Buried deep inside a New York Times article that mainly focused on Bush's "no new taxes" speech (where have we heard this before?) is a little tidbit that has gotten surprisingly little coverage in the mainstream press. So much for that "liberal media," eh?

Here's what Bush had to say about thinking terrorist thoughts:

[anyone] who espouses a philosophy that's terrorist and bent, I assure you we will bring that person to justice.

So you don't even have to perform any terrorist act now, nor do you actually have to be a terrorist. Now just having a philosophy that Bush considers "terrorist and bent" will get you "brought to justice". How much would you like to bet this is going to include protesters of the World Bank and the like? (I don't particularly care for those people either, but I support their right to protest yogurt if they want to.)

The danger here is this: terrorist actions are measurable and definable. It's pretty obvious, too, if someone belongs to some terrorist sect. But now there is this talk of punishing people who think terrorist thoughts. How do you quantify that? How do you prove guilt or innocence there? And should we really be punishing Thoughtcrime?

---Nick