He's been opposed to Iraq since before the beginning.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism

Rather, they seek the renewal of "small-r" republican society in the context of the Western heritage, customs and civilization.[28] Joseph Scotchie wrote.

Republics mind their own business. Their governments have very limited powers, and their people are too busy practicing self-government to worry about problems in other countries. Empires not only bully smaller, defenseless nations, they also can’t leave their own, hapless subjects alone. . . Empires and small government aren’t compatible, either.[29]

By contrast, paleocons see neoconservatives as empire-builders and themselves as defenders of the republic, pointing to Rome (and sometimes Star Wars[30]) as an example of how an ongoing campaign of military expansionism can destroy a republic.[31]

He's been opposed to Iraq since before the beginning.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism

Rather, they seek the renewal of "small-r" republican society in the context of the Western heritage, customs and civilization.[28] Joseph Scotchie wrote.

Republics mind their own business. Their governments have very limited powers, and their people are too busy practicing self-government to worry about problems in other countries. Empires not only bully smaller, defenseless nations, they also can’t leave their own, hapless subjects alone. . . Empires and small government aren’t compatible, either.[29]

By contrast, paleocons see neoconservatives as empire-builders and themselves as defenders of the republic, pointing to Rome (and sometimes Star Wars[30]) as an example of how an ongoing campaign of military expansionism can destroy a republic.[31]

This is one of those situations where my jaw drops and I ask myself "How do these people suppose they can get away with this crap?" Then I have to remind myself that I, unlike many Americans, have been paying attention. The whole basis of the McConnell editorial relies on ignorance of the actual state of the law and it's history. Unfortunately, due to ther way the issue has been presented to America via their teevees, he'll probobly get away with it unless we raise a holy stink.

"but the law remains essentially the same"

Note the careful use of the word "essentially" in order to cover for the fact that he's lying like a rug. The law in question was completely rewritten to the administration's specifications shortly after 9-11 but has nevertheless been willfully violated repeatedly ever since it was rewritten.

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!

In a significant number of cases, our intelligence agencies must obtain a court order to monitor the communications of foreigners suspected of terrorist activity who are physically located in foreign countries

He's referring to (without stating explicitly because that would give the game away) suspects in foreign countries who are corresponding with Americans or others on American soil.

The unstated part is of course "so what?" The court orders are easily attainable and if they weren't, a compliant Congress would have gladly amended FISA to read whatever Bush wanted when he had the chance.

The object of the game isn't to catch terrorists. The object of the game is unchecked executive power.

I too agree that, if they're going to claim that the evesdroppong program has saved lives then they need to put up or shut up.

I also simply won't accept that all of these successes have been so secret that to reveal them would compromise the program.

That depends on which program you're referring to. If your referring to the program wherin they use survellance data to identify terrorists in the US who they then arrest and prosecute, well, that hasn't done much. If on the other hand, your referring to the program where they use the survellance data to identify targets to snatch off the street and fly to secret sites in Eastern Europe where they are then coerced into ratting out their buddies, well sure, that's saved lots of lives.....we think......

Doesn't that parallel the idea of a motorcycle cop cruising around until he/she sees someone speeding or running a light?

then they simply could have rewritten the law to suit

As has been pointed out, after 9-11 an incredibly pliant Congress voted into law everything the administration wanted in order to prevent another attack.

As an aside, your motorcycle cop analogy falls flat as soon as the cop gets off his bike and starts peering into people's windows.

we may have to do some listening in order to protect ourselves, so let's talk about how best to do it with the least amount of infringement

One of the straw men frequently tossed up is that we're against appropiate wiretapping or that we want to defend the rights of the terrorists. This is of course a smokescreen but the fact remains that the appropriate venue to have this discussion is the US Congress.

The wiretapping isn't the problem. It's the deliberate circumvention of the law.

I think again we're falling in the trap of treating a group as monolithic as opposed to a collection of individuals. In this case, I don't think "the ruling class" thinks with one mind. There are of course cliques with various prices of membership and Ivy league is definitely a leg up, but at the same time I think that there is a rather large group of people who actually DO value education as an end in itself, and are more than willing to "share the wealth" (especially since its clearly a non-zero-sum commodity).

He's also worth citing as a counterexample whenever the subject of the sad state of journalism arises.

Patience...

Glenn will sell no whine before its time......

(apologies, I just couldn't resist!)