There are plenty of people that did a lot of work (including me) educating people about exactly what was going on with both versions of the bill and all the procedure back in December.  Now Reid is sneaking up on us with this bill faster that we thought.  

The bottom line is that there is an immediate goal here, which is to mobilize pressure on the presidential candidates to do more than give lip service, but actually lead on this filibuster.  That is a solid strategy at this point.  That's what we want people to do.

When it gets to the point of voting on amendments, we'll be telling people which amendments are good and not and why.

Why do you think there is some kind of subterfuge here?

Do you want to discuss the ins and out of Diane Feinstein's amendments?  Or go over the problems with the Intelligence Bill again?

Like I said, the downside to stripping immunity is almost nil.  That's just not what our problem is right now.  The Democrats are going to pass a FISA bill, with immunity.  We're not worried that they might pass one without it.  If we get that far it will already be a victory far greater than we could have hoped for.  And, as I said, if there is no immunity, we'll stand a good chance of getting to the bottom of this in the next administration and fixing the problem in a good and sustainable fashion.  You aren't suggesting we don't take the risk, are you?

The Senate is set to revisit the legislation permanently granting the government's spies a free hand to unilaterally wiretap American telecom facilities and services and give immunity to the government's corporate partners in its warrantless wiretapping program, as Senate leaders and President Bush hope to push the measure through a typically slow legislative process by February 1.

That's the day that the controversial Protect America Act expires, leaving the nation's spooks without a tool to order new wiretaps on American soil without actually getting a court order from a special court.

The contours of the battle seemed not to have changed since the last skirmish in December, despite the Mr. Smith Goes to Washington-like opposition by Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Connecticut) that won a month's reprieve for anti-immunity forces.

To wit, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) says he opposes immunity for telecoms that helped with the warrantless wiretapping, but again is poised to set the rules so that the bill favoring the administration's positions has nearly insurmountable legislative advantage over a bill omitting immunity and requiring some court oversight.

The Administration is clamoring for the win, and threatening to veto any measure that does not give it all the power it secretly -- and in plain contravention of the law -- gave itself for four years.

The top presidential Democratic contenders are likely too busy with campaigning to detour to Washington to perform their Senate duties.

The Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell (right) says the debate is killing Americans and is scaring the populace with exaggerations that defy sense, but which can't be fact-checked due to claims of national secrecy.

And mainstream journalists continue to fall for the administration's description of the new bills as modernization of FISA, when in fact, the administration's proposal radically dismantles FISA's architecture and grants the intelligence community wide latitude to operate inside the United States with minimal court oversight.

In this environment, I have a hard time squaring your beef with the circumstances.  The average blogreader can't do all that much besides let their voice be heard by Congress.  Bloggers that have the ear of the congressional players are working their asses off, and your response is contempt.  I just disagree.