simple messages are best. . .

". . .It is time for the president
and Republicans in Congress to stop
trying to bully their way through
this and work with Democrats to end
the war. . . It's time for the president
to show respect for the American people,
who voted overwhelmingly to leave Iraq. . ."

-- howard dean,
d.n.c. chairman,
this morning. . .

this is the best antidote to the
bush/rove/cheney spin on war funding.

the truth.

in small words,
and short sentences.

this will resonate
with all americans. . . just
as this did, almost forty
years ago, now, on vietnam:

". . .I do not want -- as I believe
most Americans do not want -- to
sell out American interests,
to simply withdraw, to raise
the white flag of surrender. That
would be unacceptable to us
as a country and as a people.
But I am concerned -- as I
believe most Americans are
concerned -- that the course we
are following at the present
time is deeply wrong. I am
concerned -- as I believe most
Americans are concerned -- that
we are acting as if no other
nations existed, against the
judgment and desires of neutrals
and our historic allies alike.
I am concerned -- as I believe
most Americans are concerned --
that our present course will
not bring victory; will not
bring peace; will not stop
the bloodshed; and will not
advance the interests of the
United States or the cause of
peace in the world. I am concerned that, at
the end of it all, there will only be more
Americans killed; more of our treasure spilled
out; and because of the bitterness and hatred
on every side of this war, more hundreds of
thousands of [civilians] slaughtered; so they
may say, as Tacitus said of Rome:

'They made a desert, and called it peace'. . ."

-- robert f. kennedy (1968)

[h/t the huffington post.]

that is all.

happy easter!

batteries [some background reading] required. . .

below are two excellent "backgrounders" on the
byzantine process for classifying -- and then
de-classifying -- national security information.

and more importantly, these two articles explain
the astonishingly "novel" theories advanced
by the office of the u.s. vice president in
asserting that it is mostly exempt from having
to comply with the federal law governing the
de-classification/classification process. . .

first -- from looseheadprop at firedoglake;
next, is a more general, june 2006 piece
from the new standard.

to grossly oversimplify, it can be said that
one important aim of the federal law in this area
is to maintain a centralized-index of all that
the various offices of the government deem
secret, or classified. in this way, there
can be an entirely sensible, coordinated and
orderly approach to making sure that state-
secrets. . . stay that way.

vice president cheney's office has asserted, in
writing, that his office is, in effect, a fourth
branch of government, and as such, is largely
exempt from the law that governs the other
three "ordinary" branches. the claim
is that the vice president is extra-constitutional.

the sheer audacity of this lie: creating a branch of
government, from whole cloth, out of what most
serious scholars acknowlege is largely a
ceremonial office -- the vice president's -- is
breath-taking. the size of this prevarication,
as well as the confidence with which the vice
president's office asserts the same, suggests he
expects little or no reprobation or correction
from the chief executive.

we -- the american people, on the
other hand -- may not
go along quite so quietly,
mr. vice president. the
house judiciary committee would
be the correct place to begin
hearings, and ultimately sanctions,
addressing the open and willful
failure of the vice president
to comply with federal law.
violations of these laws
are mostly felonies -- some of
which are punishable by life
in prison. life.

it is high time to write the chairman of the judiciary committee,
rep. conyers [click on this link; photo at right], and the
representatives in your district, about all these
matters. we need to begin the process of bringing
the vice president to account to the legislative
(and if need be, the judiciary) branch for his
apparent transgression of well-settled federal law.

much more to come on this. much more.