Some Patriot Act haters will likely, as noted in the editorial, place blame for these problems on the Bush administration, but in doing so they ignore the kinds of problems that the FISA court creates for people in the intelligence business. When moments count, when it has to be done as quickly as possible to save lives, the FISA process, or any process which impedes the intelligence communities' efforts at gathing intel could cost people their lives.

terp,

I'm ashamed of you on this one, seriously. A true conservative is not going to stand by and watch their precious Constitution die without a fight. The same Constitution that stops the secularists from shutting down churches, the same Constitution that forbids the government from taking our guns, ALSO protects us from illegal search and seizure.

The question is, do you want a police state or don't you? Allowing the government to implement warrantless wiretaps with no oversight is guaranteed to bring out a police state. And all of us will suffer, not just the terrorists.

One thing is certain, if we are going to extend the constitutional protections we enjoy to every slime ball in the world wanting to do us harm, we might as well hang up a going out of business sale sign now. Cause they are and will use that to their advantage.

Well stated.

That is exactly where I sit on the issue.

Oversight is fine, but oversight that truly impedes the intelligence community from doing their job has got to go.

And sorry Gideon, we've argued about this before, and you won't change my mind by (and I don't mean to insult or antagonize here, so please don't take this wrong) fear mongering about the constitution being trampled.  The rights of the innocent should be protected, but the security of the innocent also must be protected and tieing our hands behind our backs isn't helping the situation.

I don't have a problem letting the surveillance happen first and then having the oversight come into play after the fact with the information that is obtained being declared inadmissable in court cases if necessary.

I liken this whole problem and situation to one where an adult sees a toddler about to walk into the deep end of the swimming pool.  The adult can stand by and watch the toddler walking in while they ask around whose child the toddler is, and who is responsible, and would the responsible individual please retrieve the child, etc., all while the child is going down for the third time gurgling and choking on the water, OR the adult can immediately intervene, save the child's life and pull them back to safety and then have to deal with the parents/guardians that weren't paying attention but have suddenly awoken to notice that someone (not them) is apparently now interfering in their duties and responsibilities as a parent by having pulled the child back to safety.