Why aren't they talking about the fundamental issue?
This whole discussion of immunity for collaborators with the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping is important, yes. But I am amazed that there doesn't seem to be much discussion of what I consider the main issue, which is the warrantless wiretapping itself . No, the companies should not get off scot-free for breaking the law, but why are we allowing the warrantless wiretapping in the first place?! A friend suggested it might be because we have some super secret and powerful tool to monitor communications, and they don't want that brought out into the public. If so, I suppose that is OK, but I want to know that it is not just a free-for-all, and someone besides the fox is watching the hen house.