release

I’m not expert enough to form an opinion on whether or not the President’s authorization of warrantless wiretaps is legal or not - and there are some pretty bright minds arguing for pro and con on that point - but legal or not, these actions should be a cause of great alarm to all those who believe this country stands for something other than “might makes right.”

Daniel Solove says it best:

Suppose the President is right that he has the power to do this based on his “inherent authority” as Commander-in-Chief. The implications are quite alarming. It means that the President, in his sole discretion, can secretly authorize the NSA to engage in electronic surveillance on U.S. citizens until the War on Terrorism is over. This is a war without a foreseeable end. Under his argument, there seems to be no reason why he can’t authorize other agencies to engage in surveillance, such as the FBI and CIA. And why does it need to be limited just to wiretaps? Perhaps video surveillance, bugs, searches of homes, gathering documents, and more.

… The problem with Bush’s argument is that he has articulated virtually no conceivable limits to his power.

Bruce Schneier makes a point I first mentioned last year:

Unchecked presidential power has nothing to do with how much you either love or hate George W. Bush. You have to imagine this power in the hands of the person you most don’t want to see as president, whether it be Dick Cheney or Hillary Rodham Clinton, Michael Moore or Ann Coulter.

(Schneier link via Q)

I’m all for defending our country against terrorists. I just fear that, while we have exported democracy to Iraq, we’re importing their old Baathist-style dictatorship back here in exchange.