While we were waiting for Santa

Late Saturday the NY Times broke this story that the NSA evesdropping was much bigger than Bush admitted. In fact, it includes the cooperation of our private telcom companies so that the NSA could practice data mining on telephone calls and emails. Now the Bush admin won't talk about it. Can't help the terrorists, now, can we?

This isn't good. This is more suggestion that Bush and the NSA believe that in the battle with terrorists, any measures are on the table--including violating our very constitutional safeguards--the very same ones the terrorists allegedly hate.

Some good news may be starting to break here. Former Sec State Colin Powell has some guarded criticism of the President's tactics. He admits that the administration didn't need to do this without warrants, but then, in typically Powell fashion, says that he doesn't have a problem with the President doing this without approval.

No need to not have oversight--except that Bush acts as if he doesn't need oversight. Again, imagine Clinton doing this and imagine the outrage coming from the Falwells and Robertsons.

____

As SOF pointed out this morning, there might be some good news in the Right's insistence on packing the courts with what they call "strict constructionists." Michael Luttig, the jurist who was the apple of the right's eye and even discussed as a possible Supreme court nominee--criticized the government's tactics in the Padilla case. Luttig had ruled that Bush was proper in holding Padilla as an "enemy combattant" (even though Padilla is an American citizen). Even Luttig was furious that the government completely flipped its justification. As SOF noted, the strict constructionists might actually believe that. They might actually not be amenable to an administration that simply switches justifications to fit the current problem.

_____

Either way, we at Streak's Blog are left with the impression that the President and VP have decided that the Presidency need more power. As Steve Chapman put it:

"President Bush is a bundle of paradoxes. He thinks the scope of the federal government should be limited but the powers of the president should not. He wants judges to interpret the Constitution as the framers did, but doesn't think he should be constrained by their intentions.

He attacked Al Gore for trusting government instead of the people, but he insists anyone who wants to defeat terrorism must put absolute faith in the man at the helm of government."

Even worse he seems to say that during wartime the President should have virtually unfettered power. And the kicker is that the war on terror is hardly likely to end.