Truth hiders

Bill Frist threatens to change the structure of the Senate to avoid a NSA inquiry?

It should be obvious that the executive cannot place wiretaps on Americans without any oversight. You're welcome to disagree, but I see that as a short path corruption and Dictatorsville. So the question is...will the Senate Intelligence Committee (whose job is to provide Sentate oversight to intelligence) actually oversee anything about the NSA spying?

Not if Frist has a say in it obviously.

But there are a few people willing to defend the principles of this country. Among them:
Rockefeller (D)
Levin (D)
Feinstein (D)
Wyden (D)
Bayh (D)
Mikulski (D)
Fiengold (D)
DeWine (R)
Snowe (R)
Hagel (R)

Since this has the potential to become a Democrat witch-hunt, I won't necessarily ascribe any positive virtues to the Dems. But the 3 Republicans are taking a risk here, by upholding their oaths and doing their jobs. DeWine is one of the most vulnerable senators in congress and might be motivated by fear, but Snowe and Hagel are "voting their consciences" or "exercising thought". If you use your brain for half a second you'll realize that unaccountable, untraceable, wiretaps by the executive are inherently corruptive. This should be non-partisan. Republicans, do you trust Hillary not to listen in on Rove's phone calls in a few years? Cause if there's no oversight, there's no accountability. Anyway more props to Snowe, who has officially been my favorite Republican for a long while now.

Finally, let's give credit to those who enable unlimited government espionage:

Roberts (R) (chair, no less)
Hatch (R)
Bond (R)
Lott (R)
Chambliss (R)

You 5 get the "myopic party blinders" award. It's really special that you'd rather not do your job than risk finding out that the president did something illegal. If you suceed in screwing this up, I hope you're the first people to get tapped. (Besides Frist, who probably figures with his legal troubles that his phone is tapped anyway...)