Paul Kiel January 28, 2008, 2:57 PM

The race is on to determine which Republican can best walk and chew gum at the same time: that is, simultaneously fear-monger about the lapse of the Protect America Act while at the same time rejecting Democratic efforts to extend it for thirty days.

President Bush, in his weekly radio address, warned: “We need to know who our enemies are and what they are plotting. And we cannot afford to wait until after an attack to put the pieces together.” Bush, remember, has threatened to veto any extension of the PAA.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), face underlit with a flashlight observed succinctly: “It’s not about frightening the American people. The American people should be frightened and remember full well what happened on 9/11.”

And House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) ties it all up into a neat bow: “The implications of failing to act are real. If we let this law expire, we will go back to a system that last spring kept American soldiers in Iraq waiting on D.C. lawyers before they could look for a kidnapped colleague…. Our national security is far too important for another temporary patch.”

For me, I have to say that Blunt takes the cake. Not only does it rely on the by-now debunked claim that the prior FISA law prevented the NSA from wiretapping Iraqi insurgents who’d kidnapped U.S. troops, but he claims that the old FISA law prevented the U.S. from even looking for those missing soldiers. And Blunt glancingly describes the administration lawyers who deal with surveillance authority as “D.C. lawyers.” Gotta love that. His full statement, which is just bursting with distortions too numerous to catalog, is below.

Note: Any other outstanding examples we didn’t note? Let us know in the comments.

From Blunt:

“It goes without saying that if a terrorist like Osama bin Laden calls someone in the United States, we want our intelligence community to have both the tools and the authority they need to listen. But if this Congress does not act in passing a long-term fix to our nation’s intelligence laws, we no longer will be able to monitor or intercept as much as 70 percent of terrorist communications.

“The implications of failing to act are real. If we let this law expire, we will go back to a system that last spring kept American soldiers in Iraq waiting on D.C. lawyers before they could look for a kidnapped colleague. Thankfully, responsible legislation put forward by my friend and colleague Kit Bond in the Senate and Pete Hoekstra and Lamar Smith here in the House would reauthorize FISA and ensure that companies that voluntarily helped our government track terrorists after 9/11 are given the legal protections they need and deserve against frivolous lawsuits.

“Since last August, the majority has had ample time to draft a responsible bill to ensure our intelligence agents can listen to terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda, but we still have yet to see a genuine attempt at a serious bill. If they can’t come up a bill that protects our nation in six months, what makes anyone believe an extra 30 days is going to help? Our national security is far too important for another temporary patch. We’ve had enough time for excuses – now is the time for action.”

Surveillance