From the Timesonline article posted by shooter:

"The pact would make it clear that it was lawful for European governments and companies such as internet and credit card firms to transfer private information to the United States and vice versa."

So, the Bush Administration is possibly trading OUR personal information to the European Union, along with various private companies, in the so called name of security.

Looks like we might get an impeachment, and a prosecution or two, after all.

Thanks so much for sharing that.

Glenn is right on. It futile to move off democratic principles simply to pander. Lets keep supporting the idea of getting rid of the Bush democrats

Note to Obama: When the other side is gloating, laughing and calling you gutless for your stance on a bill, it isn't a "compromise", and your position isn't "principled". The terms you are looking for to describe your position are "rolled", or "served". Even "cowardly" is more appropriate. But hey, enjoy the "center".

One more thing, Senator: The people who are telling you that your recent positions are the "center"? They are the same ones who are currently laughing at your for your "centrist" capitulation after you take them. They are the kind of people who enjoy playing "fetch the stick" but never releasing it, because the fun is watching the dog chase the nonexistent stick. This may be a painful thing for you to hear, Senator, but they aren't ever going to release the stick, because the last thing they want is for you to have it. But hey, keep taking their advice, really, because Gingrich, Kristol, Rove, Brownback, Bond, Kagan, and Limbaugh, seriously, they just want what's best for your campaign. Because the Fox news set, the Hannitys, the Coulters, and all their followers, they all really respect a "leader" who rolls over on his back and shows his belly on command and at the first challenges he faces. I'm sure you are winning way more votes than you're losing with this--dare I say it--flip-flopping.

We progressives probably didn't vote for your strong, principled positions anyway, we just liked the novelty of a black candidate, and hey, you're still black, right? So who cares what positions you take?

Brilliantly run primary campaign. I have to admit that after that masterful performance, I didn't expect you to flame out even before the convention.

Nader's probably pretty happy with you too.

If I wanted a choice between Senator Fetch-The-Neocon-Stick and Senator Fetch-The-Neocon-Stick Jr. in November, I would have voted for Clinton.

Keep trying for that stick, though, Senator, because I am sure that the next issue that comes up, whatever it is, I'm sure that following the Republican lead will be the right choice. Because hey, they are due to release that stick one of these times, right? So that next issue, I have a feeling, that one will be the one.

And just keep taking my vote for granted, it probably won't hurt you. I'm just one vote after all. I'm sure I am the only person in the country who feels this way.

And if I'm not? Well, you'll always have been the first black candidate for a major party. No one can take that away from you, ever.

P.S. If you're counting on the notion that I'll fall in line in November because you're better than the Republicans, I fell for that one back in 2006, when we elected the Democratic slate that finally passed the telecom surrender that the Republicans under Frist and Hastert--with a majority--couldn't get passed. You're actually going to have to stand for something more substantial than "trust me, I'm different--even if I sound the same".

It's easier being a Republican. It's easier just saying to hell with it, let's play cowboys and Indians.

It's just easier.

It's easy to call for war, especially when just 1% of the population will be involved. It's easy to call for tax cuts, even though the Debt is 10 trillion, cuz no one living will probably pay for it. It's easy to scrap environmental protections. We're all getting used to the obvious products of pollution, and what we don't see, what remains hidden, can't hurt us, right?

It's easy to fight terrorism by blowing other people up in foreign lands. We never see it. So, who cares, right?

It's easier than actually working toward peace, or protecting the environment, or building infrastructure, or adhering to the Constitution. It's just easier to bag it all and get what we can now.

Easier to appeal to emotion rather than reason. Appealing to reason is tough. Takes time. Patience. Energy. It's a lot easier to go for stuff like fear and loathing and greed.

The Republicans have this all worked out. Their road is the easy road. War, tax cuts, live for today. I got mine, screw you. Who doesn't want tax cuts without personal responsibility?

Now, some of that is being chipped away by reality. Finally. One of the most essential ingredients of the easy road is to keep people away from the consequences of Santa Claus and laissez-faire government. But that doesn't mean the Dems aren't looking for their own easy road to take. They're tired of seeing eyes glaze over while they attempt to appeal to reason. And they're not very good at it, anyway.

Thing is . . . they've never really attempted a passionate, exciting, articulate appeal to reason before. And that's where the basics come into play in a big way. People can be led in most any direction, with the right kind of appeal. They can even be led in the direction that most suits their actual needs and the needs of this nation and the world. It's the medium of the message, not the message. To find their own easy road they have to take the hardest road to get there. They have to make the people think they're on the easy road even while it's the hardest road possible.

I thought Obama was headed that way, but he's stumbled badly in recent weeks. Perhaps on his way to Damascus?