As for the judge, he didn’t quit his job as a federal judge, just his position on the court. I’m suspicious of his motivations, but he may have truly made a purely moral decision and didn’t consider what political ramifications his largely symbolic action would have.

This is about how we define freedom and why some are willing to give up the right to a life free of intense government scrutiny because they simply want the illusion of being safe.

As I mentioned in a rather lengthy comment to Justin’s “On Wire Taps, Freedom and Order” entry, in the end the American public will set, and re-set, its own standards on what freedom means and what its value is, and (presumably) vote according to how well the various branches of government meet those standards. (What I didn’t point out, and probably should have, is that this process is nothing new; it has been going on since the beginning of the Union.)

Of course, since President Bush will not be running for re-election again, he has nothing to directly gain or lose with voters over this domestic surveillance program. That leaves only impeachment for him to really fear – and, predictably, the far Left has (not for the first time) begun clamoring for precisely that. If, however, this surveillance is ultimately found by the courts to be unconstitutional, then it amounts to a breach of the President’s oath of office to uphold the Constitution, which would suddenly give this impeachment talk new and real life.

Indeed, the resulting debate over an impeachment of President Bush under these circumstances would likely tell us all we need to know about the prevailing American attitudes toward liberty vs. security. If the American people prove to be disinclined toward impeaching a President even after he’s been shown to have broken his oath of office, just because they believe he did so for a noble purpose, then our fears about the long-term erosion of freedom in America may well be confirmed.

Most of this I chalk up to people not really having paid attention to what goes on before, so they think there is something new here, when there isn’t.