Senate to Intel Agencies: We Don't Need to Know How Often You Spy on Americans

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/12/senate-fisa-warrantless-wiretapping-votes

There's nothing like a debate over warrantless wiretapping to clarify how the two parties really feel about government. On Friday, the Senate voted to reauthorize the government's warrantless surveillance program, with hawkish Democrats joining with Republicans to block every effort to curtail the government's sweeping spying powers. 

As the Senate debated the renewal of the government's warrantless wiretapping powers on Thursday, Republicans who have accused  

President Barack Obama of covering up his involvement in the death of an American ambassador urged that his administration be given sweeping spying powers. Democrats who accused George W. Bush of shredding the Constitution with warrantless wiretapping four

 years ago sung a different tune this week, with the administration itself quietly urging passage of the surveillance bill with no changes, and Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) accusing her Democratic colleagues of not understanding the threat of terrorism.

maybe we are becoming a little to relaxed post Bin Laden, which would be a perfect time for foreign aggression. gov't all muffed up right wing hung up on more WMD and not watching our boarders. i hate the idea as history has shown those in power can and will take advantage where they can, this sort of thing was suppose to die after being exposed with J E Hoover and the commie witch hunts, which i understand were much less dangerous then what exist now.

 "There is a view by some that this country no longer needs to fear an attack," Feinstein said.

So what were these drastic changes sought by Feinstein's colleagues that would leave the United States open to annihilation by terrorists? They're mostly attempts to find out exactly how the changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act actually work in practice. The most radical proposal, Senator Rand Paul's (R-Ky.) amendment requiring a warrant for the government to access any digital communications, had no chance of passing but clarified just how moderate the Democrats' proposals were by comparison.

"It's incredibly disappointing that such modest amendments that would have done nothing more than increase transparency and accountability failed to pass in the Senate," said Michelle Richardson of the ACLU.

i'm still a little concerned being as how the Dems control the senate, i remember Bush people saying it would only be those they have reason to suspect, unless you probe and investigate how would you know who is suspect? invasion of privacy is not explained any other way it is what it is. necessity i don't know but again another cost for "our freedoms".