no one disrespects the troops
by critizing the vice-president.
[that guy who's really in charge(!)]

asking the leadership to take responsibility
for their decisions is what the protests are
all about -- no one blames the cadets.

i do think it odd that the vice-
president is so insecure about the
logic and moral authority of his con-
victions, that he needs to invoke
the aid of the courts to insulate
himself from the natural consequences of
his stated positions, and decisions.

by that, i mean, he applied for, and
received, a "prior restraint" order,
keeping almost all of the protestors
far, far away from where he appeared.

the fact that c.n.n. covered the protest
was simply balanced reporting. and that is
what amendment, first, is all about.

i am sorry that we disagree about that.

for my money, the most unfortunate part
of cheney's speech was his sneer at the
geneva conventions -- and on the link, i
offer some some as to why that bothered me.

c h e e r s!

the administration, you said,
was abusing the grads -- not the
protestors.  i am so sorry.

i do not disagree at all with you.

in fact, jeralyn, feel free to delete
mine, above while i go pour some more,
and stronger, coffee. . .

i do firmly feel it odd that cheneny
and bush avoid listeneing to protestors
by resorting to the courts. . .

again -- i need to go caffeinate!

One thing to note about cheney's address is that he continues to equate iraq and 9/11:

America is fighting this enemy in Iraq because that is where they have gathered. We are there because, after 9/11, we decided to deny terrorists any safe haven.

I did, and Aaron certainly speaks for me.