loquitur

you did say something snippy, rb, so go right ahead and add to it.

My one observation is that the rule of law is not a conservative position and thinking it indispensable is not conservative rhetoric. It's the underpinning of civilization, and certainly the underpinning of a democratic society. You can say you don't like certain laws, but then you have to deal with Sartre's view, which is that you have to be willing to grant others the right to live by the rules you set for yourself - so if you want to take matters into your own hands on matters you deem important, then you have to let others do it on matters they deem important. And you might not like the results when that happens because those others might not agree with you.

That's not conservative rhetoric. That's plain old civilized behavior in an open society.

Will, I don't know who in the State Dept is responsible for (de)classification decisions. Clearly they are over-classifying, but that's to be expected in a bureaucracy. Overclassifying satisfies two imperatives: it covers the bureaucrat's ass and increases his/her power. So it's a twofer. Welcome to the iron law of big organizations. It does not follow, however, that therefore someone self-appointed gets to make the decision. It means State needs better procedures.