Listen, the Republicans claim that the Telco's need need immunity because it could cost them millions in law suites and they, you know, after all where just doing what the government ask them to do, etc.

So why not say ok, and pass an amendment that limits the damages that can be awarded as a result of any "warrantees wiretapping" related crimes? I don't care if the damages are limited to $1.00 because the point, as I see it, is not so much to punish the Telco's (although they obviously should be) but instead to get at the truth, so we can punish Bush and Cheney. That is the only way where going to keep our rights.

Why not call them out, because even if we loose it will lay bare the Republicans true motives. It's not that they are trying to protect the poor Telco's but they are trying to cover up the crimes of the Bush administration. How then would they argue against it. They could not!

What do all of you think?

There's more...

Remember this interview with Edward Whiteacre, the CEO of SBC Communications?

How concerned are you about Internet upstarts like Google (GOOG), MSN, Vonage, and others?

How do you think they're going to get to customers? Through a broadband pipe. Cable companies have them. We have them. Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain't going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes?

The Internet can't be free in that sense, because we and the cable companies have made an investment and for a Google or Yahoo! (YHOO) or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free is nuts!

There's more...