We asked FOX Fans to give government eavesdropping an "Up or Down" vote — Here's what they are saying:

“Up! We are at war and the president should be able to take the steps necessary to keep us safe. I believe he is justified in the actions he has taken. Eavesdropping has been done in every war we have been in the last 50 years. It is just another way for the Democrats to try to smear President Bush and his presidency.” — Peggy

“I'm not doing anything nefarious so I'm all for our government doing what it takes to protect us. I think the folks who are all up in arms about this are the ones who have something to hide.” — Kurt

“This is a temporary situation. It is about Good vs. Evil. Pick your team! Up.” — John (Berkeley Heights, NJ)

“Up, up, up! Our president needs the special power to order measures necessary to protect this nation from all enemies. Legislative encumbrances do nothing but slow down the process. When the threat has passed, the measures will stop.” — Frank (Plano, TX)

“Absolutely, when it's in connection with terrorists and the security of our homeland. If everyone had the right to know everything the government does while trying to capture terrorists, our intelligence would be a joke. This is just another tactic to criticize President Bush. I wish there was more effort in trying to work together, and less in trying to smear every decision made.” — Debbie (Whitewater, MT)

“Down all the way. Don’t you people see that this is how 1984 started? Give the government an inch and they’ll take a foot. A negative utopia awaits every none of you who votes up! — Donald (Cape May, NJ)

“Up. Do you want to be politically correct or dead?” — Sylvia (Belle Rose, LA)

“The 4th Amendment doesn't say anything about phone calls. It protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Nothing was searched, nothing was seized and nothing unreasonable was done. The president is trying to do the right thing, and the individual who let this information leak should be tried for treason.” — Lee

“Why does Congress need to have a hearing every time the president makes a decision on fighting the terrorists, or on anything else for that matter. If eavesdropping on suspected terrorists gains valuable information, then go for it. It’s the same old political crap from politicians that only care about themselves. First they cry and blame the president that bad intelligence started the war in Iraq, and now that he’s trying to get better intelligence, they’re screaming that it’s illegal!” — TD (Pittsburgh, PA)

“If it’s you or your loved one that gets murdered by a terrorist, then you would hope we are spying on foreign and domestic communications. You can't have it both ways. You have to give the agencies that deal with our protection the tools to do their job, and the least amount of people that know how they do it, the better. God bless the NSA.” — Charlie

“I don't think it is wise to let the government have complete control over eavesdropping. On the other hand, I believe our intelligence community has a right and mandate to monitor all international communication worldwide off of U.S. soil. All domestic eavesdropping should be by approved court order and per the First and Fourth Amendment.” — Barry (Houston, TX)

“Down. We should NOT allow the president of our representative government to usurp the law of this country just to make his job easier. The law provides a workable solution and it should be adhered to. Neither should we, as responsible citizens of this country, willingly allow our freedoms to be given away. Masking the gradual erosion of our personal liberties under the guise of national security is in reality is just another move towards Bush monarchy.” — Douglas (Owensboro, KY)

“I tend to support President Bush in his effort to protect me, however he does it. If I were a criminal or terrorist, then I'd prefer them not wiretapping me. But hey, if people want to hamstring the president, I have but one thing to say: I don't think Al Qaeda will be interested in bombing me where I live, so it won't be me that's their target. If I lived in New York or D.C., then I'd leave it well enough alone and let him do whatever he needs to do, within reason. This is one of the few things I disagree with Judge Napolitano on.” — Allan (Temple, TX)