For me, all the forensics of the assassination have to be reconciled with the Zapruder film, which, as the Oliver Stone movie emphasized, shows the final bullet snapping Kennedy's head, "back, and to the left; back, and to the left; back, and to the left." And a big chunk of his skull blew off the back end of the limo, and Jackie climbed out on the trunk to go after it.

All that suggests a shot from the front, hence a conspiracy. I have seen the autopsy photos online, and there is no entry wound in the face. But we know his head was down, at least at a 45-degree angle -- low enough for someone shooting from the overpass ahead, or the grassy knoll.

On the other hand, the other forensics, especially sound recordings, don't seem to allow for a fourth shot. And the FBI says the backward snap of the head can be explained by the physics of head shots. But that is counter-intuitive, at least in light of the lame explanations of that theory so far. Back then the FBI showed movies of shooting a cantaloupe, but it didn't jump backwards with great force. No sale. The study of the assassination on ABC by Peter Jennings held with the lone gunman theory but slid over the physics of the head snap.

So that's what it comes down to for me. Show me by clear and convincing forensic evidence that the last shot could have come from Oswald's gun and caused the president's head to snap "back, and to the left", and I'll buy the lone gunman theory. Otherwise the grassy knoll is still in the running.

Maybe when "CSI" jumps the shark [has a wild episode indicating creative desperation], it will be with the solution to the JFK assassination.

Many have commented that Democrats are suckers for Republican propaganda, buy into it, let them get away with clobbering them with it. They just need to learn some of those same skills -- not the part of converting lies into appealing slogans, but rather selling the truth in a powerful way.

On the funding issue, the correct slogan is "defund the WAR". In that case it is the responsibility of the Commander in Chief to use what money he has left to protect his troops by doing the only rational thing -- pull them out of Iraq. Leaving them in the field with no support would be unconscionable, and it would be his fault for doing so. Democrats need to summon up the brass to face down anyone who says otherwise.

But before doing that, Democrats should vote on Hillary's idea of declaring an end to the war. It will be vetoed, but it will be a clear message on the record from the sole body with Constitutional authority to declare war, the Congress. They implicitly have the right to un-declare it as well. Once that vote is taken, funds can be cut off, and the Commander in Chief is on fatally thin ice.

. . . with counterfeit money.

Keep doing a vice squad number on all of them.

Congress, which has the sole Constitutional authority to declare war, can pass a declaration that the war should END on such-and-such a date, and the Commander in Chief is instructed to take all necessary steps to facilitate that direction. That will be vetoed, but we might be surprised at the override vote. But if there is no override, after a majority vote in both houses to end the war, it will be a lot more palatable politically to refuse to fund it further.

And if the present Democrats won't do that, they deserve to be kicked out in 2008 in favor of some candidates who will.

I like the suggestions today about reinstituting the draft, but they need plenty of discussion. I served during the Vietnam war and opposed the draft because I opposed that war. A voluntary military means people dedicated to peace in all circumstances can stay out, and thereby not make it easy for the warmongers. But as we have seen, those little devils have ways of starting wars anyway. And, as I heard yesterday, something like 3/4 of our present military identify themselves as Republicans, something that would be impossible in a draft-based military. Finally, service was something we all had to do and did. It was a shared duty, and credential. Nobody gets to call me a surrender monkey, because they know that to a veteran, those are fighting words. So I like the draft more than I used to. It might make the Congresspeople think harder the next time some cheerleader for war cooks up another crazy scheme.