A couple of weeks ago I stopped in a men's room after clearing passport control in Gatwick airport, for the usual one man/ one urinal sort of bladder-related activity. When I got back to the concourse, I remember asking my wife, "Honey, why in the world would anyone be buying condoms from a vending machine in an airport restroom? Isn't it a little too late in the trip, or a little too early?" It just didn't add up - until the senator from the great state of Idaho demonstrated how one could make use of the condom machine without ever leaving the toilets!

Thank you, Larry Craig, for reminding us all about the importance of practicing safe sex. I'm sure that was what you were doing. Right?

Right on, Patrick - everyone except your security screeners and the hoodwinked public knows that you can't bring down an airplane with 4 ounces of body wash and a bottle of seltzer. But while each of us pays a small price in terms of extra time at checkpoints and the occasional confiscated bottle of hotel shampoo, there's a much larger price that goes unnoticed: checked baggage.

Before the liquid hysteria, I would routinely travel with just a single regulation carry-on bag. A couple of shirts, boxers, socks, a change of pants, toothpaste, bottle of shave cream, laptop, and ready to fly. Now when I pack I see that my toothpaste tube is too large, so I either have to waste time going to the drugstore to buy a small toothpaste, or waste time standing in line waiting for my bag. Since checking my bag means that I don't have to drag it around with me until I reach my final destination, and it means I can take more stuff (3 shirts, 3 boxers!), I am much more prone to just wave goodbye to my bag and hope that it meets me at the other end.

My wife is even more certain to check a bag, since she needs a biggish bottle of conditioner to keep her thick, luscious hair under control. She also likes to have a nice perfume with her, and she's certainly not going to buy a new bottle everywhere she goes and trash it before flying home.

So now the airlines have to deal with getting my bag on the right plane, getting it from one plane to another during a tight layover, and getting it off the plane and into my hands on the other end. In the old days, this was all work that I did myself, with a 100% chance that my carry-on would arrive with me. Now this is work that the airlines have to do - not just for me and my wife, but for a greatly increased percentage of their passengers. This probably means more expense for baggage handlers, and it certainly means more opportunity for bags to get lost. A lost bag (or one that didn't make the 20 minute connection when you were able to dash from your late arrival to your mysteriously on-time onward departure) costs the airline a LOT of money, since it involves staff time to trace the bag and a courier to deliver it to you.

Case in point: BA recently had to pay someone to drive clear across Ireland, 7 hours round trip, to deliver me a bag that I would have carried on had it not been for the liquids requirement. The bag hadn't made the connection in Gatwick, because my first flight of the morning had a late departure because the crew hadn't met their minimum rest requirements due to a late arrival the night before. Was the delay the night before due in any way to the extra luggage BA had to deal with the previous day? Could be...

I've had bags delivered to my door by the airlines no fewer than 4 times in the past year. Every time that happens, the airline loses money on my trip. Which means they need to find that money elsewhere. Which means an extra few bucks in your ticket price.

Late flights, more expensive tickets, more time waiting at the luggage carousel, more hassle with lost bags - those are the hidden costs of the silly liquid prohibition. So why, why are the airlines not protesting?

after a nice meal, I got about a minute into the barney video before I physically felt like retching. the last words I remember were "You and Miss Beazley," spoken by the Cretin-in-chief.

that's when I suddenly needed to toss my salad.

the saddest part is that they probably started filming this production last winter, since the opening sequence features a full coating of snow on the white house lawn that likely dates to last winter.

that's about a year's more advanced planning than went into the occupation of Iraq!

uh, John McCain carried New Hampshire with a 19 point lead in 2000.

Candidate | Votes | % | Delegates

John McCain | 115,490 | 49 | 9

George W. Bush | 72,262 | 30 | 6

Steve Forbes | 30,197 | 13 | 2

Alan Keyes | 15,196 | 6 | 0

Gary Bauer | 1,656 | 1 | 0

Other | 2,001 | 1 | 0

Total | 236,802 | 100 | 17

As a some-time college professor, I'd like to mention that several GI's have come through my classroom who have been among the best students I have had the privilege of teaching.

Unlike many of their 19-year-old classmates, the vets know why they are studying and they have the self-discipline to do their work well. College for them is not a 4 year party interrupted by the occasional class. Instead, it is a job to be completed with all the seriousness they previously gave to preparing for battle. They are damn happy to go to the library because no mortars being fired at them there. And they have real-world experience that makes them know how important it is to excel in school in order to do well afterwards.

From the perspective of teaching in a university, I would love to have more veterans.