I'm in a similar position. I have things that I do, some of them because people pay me money to do them, some of them because they have always brought me happiness, but I have done all of these things less and less because of this place. I come here to read the truth as told by Glenn and to hear the replies of all the voices (trolls included) to what he says.

I know that places like this represent a significant part of the future of global society, because they allow anyone with a computer and an Internet connection to engage in dialogue with people they may never see in person, but with whom they have a great deal in common.

I have been fortunate in my life and I am grateful. For the most part, my vocation and avocation have been one and the same.

Before 2000, I was not involved in politics because I thought progress was inevitable. Then George Bush was elected, 9/11 happened, we invaded Afghanistan. A professor friend who was a specialist in Holocaust history and Western art told me about Scott Ritter and Likud and Plan B and the neocons and told me an invasion of Iraq was likely. I immersed myself in trying to understand everything that was being said in the MSM and comparing it to what people like Ritter were saying. They were saying nearly opposite things.

And then we invaded Iraq.

It never occurred to me in all my life that the US could ever not be a democracy. But I've changed my mind. When Rome became a dictatorship and an empire, the majority of Romans never knew the difference and continued to live their lives in the same ways they had always lived them. That has happened here. We have Iraq and Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and the loss of habeas corpus and extraordinary renditions and we spy on our citizens without warrants and our Supreme Court is quickly reversing eighty years of progress and we use white phosphor and cluster bombs and gas and depleted uranium on civilian populations and for the most part, the majority of US citizens (and they are basically good people just like everyone else in the world) go on about their daily business as if nothing has changed. The majority of US citizens are more likely to base their votes on the price of gas and milk and their house payments than anything else.

It's crazy. And that is why I come here. For sanity's sake.

I spend, all together, about three hours a day at this blog. It used to be one hour. At some point I will have to return to technology (the thing people pay me for) and to writing and painting. I may find myself like DCLaw1 coming here evenings after work, finding 200+ comments, half of them related to Glenn's post, the other half to who knows what, and just reading through them all for an hour before posting one or two of my own.

And of course I will always come here to read bebop-o's poetry.

That was very, very good.

For a non-lawyer to presume to contribute to an understanding of law seems presumptuous, I know. It is similar to a layperson trying to contribute to a conversation between surgeons on the intricacies and likely outcomes of a particular surgical procedure.

Thankfully, (no disrespect intended Glenn, you're awesome) we are not a nation of lawyers (actually, maybe we are -- tell me again, what percentage of our congress are lawyers?) but of people.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the question of standing seems to revolve around the question of whether or not the plaintiffs had the standing to sue, that is, could they prove that they were subjected to the NSA's warrentless eavesdropping? This reminds me of other types of damage suits (tobacco, asbestos, etc.) that nearly always take the form of class-action suits. These days, you start with a petition alleging loss, discrimination and other forms of damage and proceed from there, don't you? Rather than beat around the bush or wait for congress to do something, couldn't a class-action suit bring this thing to a head fairly quickly? All we have to do is get a couple of dozen disappeared people or Guantanamo detainees to sign the petition.

That's the problem, right? By the time the damages to an individual are severe enough to warrant an individual suit, there's no real legal remedy under the current law. That happened with the librarians. You go to check a book out, they're spying on you, the librarian knows it, but if they tell you they could go to jail. Secrecy as a form of extrajudicial law. It fits right in with extraordinary renditions and Cheney's fourth branch of government.

The judgment you describe is sort of like the "there is no proof tobacco hurts anybody" argument the tobacco industry used so successfully for over forty years.

So can't we just assume we're all being spied on and sign a petition and file a class-action suit already? If the courts need it narrowed down, I'm sure your daily entries when combined with the comments of the blatantly anti-authoritarian individuals on this blog could certainly prove standing in this matter.

I'm not being a smart-ass, I swear. I just want someone (like the ACLU) to sue the crap out of the US government over these illegal laws.