Extendable Ears

It may not be Harry Potter-esque magic and wizardry, but the United States government has decided that it is perfectly acceptable to eavesdrop on the conversations of Americans in the name of its ongoing "war on terror."

Let's put aside for a moment how frightening -- how beyond Orwellian -- this concept is. Let's sweep aside for a moment the enormous implications on our civil liberties for a moment.

Let's pause for a moment, as the last few chords of This is Not America resonate and fade.

Just real quick, the point I want to make in this post is still more hypocrisy from these so-called "conservatives." Yes, "conservaties," the champions of the "if it's not explicitly in the Constitution, it's not a right," are once again invoking a right that's not in the Constitution.

According to this brief filed by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft (see Section III.A), the President is entitled to conduct warrantless wiretaps under constitutional authority. What does he cite as support? Is there a clause in the Constitution that reads, "The President as Commander-in-Chief shall have the authority to conduct warrantless wiretaps" (since it's the text of the Constitution we're supposed to be focusing on, of course)? No. Ashcroft cites to caselaw from the Third and Fourth Circuit Courts of Appeal, as well as the U.S. Supreme Court. Know what this means? By definition, since "wiretap" is not found in the Constitution at all (neither is "abortion"), the decisions in those cases are acts of judicial activism, which Republicans are so up-in-arms about. Those cases involve judges just making law, making up Presidential prerogatives out of whole cloth! How dare they! Oh wait, because they come out the way Republicans want them to, I guess it's okay.

It sickens me.