Aside from the other issues I have with this post (well discussed by others) you have committed another logical fallacy. You point out that Obama’s polling has increased since the FISA vote. But, as we scientists have to endlessly repeat to our students correlation does not equal causality!.

It is virtually inconceivable to me that anyone who was undecided or leaning McCain prior to the FISA vote has changed his mind and will now vote for Obama. He got nothing but bad press from this, and not just from those of us who are civil libertarians. He was perceived, correctly and across the political spectrum, as an opportunist and a flip-flopper. Hardly the stuff to persuade anyone.

Obama is doing well partly because McCain is doing so poorly, and to attribute this correlation to the FISA vote is, frankly, pretty silly.

P.S. I have a hard and fast rule: I am uninterested in contributing to campaigns of candidates who decide that I am someone they need to “triangulate” off of. It was the main reason I couldn’t bring myself to support Clinton. I don’t have to agree with everything a candidate says, but I won’t be his/her punching bag.

Aside from the other issues I have with this post (well discussed by others) you have committed another logical fallacy. You point out that Obama’s polling has increased since the FISA vote. But, as we scientists have to endlessly repeat to our students correlation does not equal causality!.

It is virtually inconceivable to me that anyone who was undecided or leaning McCain prior to the FISA vote has changed his mind and will now vote for Obama. He got nothing but bad press from this, and not just from those of us who are civil libertarians. He was perceived, correctly and across the political spectrum, as an opportunist and a flip-flopper. Hardly the stuff to persuade anyone.

Obama is doing well partly because McCain is doing so poorly, and to attribute this correlation to the FISA vote is, frankly, pretty silly.

P.S. I have a hard and fast rule: I am uninterested in contributing to campaigns of candidates who decide that I am someone they need to “triangulate” off of. It was the main reason I couldn’t bring myself to support Clinton. I don’t have to agree with everything a candidate says, but I won’t be his/her punching bag.

With all due respect, now who’s being naive? You think we should give up any hope of protecting our personal privacy, but you think that Obama will return war powers to Congress? He won’t give it up, and–this is the real point–Congress won’t accept the power and the responsibility anyway. They are much happier wearing lapel flag pins and shouting, “Support the Troops!”

The need to pass the original 1973 act was evidence that the executive had already seized extra-constitutional power in that area. The fact that two ex secretaries of state are talking about re-visiting the issue is proof that the 1973 act has been safely ignored by every president since its passage.

With all due respect, now who’s being naive? You think we should give up any hope of protecting our personal privacy, but you think that Obama will return war powers to Congress? He won’t give it up, and–this is the real point–Congress won’t accept the power and the responsibility anyway. They are much happier wearing lapel flag pins and shouting, “Support the Troops!”

The need to pass the original 1973 act was evidence that the executive had already seized extra-constitutional power in that area. The fact that two ex secretaries of state are talking about re-visiting the issue is proof that the 1973 act has been safely ignored by every president since its passage.

Perhaps he could start by overhauling the whole NSA operation. Then move on to introducing a War Powers act with real teeth.

Perhaps he could start by overhauling the whole NSA operation. Then move on to introducing a War Powers act with real teeth.