Ultra K (copyright Stormbear ) keeps hitting them out of the park and continues to impress.  Here goes some news and notes about Dennis Kucinich!

The topic below was originally posted in my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal as well as the Independent Bloggers Alliance and the Peace Tree.

Trying to make sense of tribal politics in the Middle East can't be done with simple bumper sticker slogans. The history, entangling relationships, religious dimension, shifting alliances, geography and multiple cultures are a Byzantine maze of complexity. Specifically, the Muslim world is often regarded by people in the west, especially Americans, as a large bowl of alphabet soup. As a result, policy makers who look for quick and easy fixes by force in the region overreach and miscalculate.

One tragic example of miscalculation and overreach is Lebanon. Once regarded as the "jewel" of the Middle East, Lebanon endured a brutal civil from 1975 to 1990. Surrounded by the Mediterranean Sea, Syria and Israel, this small country the size of Connecticut has flummoxed leaders in Jerusalem and Washington for two decades.

Given the admitted desire of many architects of the Iraq war to push on from Iraq into Iran and Syria, do you think it might be a good idea for Congress to pass a concurrent resolution expressly forbidding U.S. troops from entering those nations without specific Congressional authority?

I say "concurrent resolution" instead of "bill" because a bill would be subject to Presidential veto. I believe that a concurrent resolution would still have the significant effect of clearly defining the legislative intent behind the Authorization on Use of Force in Iraq as being limited to Iraq alone, closing any legal loopholes that Bush could use to argue that the AOUF gave him authority to expand the war into neighboring countries on his own initiative.

Politically, I think this effort would be a win-win for anti-war and progressive activist and legislators. Can anyone think of a significant down-side?

I gave my opinion on this WONDERFUL YouTube video I came across, and apparently the poor individual who created the video didn't appreciate it much. Awww. And then, instead of posting my artfully colored reply, he chose not to post that and to distort it. Well, I guess he showed me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBk4a6oP6 Bs

This isn't a new topic, but I haven't weighed in on it yet and I'd like to explore it below.  

I originally posted this as a diary at dailykos. Phillbox suggested I cross-post it here.
original post

One of the important things about the recent revelations provided by the investigations into the US Attorney Scandal are insights into how Karl Rove formulates and distributes Republican talking points, and how these are thereafter disseminated to the media and imprinted, however temporarily, on the public mind.

I think we're in a position now, to draw up an anatomy of a "Rove talking point" (which is how I think these should be labeled.) Anatomizing the "talking point" operation at a systematic level should, I think, provide a systematic way of responding that will be more effective than the present piecemeal response. I'll take Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria and the emerging "Rove talking point," "Has Pelosi committed a felony?" as an example, since that is recent and on people's minds. link

The anatomy as I see it is below the fold. Sorry, this is pretty long, but I hope is worth the read: