Originally Posted by Botnst

What they all seem lack is a sense of proportion. I loose interest in single-issue advocates when they loose or improperly provide context. For example, I twice mentioned the relaxaion and reimposition (to a much lesser degree) of national security procedures concerning secrets. This has been an evolving problem since John Adams and the Alien and Sedition Acts. Presidents, especially in wartime, invoke stronger security measures. Its an historical fact. We are at war now. Increased security is probably necessary for some things but not all things.

But these groups, including my own, are tragically myopic. The voters obviously don't care--having recently re-elected the major proponent of teh USA Patriot Act. And there's your answer, by the way. The people generally accept the Act as it is currently enforced. But I suspect if the gov goes any father, the squealing will become unbearable to politicians and they will suddenly discover the virtue of liberty.

The problem is much greater than just this president. Presidents come and go and their secrecy interests differ with circumstances. But unless Congress does its constitutional duty and holds the Executive to account and finely circumscribes its offical secrecy laws, the laws will always be enforced at the discretion of the executive.