1. Screw you Obama. Most of what Glenn Greenwald publishes is ranting about stuff that's well within the rule of law but which he can make a buck whining about. This, from what little I know right now, is different and extremely troubling. Despite all the rumblings about impeachable offenses in the past that IMO didn't have much to them, this seems like a genuinely impeachable offense. Hopefully we'll get the sort of coverage and digging on this that we got on the (relative*) non-issues of the past several weeks.
2. Completely aside from the constitutional questions, this does make me wonder what is going on. What's nice is that at least this went through a FISA court and there is some argument for why the metadata is OK. That's what those courts are there for - because covert operations do need to happen and they do need judicial oversight. Maybe there will be a judicial review of this action and some of this will be settled out. But aside from that I'm curious why they're doing this surveillance. It covered a very specific few month period. The constitutionalist in me is very angry at Obama right now. The practically minded person is wondering what sort of activities inspired the broad sweep in the first place. Are they worried about sleeper cells or something? That's the sort of thing that would inspire this type of intelligence gathering, after all.
* - Of course I think the Benghazi attack and the IRS scandal are important - I just mean they don't present the presidential or constitutional problems that this does.