"Uh-dish-un is Hard"

It's a warrant. And yes, you have to fill it out.

It's refreshing to finally see Bush's bluff called on what as best I can tell was and remains nothing more than pure, undiluted fearmongering with regard to FISA, telecom immunity, and so on.

But that aside, I still wonder why there continues to be this fundamental cave-in on what amounts to a basic principle of Constitutional Government and rule of law. Even Shrub's fiercest critics take pains to assure the citizenry that warrantless spying has not been affected, or can continue on for another year, blah, blah, blah, etc.--well, I'll repeat myself: what's so goddamned difficult about getting a warrant of ANY kind in order to monitor terrorists? It's not like taking the bar exam, and HAVING A RECORD, however classified it might be, is an essential function of legitimate government.

To paraphrase Lenny Bruce, warrants--or a lack thereof--don't allow the criminals to get off...warrants PROTECT the public by ensuring that the government doesn't BECOME criminal. Bruce went on with a brothel analogy: without a warrant, the cop can go to the whorehouse every night. If the place gets raided, he'll claim, "oh, I was investigating..." BUT, if he has to go to the judge, and now he's got the paper, the place gets raided, "and, what's that? A warrant? OK, not a problem..."

Absent records, we simply don't know what or whom Team Bush is listening in on...

One frightening aspecct of this particular mess is the degree to which the net was cast. As the Olbermann commentary notes, Mark Klein claims EVERYTHING was gathered, at least everything on AT&T circuits. To be fair, one can reasonably assume that the volume of data alone makes the odds of someone's civil liberties being violated almost lottery-like...then again, lotteries have winners...or perhaps losers, in this case.

Also, given what we DO know about this administration--that, particulary while Karl Rove slithered around the White House, it was almost certainly the most intensely political regime ever--you really have to wonder what DID make it past the initial gathering process and onto analysis. Maybe they didn't bother with me, for instance, but what about high-ranking Democrats, or influential business leaders, and so on?

Requiring a warrant would provide us with answers. And that's why NOT getting a warrant has traditionally been a violation of law...