Can we now frame this and send copies to John Yoo and Cass Sunstein? 

Many of those speaking out in defense of Bush's breach of the 1978 FISA law prohibiting espionage on first amendment activities of Americans seem to be either A) challenging the appropriateness of the 1978 legislation in the post 9/11 world or B) asserting the President's prerogative to violate such laws in his role as Commander-In-Chief.

To the lay person, neither of these arguments would appear to exonerate the President.  In a nation of laws, approach A would suggest a need to have the Republican majority in Congress repeal or revise the 1978 legislation.  Approach B would suggest a challenge to the constitutionality of the 1978 law and Congress' power to impose such checks and balances on the Executive branch.

The President's recent confession to allegations in violation of the 1978 FISA law specifically banning warrantless surveillance of first amendment activities and his assertion of extra-judicial authority to do so seem to have thrown the nation into a state of constitutional crisis.

Can anyone short of the Supreme Court resolve such a dispute between the Legislative and Executive branches?

Good point, paDem.  This Administration does not care about legality as long as it can use political means to push its agenda through into reality -- and with a Republican Congress (and, frighteningly, a more right-leaning Supreme Court), their only goal is to use raw power to have their way.  I doubt if Bush has even read the Constitution, much less cares about protecting it.  And I equally doubt he cares about protecting the American people -- Katrina put the lie to that notion.

I don't think these people will budge legally even if they want to. There could be war crimes trials some day.

Bush will get away with it, and one more bad precedent in American governance will be set. What was that famous quote by Goebbels? Just tell the people they're under attack, and they'll let you do whatever you want.

A Rasmussen Poll released today shows this issue isn't getting a negative reaction from the public

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2005/NSA.htm


Sixty-four percent (64%) of Americans believe the National Security Agency (NSA) should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that just 23% disagree. Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Americans say they are following the NSA story somewhat or very closely.
Eighty-one percent (81%) of Republicans believe the NSA should be allowed to listen in on conversations between terror suspects and people living in the United States. That view is shared by 51% of Democrats and 57% of those not affiliated with either major political party.

Where do you think this is going to go if a majority of DEMOCRATS is in favor of the NSA activity?

Frankly, I don't think that public opinion will turn on this unless and until it's demonstrated that Bush has pulled a Nixon and used the NSA to spy on domestic political opponents.  I don't think that it makes intuitive sense to most people that you don't need a warrant to listen in if Osama calls a subordinate in Syria but you do if he calls a pal here in the US.

A Rasmussen Poll released today shows this issue isn't getting a negative reaction from the public

I haven't been impressed with the intelligence of my fellow citizens for some time now. So, this doesn't surprise me. Nor should it. After all our president has been insisting that we are at war for some time, and doing so repeatedly. The natural inclination is to believe what a president says, and if we were at war most people would say don't handicap our troops.

This is why I get so furious when Democrats repeat the nonsense about us being at war. That is just playing into Rove, et al's hands. It would take massive courage by our Democratic Party leaders, courage comparable to Howard Dean's, and it should be clear that such courage is lacking in our leaders. After all, if they did that, they could kiss the Republican vote goodbye. And, God knows, we need to have Republicans vote for our side or we always will lose. Right? I say, right?

It is all in the framing as others have pointed out.

This question is framed both incompletely, inaccurately, and coincidentally exactly as the WH has been framing it of late.

When this story Bush admitted he violated the statute but that he had  constitutional and statutory defenses.  That is not how the question was worded or the WH has subsequently tried to reframe.


We have to keep turning it back to the bedrock premise  and not because it is to some partisan advantage to do so.

Rather because left unchallenged on the actual facts, Bush will contine to break this law and quite possibly other laws in the name of terrorism.

It is as simple as that and it is not a matter of political calculus but of grave constitutional consquence for democracy in this country.  Concerned Americans have no option but to fight the menace regardless of poliitcal cost or benefit

Would that the Democratic leadership had stood on principle not polls when the question was war or peace.....

Actually, it's only illegal if they fail to get a warrant.

The poll quoted above is a prime example of manipulation via frames.  Take the question, "Should criminals be punished?" I suspect a vast majority would say yes.  Using that question to justify vigilantiasm is very similar to using the above poll to justify unwarrented wire taps.

Let's do the poll again and reframe the question:

Instead of "Should the National Security Agency (NSA) be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States."

Let's ask "Should the NSA be allowed to [spy]  on  people living in the United States WITHOUT A WARRANT."

The (not so?) subtle distinction is significant and is a nice primer in the use of polls to influence public opinion. Ask the right questions, with the right language in the right order and you'll get the "right" answer.  Send out the results in a press release, publish on the web and create conventional wisdom.

Polls - just another tool in the propaganda tool box.