see Patriot Act Critics Laud Vote to Limit Use (NY Times, 6/16/05)
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Patriot-Act-Libraries.html?
and "House defies Bush, votes to change Patriot Act" (Washington Times, 6/16/05)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050616-121816-9276r.htm

To the Editors:

As a libertarian-leaning Republican, I never thought I would say this: Bernie Sanders and Jerrold Nadler are exactly right. The Patriot Act goes too far. The FBI should be required to get a judge’s approval for search warrants and wire taps. At the very least, fishing expeditions such as searching library records and bookstore purchases without judicial review should not be allowed. I applaud the Republicans courageous and wise enough to vote with Democrats to allow this provision of the Act to expire.

The concept that this is a road map for terrorists or that libraries would become “safe zones” is simply laughable. Such rhetoric insults our intelligence (and our Intelligence.)

As Benjamin Franklin said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

In case people forget, Franklin said this at a time when there were foreign soldiers attacking our citizens on our soil, unfriendly countries on our borders, and a large percentage of the American population supporting the invading forces. The Founders, true Patriots, were wise enough not to create an 18th century Patriot Act even in circumstances that extreme.

President Bush should take a deep breath and realize that he risks damaging the very thing he is trying to protect, a nation “with liberty and justice for all.”

[It's too bad we neither of our major political parties actually believes in liberty. I wish more people knew about the Libertarian party, and I wish the Libertarians had better positions on immigration.]