Article on a presidential signing statement asseting the right to open private mail in emergencies, a right the Post Office claims is already provided in law. There doesn't appear to be much here that is newsworthy but it gets attention because of the Bush administration's other well publicized claims of a right to breach the privacy of citizens without obtaining warrants.

Articles discussing proposed changes and/or impacts to our nation's Constitutional protections deserve high priority from mainstream media. A key component in journalism is keeping the citizenry well informed regarding actions taken by our government. Therefore, this piece scores highly for its subject content, but fails considerably in defining the larger issues associated with it, especially in regards to the use of "signing statements".

Not a bad balance of sources and viewpoints, if clipped. The story shows a bias toward unitary executive thinking. It makes it sound like the signing statement is another form of law, which it is not. It is the President's assertion of his opinion and does not carry the weight of law. None of these signing statements have been challenged because none of the feared violations of law have been yet discovered and brought to the courts for action. The original NY Daily News story was less balanced but more informative on the issues.

See how they step it up? Soon they will say they need warrantless searchs for citizens homes and persons. To protect you! The scarey part is that there will citizens who will be all in favor of these civil liberty erosions.