It is true. If you listen carefully to what most of the Dems (and all but Paul on the GOP side) are saying, they're intent on staying. Some call it responsible withdrawal, others come right out and say it's to secure our interests. Those that do, ignore the two central truths of the 'war on terror': (i) they fight us over there because we are there and (ii) they come over here in the hopes that we'll either (a) get out of there or (b) send more of us over there as fodder so that eventually we won't be there anymore. It is that simple. They'd like us to get out of their backyard so that they can do whatever it is that they want to do. Just like you.

"What makes this all the more appalling is that it was so easily avoidable. All Democrats had to do was offer legislation to fix the only real gap in FISA and then demand that the President sign it or risk a Terrorist attack. They could have gone on the offensive ahead of time by crafting the legislation and then made it their own cause to demand that the President sign it immediately in order to fix this problem and protect us from the Terrorists."

They could have also elected to do absolutely nothing. W has already said he doesn't have to follow the law, so, really, how was this administration being hamstrung? They could have not brought a bill to the floor in the first place. What would that have said? Nothing much, except that we're still a Nation of laws, not Men, and that it's time to get with actual leadership, rather than dictatorial quick fixes.

This is the end of the rope for me. Next thing, you know, Gitmo probably won't look so bad to enough the Dems that Pelosi and Reid will feel the need to put up a bill that can't be overridden by a veto, therefore will have to be passed based on W's terms. Enough already!

frankly, the bill never should have been brought to the floor of either the house or senate. much less "negotiated" or voted on. this is about provisions protecting the past. it's about corporate donors and the fear of being called "soft" on [whatever it is the GOP is selling as the next sure fire fix to whatever ails us]. we'll, the democratic party as a whole is soft on principle. I'm not.

that at&t, verizon, etc. chose to participate in breaking the law is not my concern. that W and his cronies elected to take the easy way out again (remember, it'd be a lot easier with a dictator, especially if W is the dictator), rather than obey the law while working to change it is not my concern either. that's why we have laws, so we don't face this little problem. When laws get broken people pay the price.

But, there's nothing to see here now. Orwellian at its finest. No laws were broken in the past, because we fixed everything up in the present.

Have a nice day. But watch who you talk to, where you visit and what you do. the government has ears and you might be the next MSM exploitation fragmentation.

"Every now and then, it is worth noting that substantial portions of the right-wing political movement in the United States -- the Pajamas Media/right-wing-blogosphere/Fox News/Michelle Malkin/Rush-Limbaugh-listener strain -- actually believe that Islamists are going to take over the U.S. and impose sharia law on all of us."

And in their haste to stop such a pressing catastrophe, these same folks are more than happy to attempt to establish a right-wing, religious totalitarian state. Neither, I'm afraid, are acceptable to me. Nor should the choice between Sharia law and the law of the Right be the only 2 options.

They don't even bother to pay attention once they've settled on a script. Has the Dem leadership (and I'm using that term loosely) not been paying attention this week. Their new strategy just happens to be W's strategy. Incremental steps to back where we started.

STOP WASTING AMERICAN LIVES, TREASURE and PRINCIPLES ON THIS ILL-CONCEIVED AND IMPOSSIBLE TASK.

It's a political problem. Not a military one. And even if it were a military problem, the US military is not the entity that should be providing the manpower. In case no one has realized, our presence causes issues in that region of the world.

I'm with the others here who continue to point out that the easiest way to 'end the war' is to stop funding. This we need 60 or bust is a nice insider's explanation, and a great excuse for people who don't pay attention, but the fact is that it takes a simple majority to pass any piece of legislation, what happens after that is up to the decider. If he decides to veto it, so be it. If Congress has the super majority needed to override a veto then, cool. If not, what happens?

Give it a minute . . .

It's not that the decider gets what he wants, it that no one gets what they want. Simple. Give him what you want and if he doesn't want it, then he gets nothing.

BTW, this approach is said to work really well in thousands of households across the country where parents are dealing with unruly children. Therefore, I'm pretty confident it'll work on the decider in chief.

to Brownback and his ilk when the "far Left" does it. Only Americans can spy on Americans (and the rest of the world). Everyone else must simply just believe what we tell them to believe.