I agree with Glenn--it's hard for me to get very upset about the failure to extend the so-called Patriot Act. And as with the idiotic "assault weapons" ban, it demonstrates the value of having sunset clauses in legislation. I still think that there would be few constitutional amendments as powerful, and beneficial, as this one.

Some of the key findings about the failure of intelligence prior to 9/11 was the wall of separation between intelligence gathering and law enforcement. Legal restrictions were in place to prevent the sharing of information, making it more difficult to "connect the dots" between what different agencies knew. The Patriot Act largely tore down that wall. Some key provisions of that are going to be sunsetted some January 1st, effectively reerecting at least some of the wall. I fail to see how that's a good thing.

Some of the other things were a law enforcement wish list that were tacked on as riders. Defeating those was a good thing, but overall, I don't see today's event as a positive.

"but overall, I don't see today's event as a positive."

Then again, we could have the National Security Agency spying on American citizens without obtaining a warrant... Nah, that would never happen.

Trent Lott as a new hero:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121601825_2.html

"I don't agree with the libertarians," said Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.). "I want my security first. I'll deal with all the details after that."

Sunsets are a two edged sword. Sunsets have the advantage of keeping the elected idiots busy re-passing old laws so they won't have time to think of new ones. OTOH, those same idiots will likely break anything which is already fixed, and sunseting just begs them to do so.