Let me think on that. It's really a political question of vulnerability. You want someone that's prominent enough in the debate, but weak enough in their home d

Let me think on that. It's really a political question of vulnerability. You want someone that's prominent enough in the debate, but weak enough in their home district to take down. A senator would be better than a Congressman... You'll also have to remember that there is a series of corporate interests, large and small, with very deep pockets that will oppose any check on the surveillance state, no matter how reasonable. Full Disclosure: I don't support outright ending these programs, as many of you do. I do support real judicial oversight, transparency into the law being made in the FISA opinions, and a series of internal and external safeguards to reign these programs in from the brink. I know it's not the most popular opinion in these parts, but politics makes for strange bedfellows. No reason that we can't work together on the things we agree upon.