Or is it just the potential immunity for the telcom companies that apparently blindly followed the Bush Administration's instructions that sticks in your craw.
For reference, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution reads as follows:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The purpose of this is a attempt to actually look at the new FISA bill and point out what is or is not the part of the bill that is so problematic (other than just the idea of any kind of FISA act at all).