IF the Admin is allowed to frame the domestic spying issue by saying "Look, if someone in the U.S. is talking to someone in Al Qaeda, we want to know why" we are going to lose.
Most Americans are OK with that kind of spying because they can't see far enough down the road to realize that this kind of extraordinary power can (and has) also been used to stifle dissent, imprision political opponents, manipulate markets, etc. Most Americans just haven't read enough history.
It's a catch-22 for the Dems if protecting civil liberties lets them be painted as soft on terrorism. It doesn't have to be that way. But there's a solution...
The solution is for Dems to introduce bills in both houses authorizing the Admin to do exactly and specifically what the administration claim to be doing AND SPECIFICALLY PROHBITING ANYTHING ELSE.
Fine, when the admin finds a US phone number on a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan (one of their favorite examples), let them fill out a simple affidavit saying where they got the number/how that number is linked to terrorism and then listen away - no warrant required. BUT, the FISA court needs jurisdiction and subpoena power over those affidavits, the Senate Armed Forces Committee needs access to any and all of the affidavits, etc. The process has to be subject to review and access by both the judicial and legislative branches to keep the executive branch honest. Not because we don't trust them (cough) but because our system of government is based on checks and balances.
The problem is not as much with what the admin CLAIMS it is doing with a warrantless tapping power but rather the fact that it has just taken this power of its own accord what it could do with the unlimited power it claims it has.
I don't want the admin tapping every call between every American who has family members abroad, between every American who has business contacts abroad, putting the whole thing through some kind of filter/algorithm and then winding up classifying/labeling Americans as supporter or non-supporters or with any other label depending on what the algorithm of their call pattern spells out.
Bush says he needs a very particular power limited to "terrorists". Fine. I say give it to him; but don't let him take it and keep it limited to exactly what they are claiming they are doing. Because it's not what they are claiming they are doing that we are so worried about.
IMHO such a bill would undercut the Admin in a heartbeat.
