Do As I Say, Not As I Do

As we continue to hold the hand of a budding new democracy in Iraq, we find ourselves in a little democratic howdy-do of our own.

Last weekend the New York Divides (err, I mean "Times". I knew it was a math term and since they seem set on dividing our country I thought that was it, sorry.) published a story claiming that President Bush's administration wiretapped private phones inside the United States for, what the administration claimed, was necessary surveillance in the War on Terror.

Now, the details are still coming out and right now it appears as though both sides have some valid points. How convenient that the NY Divides sits on this story for a year and only releases just before an anti-Bush book on this very subject is days away from being published. Furthermore, leaking such information on an ongoing national security effort can put a crimp in needed covert action. A slap on the wrist for you New York Minuses.

But onto the bigger issue here. What line may an administration cross under the blanket of "national security" before that line is obliterated and constitutionally protected limits are lost? (That's right. We're taking a look at the constitution to find answers. Glad you were paying attention to the introduction two posts below.)

The obvious first stop is the fourth amendment. It reads:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall be issued, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It seems pretty clear that the President is not above the law in this matter. Even the War Powers act of 1973 doesn't seems to allow overstepping of this matter. If we stop there this seems pretty clear cut. Perhaps the only "out" would be if the victims were not U.S. citizens. Not knowing that, we have to keep looking for answers.

The second place to visit is case law based on the constitution. From that we find a summary of Supreme Court rulings from the FindLaw web site that advises:

"Preservation of the security of the Nation from its enemies, foreign and domestic, is the obligation of government and one of the foremost reasons for government to exist. Pursuit of this goal may lead government officials at times to trespass in areas protected by the guarantees of speech and press and may require the balancing away of rights which might be preserved inviolate at other times. The drawing of the line is committed, not exclusively but finally, to the Supreme Court."

There have been many cases where the matter has been taken up, with various outcomes. There appears to be no clear Constitutional answer for resolving this in a blanket form except for the fact that the courts get to decide when and where the line is crossed.

The administrations first reaction to the leak was to blame the little dog for pulling back the curtain on the Great and Powerful Oz. Certainly there are eyebrows to be raised in the direction of the leakers, but that seems little more than a "quick...look over there" stalling tactic while the administration figures out an actual response.

The second, and more valid, reaction was basically "we didn't have time to get an actual warrant...national security was at risk." Now we've got a real fight on our hands. If national security was at risk (and we don't know how imminent it was) then action had to be taken. If the Bush Administration had a chance to stop terrorism here in this country and they did not do whatever it took, then people would die. Now the administration is faced with responding to doing exactly what they would have been blamed for not doing had they not done it. At least I think that's what I mean......yeah, that's it.

What were clearly have here is a failure to communicate constitutionally. If the means don't exist for legitimate national security threats to be dealt with in a timely fashion without violating the Constitution then clearly we need to do some work on fixing that.

That's where Congress comes in. Instead of howling Democrats gnashing their teeth and wrending garments over how the Bush Administration violated us, they need to recognize the problem and get to work on fixing it. If they don't, they have no one to blame but themselves when this situation comes up again and the results fall on either side; we stop the terrorists illegally, or we allow them to succeed legally.

Regardless, if we want to show Iraq exactly how a proper democracy works in responding to terrorists we need to set an example of action.

What's In A Name?

The Democratic Party has finally come to one agreeable decision. The word "liberal" has finally became as bad a the "N" word, the "L" word and any other letters that can somehow suddenly become words all by themselves. We can thank the Republicans for that. Branding political lefties like Hillary and Ted "Captain of the swim team" Kennedy as Liberals has stuck in their craw for too long.

The word is starting to lose it's power, however. It no longer exemplifies the methods they will undertake and the tactics they will use to subvert everything we are accomplishing. The Liberals have self-adopted the word "Progressive" but that doesn't really seem to fit. A Democrat has never actually made progress on anything in their life. Besides, whenever I hear them call themselves that I keep thinking I should ask them about shopping for the best auto insurance rates for me.

So what do you call a radical faction that seeks to destroy any actions by a sitting government through threats, intimidation, destruction and weapons of mass ignorance? Actually, we already have a word for that...."Insurgent"

That's right. That cozy little word the media drummed up for those terrorists who are doing everything they can to disprupt elections, stop capitalism and automatically hate everything America is about, but the media wants us to think their just struggling for their freedoms. The only difference between Muslim insurgents and American insurgents in that instead of road side bombs, the American insurgents weapon of choice is the media. Remember when Newsweek published a story saying our prison guards in Iraq were flushing Korans down the toilet? Dozens of innocent people were killed during the resulting rioting over the news. Turns out Newsweek made the story up. It never happened. Don't plant a bomb, plant an inaccurate news story. You'll get the same results.

So Democrats, you have your wish. No longer will I refer to you as Liberals. Henceforth you are soft, lovable,squeezable little insurgents.

Gee...aren't they cute?

I Can't Just Call You "Man'"

The first thing to do is to get the introductions out of the way. I am the Constitutional Peasant. What does that mean? Well a quick check of Monty Python movies might give you a clue. But I view it a bit differently since here in America we live in a Representative Republic rather than an anarcho-syndicalist commune where we take it in turns to act as sort of supreme executive officer for the week. (Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!). All right, I'll move on.

I like to say that I am a Republican. That is I usually vote for Republican candidates. They're the ones who most closely fit my views on financial and most social issues. But as the Republican Party strives to push itself further under the right wing of whatever vulture their emboldened to, I often find myself staring at the party from a distance. Standing somewhere in the middle but no where near the left. Without a convoluted party platform to mold my Stepford life after I have chosen another guiding principle; the U.S. Constitution. A sort of "What Would The Constitution Do?" principle, if I may borrow a term from the far right wing conservative Christians who have managed to give me more elbow room here in the middle.

The Constitution is not perfect, but like many who use the Bible for guidance and strength in their faith, I use the Constitution for guidance on our country.
For more on this I suggest you visit this site...BUT..if you do doubt your courage or your strength, come no further, for death awaits you all with nasty big pointy teeth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States