Kathy Lopez over at NRO's The Corner is a bit upset with Dana Rohrabacher joining a Democratic effort to renew the Patriot Act for only four more years:

WHAT WORLD DOES DANA ROHRABACHER LIVE IN?

"Lawmakers narrowly turned back an effort by Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Virginia, to renew the expiring Patriot Act provisions for four more years, rather than making them permanent -- an amendment that drew spirited support from archconservative Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-California...

...'We should not be required to live in peacetime under the extraordinary laws that were passed during times of war and crisis. Emergency powers of investigation should not become the standard once the crisis has passed,' he said, drawing applause from his colleagues."

Maybe I'm reading him wrong, but we're living in peactime? We're not in a time of war and crisis? News to me.

Normally, I wouldn't think of contesting someone like Lopez - but I think that there's a bit of a misunderstanding here: I don't think that Rohrabacher believes we are at peace, but he feels we might be so in four years and thus would like to sunset the Patriot Act and only renew in four years as necessary. Lopez got it a bit wrong - but so did Rohrabacher. Our War on Terrorism is a war which may last for decades, and we can't rely upon a possible Democratic Congressional majority and/or a Democratic President in 2009 to renew the Act...we can rely upon even a GOP minority to block the repeal of the Act, but we cannot rely upon the good sense of our Democrats; not until they've completely purged the political left from their Party. Self defense requires us to take steps to ensure the safety of the nation even if we blow it in the political sphere and lose power at a later date. Better to make the Patriot Act permanent - and then seek to repeal or modify in 2009 or beyond if we genuinely believe that we've got terrorism permanently under control.