If a candidate for President puts a hold on a controversial eavesdropping bill that would grant immunity to big telecoms, and no one reports it, did it really happen?

Because at this very moment, the coverage of Chris Dodd's hold on the FISA bill is underwhelming, if not completely nonexistent:


CNN.com: No Mention of Dodd or FISA

Huffington Post: No mention.

FoxNews.com: No mentions (But ran a story that the bill passed the Senate Intelligence Committee)

National Review: Plenty of Pro-eavesdropping articles, no mention of Dodd.

Drudge Report: No mention of Dodd or FISA.

Politico: No mention of Dodd or FISA.

ABCNews.com: No mention of Dodd or FISA.

CBSNews.com: No mention of Dodd or FISA.

MSNBC.com: No mention of Dodd or FISA.

Google News: No mention of Dodd or FISA.

Heck, no one even is covering the fact that it appears Harry Reid plans on sticking it to his own and going around Dodd's hold.

For a political junkie, Dodd's move meant that maybe, just maybe, some politicians were ready to climb out of the pocket of the telecom industries and other donors and start doing right by the American people and the Constitution. Does it all just mean that the rule of law only matters to hardcore political junkies? Is Joe Torre not managing the New York Yankees that much more important than whether the government can spy on its citizens?

But it seems Dodd's hold is likely to be a completely empty gesture if no one reports it. It truly appears that despite Dodd's action, the Telecom industry has already bought its amnesty.

--WKW