A historic hearing on American liberties is taking place RIGHT NOW in the U.S. Senate. If you have C-SPAN at home or access to high speed Internet, turn to C-SPAN 2 and watch.

It is interesting that Republicans who should be the most conservative when it comes to protecting American civil liberties seem to be the most vocal in repealing those liberties in the name of security. But why does the FBI, the NSA and Military Intelligence have to spy on little old ladies, librarians, bloggers and journalists when they can’t even find Osama bin Laden?

Watch the U.S. Senate on C-SPAN 2

The Associated Press is reporting today that several Patriot Act provisions that the Bush administration says are crucial in the fight to stop terrorism on U.S. soil may only be around for another couple of weeks.

A coalition of Senate Democrats and libertarian-leaning Republicans is threatening to filibuster a congressional agreement to renew 16 key portions of the USA Patriot Act before they expire Dec. 31.

A showdown vote was scheduled Friday, with the White House and its congressional allies rejecting suggestions for a short-term extension of the current law as is. White House allies said they would prefer to let the 16 temporary provisions expire completely rather than give critics more time to add additional restrictions on the FBI’s ability to comb through Americans’ computer files and bank and library records.

Making most of the Act’s provisions permanent is a priority for both the Bush administration and Republican leaders on Capitol Hill before Congress adjourns for the year.

The House on Wednesday passed a House-Senate compromise bill to renew the Act that supporters say added significant safeguards to the law. These supporters predict doom and gloom if the Patriot Act’s critics win and the provisions expire.

The failure to renew the provisions would be “interpreted by our enemies as somehow inviting or even enabling further terrorist attacks on U.S. soil,” Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said.

But the critics, who include senators like Democrat Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Republican Larry Craig of Idaho, say they don’t want the Patriot Act to expire - they just want enough time to improve the bill to the point where it doesn’t infringe on American liberties.

AP: USA Patriot Act Faces Opposition in Senate

President George W. Bush was seen on cable news this morning signing the CAFTA trade agreement, in what CNN’s White House correspondent called “a gloatfest,” since the bill only passed in the U.S. House of Representatives by two votes. Are you feeling the screws turning yet?

Meanwhile, the Birmnigham Snooze did manage to eke out a story of sorts today on the sneaky visit of U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Although it just demonstrates the pathetic and rear-end kissing nature of mainstream journalism these days.

Even in my early days in journalism at the University of Alabama’s Crimson White student newspaper, I would have been laughed out of the newsroom for reporting that a government official such as Gonzales was “pleased with Martin and the direction the U.S. attorney’s office is taking.”

So he is pleased that the U.S. attorneys office in Birmingham has lost every high profile case to come before it? And to change the subject, they indict former Jefferson County commissioner Chris McNair, who lost his daughter in the 16th Street Church bombing, for some renovation work on the photography studio dedicated to the memorial of his daughter?

Aren’t you so pleased that the Birmingham News is pleased with the pleasing idiots who are running the country? I guess it beats hiding out in the bushes and catching a Democrat in an affair with a reporter, eh? How’s that circulation doing these days? Do you think people are pleased with your pleasing BS?

Full Statement of Rep. John Conyers, Jr. opposing the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act, thanks to Brad Friedman’s Blog.

Let me say at the outset that every member of the House wants to make sure that law enforcement officials have the tools they need to protect the American people from terrorism. I also know that every member of this Body wants to make sure that we protect our civil liberties and freedoms as we fight the terrorists.

I support the vast majority of the 166 provisions of the Patriot Act. In fact, after September 11, I helped write many of them in a version of the bill that passed the Judiciary Committee 36 to 0. I did this because I believe that as technology changes, our laws need to keep up with it. I believe our law enforcement officials need to be able to talk with one another and connect the dots to prevent terrorist attacks.

This debate isn’t really about the Patriot Act, or even most of the 16 provisions scheduled to sunset this year.

It is about a few provisions that are subject to abuse, and need greater checks and balances.

Let me suggest four areas where changes are badly needed.

First, Section 215, concerning Business Records allows the FBI to obtain any record considered “relevant” to an investigation. This includes library books, and book store and medical records. The provision has been difficult to oversee, since targets of FBI investigations are not permitted to tell anyone about it, even their lawyer. However, based on what we have learned, section 215 has been abused, as the American Library Association has reported that more than 200 requests for library records have been made since September 11.

Second, Section 505, concerning National Security Letters allows the FBI to obtain financial, telephone, internet and other consumer records “relevant” to any intelligence investigation without judicial approval. Like section 215, recipients are gagged from ever telling anyone they received the request. A federal district court struck down this provision as unconstitutional, but the Administration keeps using it.

Third, under section 213, the government can “sneak and peek” in your business, your car and your home - even if there’s no emergency. This section was not in the bill reported by the Judiciary Committee, and was slipped in by the Administration in the middle of the night. This provision has also been subject to widespread abuse - it has been used more than 240 times, with the longest delay being for 406 days. Moreover, only 10 percent of these uses have had anything to do with terrorism, the purported justification of the PATRIOT Act.

Finally, it is clear to me that we need to have additional sunsets in this legislation. We learned over the last four years that the only thing that made the Administration grant us any information or oversight on the use of these new powers was the sunset provisions. We also learned of abuses during our oversight is leading us to make modifications. Given this history, it simply makes no sense to make these provisions permanent or near permanent.

The lessons of September 11 are that if we allow law enforcement to do their work free of political interference, if we give them adequate resources and modern technologies, we can protect our citizens without intruding on our liberties. We all want to fight terrorism, but we need to fight it the right way, consistent with our constitution, and in a manner that serves as a model for the rest of the world.

I believe the committee-passed legislation does not meet that test, and as such, does not warrant passage today.

Too bad - since the Bush Loyalists will most likely muster enough votes to pass it. We are doomed, ho, ho, as Hunter Thompson might say - if he were alive today.