Someone needs to give Cato Institute bloggers a refresher course in headline writing. Julian Sanchez's June 16 post, "A Reply to Epstein & Pilon on NSA's Metadata Program," is the most cogent analysis of what's really at stake in the government surveillance drama that I've read to date. But that headline?! To call it coma-inducing would be too polite.
Here is an alternate suggestion:
"Why the Defense of Government Surveillance by my Cato Colleagues is Misinformed, Dangerous, and Completely Misses The Point."
Sanchez also buries his most powerful analysis. The majority of his piece reads like a compelling legal brief, a point-by-point demolition of the argument that the government's ability to collect and analyze massive amounts of data about millions of Americans is properly constrained and legally justified. But then, near the end, he explains why this is such an important debate to have right now. Society will always struggle with the challenge of finding the proper balance between "state control and citizen autonomy," he writes. But...