This is a good reminder of two basic points of America:

1. Freedom of expression should be tolerated in all it's greatness, regardless of what crazy ideas people come up with.

2. You will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the general public.

It'd be great if Howard Stern would be the play-by-play announcer.

I'm not sure what or who you've been reading that leads you to believe there's a mutual respect that exists on this issue, but the right barely acknowledges the phrase "pro-choice". Instead, those who believe in personal choice on this issue are called pro-abortion, murderers, abortionists, anti-life, etc.

Mutual respect on this issue, and every other one for that matter, would be great. And if your debates on the issue with friends and/or your local news organizations is respectful, then I'm envious. But to insinuate that the right debates this issue in respectful tones and the left doesn't on a national scale is completely false.

What about a class action lawsuit by individual citizens regarding the possibility that I (or anyone else) have had their rights violated by Bush's order?

Obviously anyone can bring a lawsuit for any reason, but would a case like that get thrown out of court immediately?

Hi All,

I sent this letter to my GOP congressman, as well as the Democratic congressman whose district I used to live in. If you agree you are most welcome to utilize this letter or some variation of it.

Congressman,

I am writing regarding the news that the President has authorized the NSA repeatedly to bypass the FISA court as it participated in covert surveillance activities on American citizens.

The President has asked that we should simply trust him that these actions are in our best interest, and to ignore the seemingly indisputable fact that these efforts being undertaken are against the law. However, I still don't understand why this action would ever be necessary by the President or the NSA.

The following are all documented facts:

--The FISA court has issued warrants historically in over 99.9% of the instances they have been asked to by the NSA, and can even be requested retroactively if time is an issue. Simply put, there is no reason that a legitimate action by the NSA would ever have a difficult time getting the necessary warrants.

--The FISA court's issued warrants are not publicly available as a regular course of action. So the need for secrecy, while a legitimate need, is already guaranteed.

--After the Patriot Act, which was the last time the Bush Administration authorized government entities to take action against Americans; there are numerous instances of innocent people being jailed for years without such basic rights as judicial review and/or specific charges being against them.

I have always been a bit of an apologist for allowing our leadership a wide margin for error in times of war. For example, I have no problem with throwing someone in Guantanamo Bay for even the flimsiest link to a terrorist organization. But I do feel in recent years that we've failed in our responsibility to review in a timely manner the potential terrorist links to ensure we don't keep innocents behind bars any more than is absolutely necessary.

It seems clear that the law, as it's currently written, sufficiently allows our law enforcement agencies to take the necessary actions to protect the American people while still maintaining the minimum checks and balances that should be required on executive power. For this reason, along with the fact the Bush Administration has in the past taken actions against innocent civilians, I believe it is time to at least begin the discussion regarding impeachment of the President and Vice President. To put it bluntly, enough is enough. I understand that Rep. Conyers has begun to look into the legal issues in this case and if they warrant impeachment hearings. I strongly urge you to support those efforts.

Sincerely,

(NAME)

You bring up a valid point, Cheney as President today would be worse than Bush has been. And that's why I specifically to look at both the President and VP when I wrote two congressmen today.

But there is one aspect of an impeachment of Bush that would help to harness Cheney: Renewed Congressional efforts to curtail the powers of the executive. If things actually got to the point where Bush was impeached, then those in Congress would see that the general public demands a strong leash be put on the White House, and would be terrified about losing their jobs next November due to their apparent willingness to lie down in the face of this administration.

I think that we will see a corollary between a revitalized Congress and the impeachmenet issue gathering steam.

There is no such thing as a pro-abortion movement. That's a mistruth (like partial birth instead of late term) put forward by the right wing to frame the issue in ways favorable to them.

Pro-abortion would mean doctors hanging outside clubs on Saturday night offering their cards to couples stumbling out, or Planned Parenthood trying to sell the idea of how great an abortion is to pregnant women, which doesn't happen anywhere.

Pro-choice means regardless of what your personal opinion on abortion is, it's important to leave the ultimate choice up to the woman who's pregnant. If an individual is against having an abortion, that's their right to make that decision. But it doesn't give them the right to make the decision for anyone else.

It'd be great to see the women's organizations (as well as guys like me who support individual choice) have more success clarifying these misconceptions among those who are undecided or flexible in their opinion on the subject.