a book listing all the doctors who were participating in the plan at the time the information was gathered. These doctors basically fall into two categories--those who are no longer accepting new patients, and those who will see you but are no longer part of the plan. But don't worry--the remaining doctor who is still in the plan and accepting new patients has an office just a half day's drive away!

Q: What are pre-existing conditions?
A: This is a phrase used by the grammatically challenged when they want to talk about existing conditions. Unfortunately, we appear to be pre-stuck with it.

Q: Well, can I get coverage for my pre-existing conditions?
A: Certainly, as long as they don't require any treatment.

Q: What happens if I want to try alternative forms of medicine?
A: You'll need to find alternative forms of payment.

Q: My pharmacy plan only covers generic drugs, but I need the name brand. I tried he generic medication, but it gave me a stomach ache. What should I do?
A: Poke yourself in the eye.

Q: I have an 80/20 plan with a $200 deductible and a $2,000 yearly cap. My insurer reimbursed the doctor for my out-patient surgery, but I'd already paid my bill. What should I do?
A: You have two choices. Your doctor can sign the reimbursement check over to you, or you can ask him to invest the money for you in one of those great offers that only doctors and dentists hear about, like windmill farms or frog hatcheries.

Q: What should I do if I get sick while traveling?
A: Try sitting in a different part of the bus.

Q: No, I mean what if I'm away from home and I get sick?
A: You really shouldn't do that. You'll have a hard time seeing your primary care physician. It's best to wait until you return, and then get sick.

Q: I think I need to see a specialist, but my doctor insists he can handle my problem. Can a general practitioner really perform a heart transplant right in his office?
A: Hard to say, but considering that all you're risking is the $10 co-payment, there's no harm giving him a shot at it.

Q: What accounts for the largest portion of health care costs?
A: Doctors trying to recoup their investment losses.

Q: Will health care be any different in the next century?
A: No, but if you call right now, you might get an appointment by then.

Precisely what does one think the Marines, naval security guard types, and offloadable small craft are for on a destroyer anyway, waterskiing?

There should be, but there will not be. Went out of style when FDR needed a scapegoat and found Admiral Kimmel and his Army counterpart.

It was fascinating to go through your site and enrich ourselves with some exclusive information on media.

The kid from 3rd Rock From The Sun, Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman's daughter, Anna Paquin, Christina Ricci, Leonard Nimoy's son, Woody Allen's son, and Rider Strong go here. Nobel prizes and actors. Oh yeah.

NEW YORK, NY---This fall, Columbia University imposed perhaps the most flawed and unfair sexual misconduct policy found at any university in America. The policy, specifically designed to eliminate the already weak protections of a prior code, lacks even the most minimal safeguards and fundamental principles of fairness. The policy offers no substantial protections to the accused, who, in decent societies, are presumed innocent. Approved by the Columbia University Senate in the spring, over virtually no opposition from the faculty, it has the enthusiastic support of Columbia President George Rupp.

The new policy denies to the accused student the very rights that have formed the basis of our concept of fair process since the founding of the Republic: the right to timely notice, the right to prepare a defense, the right to confront one's accuser and to cross-examine witnesses, the right to an attorney, and the right to an impartial hearing. "As it stands today, students at Columbia will be far less free than students who attend the City University of New York or Staten Island Community College. The privilege of attending Columbia should not require students to give up the expectation of receiving decent treatment and fundamental fairness from all of Columbia's programs, including its campus disciplinary system," says Alan Charles Kors, President of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). "That expectation is natural and reasonable," Kors adds.

In an August 1 letter to the Board of Trustees of Columbia University…

FIRE's letter pointed out that under the new policy, a student in his senior year could be expelled from Columbia as a result of charges from an ex-girlfriend that he allegedly committed "date rape" in his freshman year. He could be informed of those charges less than ten days before a hearing. He would not know the specific nature of the evidence alleged against him until the hearing officer described it to him immediately prior to the student's own testimony. Despite the grave seriousness of the charges and the ruin awaiting him from false conviction, the student would not have an attorney present to advise him and would not have the right to be present even to hear the testimony of either his accuser or the witnesses against him. He has no right to cross-examination, which, elsewhere in this society, is regarded as the principal way to test the believability of a witness and the truth of testimony. Indeed, the policy goes out of its way specifically to prohibit cross-examination. In short, the accused student lacks even the minimal information, time, and means to defend himself….

In supporting the passage of this new policy, student activists (many of whom have been selected by Columbia to help administer the policy) wore red tape to symbolize the rights of the accused that they were seeking to eliminate from Columbia's old sexual misconduct policy. "What the students perceived as 'red tape' was, in fact, a set of procedural protections designed to guarantee that the sexual misconduct disciplinary process was fair and impartial, not dominated by lynch mob hysteria and witch hunts," Kors noted. In the letter from FIRE, Kors asked the trustees of Columbia, "Would you want a friend, or your son, or your daughter tried under such a fundamentally unfair policy?"