QUESTIONING THE TIMING

I said this in comments to what Kathy posted yesterday, but I'll say it again: Please note that Republicans shot down a surveillance bill in the Senate that would have extended presidential spying authority for four months, but six months was sufficient in what just passed both houses of Congress.

What's the difference? Here's what I think: If a bill is signed soon, six months from the signing will be shortly after Super Ultra Mega Tuesday -- the point at which we'll probably know both party's nominess for president. At the very least, on the Democratic side, we'll probably be down to two candidates at most -- and if so, there's a good chance they'll both be senators.

I think the GOP wants to focus the next renewal battle on the opinion of Senator Hillary Clinton and/or Senator Barack Obama. If the nominee (or last couple of candidates standing) oppose renewal, they hate America and love terrorism. If they give in to GOP demands, they alienate people like us.

I know we're not supposed to say that everything is good for the GOP, but I think the GOP thinks that timing is very good.

****

Also, Kathy said,

I can't hammer this point too many times: any authority that is granted to President Bush will also extend to President Clinton or President Obama or President Edwards. Don't Republicans understand that?

You can probably guess my response to that: ... or President Giuliani (or Romney or Thompson). Giuliani, in particular, doesn't respect civil liberties -- remember, for instance, that he had no qualms about illegally releasing the sealed juvenile record of police shooting victim Patrick Dorismond. Republicans don't care, but we should.

(Now back to the guest bloggers.)