Congress passed laws that would compel companies to comply with legitimate national security needs. Of course, since laws were passed publicly, citizens would be aware of what their government was doing, and if necessary, challenge the laws' constitutionality in the courts.

Now that America is a dictatorship governed by secret presidential decrees, Congress and the courts are no longer even necessary.

I wonder if anyone will mention the demise of our constitional republic on the next Fourth of July, when we pay lip service to the Founding Fathers, martyred patriots and the now-obsolete notion of the "American Way."

John McCain tried to differentiate himself from the Republican pack by advocating an increase in Iraq troop occupation levels, never dreaming that Bush would actually do it.

Now that Bush has "surged," McCain has to not only assume ownership of the policy, but attempt to take credit for it.

It's not that the "surge" has accomplished anything useful -- our Iraq policy is much too incoherent for that. Instead, the illusion of success is based on co-opting and arming the Sunni insurgents that were attacking US troops last year, and setting the stage for civil war against the Shiite government we installed.

"Past insecurity and sectarian violence kept many medical professionals away," Faulkner said. "We are optimistic that the improved security and stability will permit the return of these professionals and essential services."

Oh yeah, it's all make believe.

At the rate of $250,000,000.00 and one American life per day, we should hope we could point to something tangible in Iraq we have achieved at the cost of all that treasure and blood.

Nazis? Wimps. Commies? Wussies. Total war with highly industrialized militaristic societies? No problem.

Twenty guys with boxcutters and an audacious plan? PANIC! Kill and maim tens of thousands of innocents, shred our Constitution, bankrupt our economy and ruin our international credibility (and wet our collective diaper).

Thank goodness we have the fightin' 82nd chAirborne to save us all. May their steely resolve and steadfast courage never falter (until they run out of Chee-tos or the draft is re-instated).

Bush (and the Republicans) need to keep Al Qaeda around as a boogeyman. That's why they conveniently allowed Bin Laden to escape at Tora Bora.

When Obama suggested attacking Al Qaeda targets in Pakistan if we received "actionable" intelligence, Bush and the GOP howled as if Obama was going to attack a valuable US asset -- which in essence, he was. Al Qaeda is a political asset for the Republicans that continues to be both protected and exploited to this day.

"On Capitol Hill, House Republicans stormed out of the House chamber to boycott a vote to hold two presidential confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into whether federal prosecutors were ousted for political reasons."

So the walkout shown in the ad was actually in protest of a different vote altogether.

Yes, House Republicans were avoiding the contempt vote on Bolton and Meiers and pandering on the FISA/PAA issue, the shameless, despicable bastards.

Yes, we have a serious "whore" problem, and it ain't with comely female lobbyists.

Our campaign-finance system guarantees that our politicians whore themselves out to special interests just to raise money for TV ad dollars. It's fundamental to our system. The Supreme Court's ridiculous ruling equating free speech with money made it the law of the land.

The sad thing is that all those idiotic political ads are absolutely useless -- even counterproductive -- for advancing our political discourse.

The only party benefitting from the semi-annual blitz of mindless TV advertising are the media giants, who make out like bandits from the ad revenues, and thus will never educate the public about the utterly corrupt state of our government --except when there is a salacious sex scandal that will pump-up ratings. It's a perfect storm of overt self-interest at the expense of good government that makes the old Roman Senate seem positively idealistic by comparison.

Only a constitutional amendment mandating public financing of elections and national standards for balloting -- and with free TV time for qualified candidates -- will end this disgraceful pornocracy.

CNN has been bending over backwards to avoid any mention of St. McCain's possible carnal activities -- as if any favors done were simply inexplicable, and therefore, unbelieveable. Despite the Republicans' sudden prudery and squeamishness about sullying reputations, the sex angle has to be referenced in order for McCain's actions to make any sense.

Also, McCain himself obviously lied, and apparently counted on the ignorance of his audience, when he claimed he had never, ever, done anything to dishonor his office, as if the Keating affair never happened.

From McConnell/Mukasey:

Specifically, you assert that the National Security Agency (NSA) or Federal Bureau of Intelligence (FBI) "may begin surveillance immediately" in an emergency situation. FISA requires far more, and it would be illegal to proceed as you suggest].

Question: Just what exactly was "illegal" about proceeding as Reyes suggested? It's my understanding that FISA allows warrants to be requested retroactively in an emergency, so no loss of surveillance occurs while awaiting court approval.

Perhaps it would have been "illegal" because the wiretapping targets were far outside the statutory scope of FISA, and no judge would ever have granted a warrant.

Their point -- and it's true -- is that the Government can't just start eavesdropping with no warrants any time they feel like it under FISA. Even for the emergency provisions, some procedural requirements must be met -- specifically, the AG or a designee must certify that it's likely that the FISA court would find probable cause for the eavesdropping. So some process is required even for FISA's emergency, no-warrant 72-hour eavesdropping provision.

Is that as simple as filing a form with the court or a full-blown hearing? In any event, it just wouldn't seem like such a crushing, insurmountable burden when balanced against the obvious potential for abuse.