Another wiretap poll question

A Washington Post poll released Wednesday shows slightly more positive results than the AP poll I mentioned earlier:

11. Would you consider this wiretapping of telephone calls and e-mails without court approval as an acceptable or unacceptable way for the federal government to investigate terrorism? Do you feel that way strongly or somewhat?

           ------Acceptable------      ------Unacceptable------      No
           NET  Strongly  Somewhat     NET  Somewhat  Strongly      opin.
1/8/06     51      35        15        47      14        33           2 

For the sake of comparison, here are the AP results again (PDF):

Should the Bush administration be required to get a warrant from a judge before monitoring phone and internet communications between American citizens in the United States and suspected terrorists, or should the government be allowed to monitor such communications without a warrant?

Should be required to get a warrant.......................................... 56
Should be allowed to monitor without a warrant............................. 42
Not sure......................................... 2

Given the more positive framing of the Post question, it's not surprising that support for warrantless wiretaps increased. But the Post still didn't come close to the results of the awful Rasmussen question I slammed before:

Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?

As I pointed out, the question does not mention warrants, which artificially pushed approval up to 64 percent -- far higher than the Post or AP.