" I am swearing off filibuster follies and Alamo analogies." Is that a promise? Your reading of the daily kos sentiments regarding an Alito filibuster was so far off the mark that it wasn't even funny. The person who wrote front page diary after diary there, week in and week out, calling for a filibuster, Armando, might not be happy to see you "cherry picking " the evidence like a good Republican spin artist. Do your homework, please. Read thoroughly, and sample widely. John Kerry actually wrote to dkos members, seeking their opinions on a number of issues, and they told him what they thought, too. They asked him to filibuster. PFAW does not deserve your malignant comments, either, although I give money to them only when I can afford it. The next thing I know, you will be saying that the ACLU doesn't care about our Constitution and only wants to line its pockets. Think how calloused and cynical you sound, Mr. Shapiro. I'll bet you bought into that Republican lie that the confessed felon Jack Abramoff's sins are also Democratic sins, didn't you? Ask Howard Dean about that, and you will get a fight!

Elmer Gantry.

And may he rest in peace.

Tom Daschle has now clarified what Gonzales meant, that they asked Congress to approve spying on U.S,. citizens after 9/11, and they were refused. Not that they didn't think they could get it passed and so didn't ask. They were told, flat out, NO! So they did it anyway, and Daschle paid for that refusal, too. They hired their big guns and went after his Senate seat. Our country is being run by mobsters, and the sooner people wake up and call them what they are, the sooner we might be able to throw them out. Indictments, please, the more the better.

A previous letter writer says the late start for the House is January 31. Can this be possible, or even legal? Just for little old Tom DELAY?

"The 20th Amendment to the Constitution, proclaimed as ratified February 6, 1933, established noon on the 3rd day of January as the meeting date, unless the Congress by law appoints a different day" (qtd from the official site of the U.S. House). It obviously can't be December 31, or they wouldn't get New Year's day off, but postponing the opening of the spring session by nearly a month, even if they are allowed to make a new law to change it, is outrageous.

Moreover, extending the Patriot Act by five weeks, when it was scheduled to expire at December 31, would push the new expiration date to Feb. 3, 2006, five weeks from Dec. 31. If Jan. 31 is correct for the opening day, that gives the House THREE whole days to agree to whatever the Senate has done with the Patriot Act by then.

I hope the Senate is coming back in a more timely fashion, and I hope the Senate establishes the nation's priorities a little more sanely than the obviously crooked House: hearings on Bush breaking the law first, please, and then hearings on the Alito nomination, if they still apply. Nothing less will do.

Bravo for the judges on the FISA court, who want to know whether their own actions have been tainted by the Bush administration's and NSA's unwarranted and warrantless spying. In asking the perpetrators, however, they have no check on who is telling the truth. They should at least ask for information from the NYT reporters who uncovered the story and who have not released everything they know about the techniques involved in the process of information gathering because the president asked them not to divulge everything they know. The court has the right and the need to know, if they are to draw rational conclusions. The whole world is out there, speculating about methods and the length and breadth of the snooping: is it a data-mining operation like Able Danger, in other words a fishing expedition? is it a selective procedure that intercepts a few calls or e-mails once in awhile? is it a reliable program, and has it actually caught any terrorists? The court needs answers, and so do Congress and the nation. Mr. Risen and his colleagues at the Times should be called to answer as a check on what the government officials and NSA officers say. Or, I suppose, we can all wait and buy Mr. Risen's book next year.

is permanent, so it is still in effect. The articles that were to sunset unless renewed by Congress are the only matters still under discussion, and the proposed three-month review period is for those alone, not for the whole act, so what is Frist's big problem? Bush is grossly misleading when he keeps referring to the Patriot Act, as if the whole thing has been abandoned. Some of the articles under discussion deserve review, even more so now that we see how brazenly our president ignores or misconstrues existing law. I hope the Senate gets an opportunity to revise and dump, as necessary. I just wish they could dump the president, too.