Joe Klein's article from 1/8/06... NSA and liberal Democrats.

[MODU]

The problem is that there are Democrats who believe the President has the power to authorize the program, and there are Democrats who think it is an illegal abuse of power.  When you have to distinct opinions in one party, the genenral public combines both and feel that the party has no common basis in regards to national security, which is in line with what the author was saying.  And with the FISA review court upholding the Presidents order, it just further goes against the credibility of the Democratic claim that they are strong on protecting the nation.

(Now let's just make one thing clear here . . . no Democrat is truly advocating the defeat of the US, nor any devistating attack on our nation.  They just have a different view on what actions should be taken in protecting the US, and to what level of force/power we should go up to.)

[MODU]

The problem is that there are Democrats who believe the President has the power to authorize the program, and there are Democrats who think it is an illegal abuse of power.

Spying on American citizens without a warrant is an illegal abuse of power. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.

Intercepting international communications between the US (there is no distinction between US citizens and US residents) and known terrorist organizations is a lot different than spying on American citizens.  Additionally, with the FISA review court agreeing with the Presidential order, it's not illegal.  You might feel it is, and you are welcomed to your opinion, but opinion and reality are two different things.

[MODU]

Intercepting international communications between the US (there is no distinction between US citizens and US residents) and known terrorist organizations is a lot different than spying on American citizens. 

How is it different?  If any person on either end of the phone is an American citizen, this is spying on American citizens.

Actually, it is different.  Spying, in the typical sense, pertains to tracking an inidividual, collecting data on that person, an using it for criminal prosecution later on.  The intercepting of electronic communication is different, since they are not after the individual, but the information to prevent an attack.  And since there are millions of international electronic communications daily, the time is spent on screening the data from suspected terrorists rather than individual US citizens (again, "citizens" are not the target).  As the FISA review court said, the definition of an agent of a foreign power, if it pertains to a U.S. person, is closely tied to criminal activity.  The term includes any person who "knowingly engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities . . . which activities involve or may involve a violation of the criminal statutes of the United States," or "knowingly  engages in sabotage or international terrorism, or activites that are in preperation therefor."  So the argument of spying on everyday citizens is bunk, since again, it is the electronic communications between the US and foreign nations by people with criminal intensions.