I can't tell you how tired I am of the Bush Administration's crazy-making over the last few years.  

After the 2006 elections, I breathed a sigh of relief for many reasons.  One of the main reasons for my relief was the very sane and healthy prospect of resuming Congressional oversight of the Bush Administration's Executive Branch.

It shouldn't have surprised any of us that, as should by now be obvious, the Bush Administration would feel no shame in trying to keep its activities secret from the American people by employing any means necessary.  It's obvious that they believe their control and operation of our government is none of our damn business.  You see, they believe that they have the right to keep their activities secret, and executive privilege is their King's X, allowing them to tell us with impunity and without apology, "We do what we want and it's none of your business."

So when is executive privilege justified?  Reading about the power struggles and thinking about it has only made things murkier and more confusing for me.  Listening to the back-and-forth between oversight committees and the  executive branch provides little illumination.  

So far, the conversation goes something like this (using "shorter"-style translation):

Congressional Oversight:  (to Bush Admin. or Exec Branch Dept.)  We need documents from you.

(weeks/months pass with no response)

Congressional Oversight:  Hey!  Stop ignoring us.  We need documents from you.

Bush Adm/Exec Branch:  Huh?  Oh, sorry.  We've been busy.  Fighting terrorists, you know.  We'll get them to you.

(weeks/months pass with no response)

Congressional Oversight:  So where are the documents you promised?

Bush Adm/Exec Branch:  Well, here are a few
of them--mostly redacted.  But isn't it an impressive number of sheets of paper?  10,000!  We'll send the others once we find them.  If we find them.

Congressional Oversight:  You mean they're lost?

Bush Adm/Exec Branch:  Maybe.  We don't know.

----------------------------------

An interminable amount of time passes.  Finally, we get to this:


Bush Adm/Exec Branch:  We invoke executive privilege.

Congressional Oversight:  Now you tell us.  Why in the world do you think that applies here?

Bush Adm/Exec Branch:  Because we need to protect the valuable level of candor between the President and (fill in the blank depending on what they're covering up) in their deliberative communications, you know, especially on these politically charged issues.  (Are there any issues during the Bush Administration that aren't politically charged?)  Besides, you haven't demonstrated a real need for these documents.  And anyway, you're just engaging in phony political theater.

Congressional Oversight:  We're doing oversight.  It's our responsibility.  And you haven't proven a valid basis for asserting executive privilege.

And on and on and on and on.....

-------------------

So what the hell distinguishes where the line is drawn between these two--(1)  when the President does have a right to executive privilege that supersedes the citizens' right to know and (2)  when the people's need to know what the hell their government's doing is more important (not to mention the most valuable check on abuse of government power)?

I've been looking for a distinction that answers this question--something that's clear and concise and irrefutable.  Is it some ineffable, delicate balance that only someone much smarter than I can grasp?  I'd started to think maybe that was the answer--either that or I'm crazy and no longer possess the ability to use logic.

Then I found this on the Obsidian Wings site.

That makes sense.  God bless publius at Obsidian Wings.  That makes sense.  And I'm not crazy.