Those 56 percent of Americans who agree that it’s OK for President Obama to ignore our Constitutional right to privacy pride themselves on being forward-thinkers and relish standing alongside Obama while he criminalizes Edward Snowden and his supporters. They’re also the same people who agreed with Obama back in 2001 when he had this to say about the U.S. Constitution: “The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society… [The Supreme Court] didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. [It] says what the states can’t do to you. [It] says what the federal government can’t do to you, but [it] doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.” At the time, Obama was referring to the changes brought about by the civil rights movement. Obviously, though, over the years his opinion remains unchanged and he still has no respect for the Constitution – or the citizens – of the United States. But when it comes to security vs. privacy, the Constitution guarantees that Americans really don’t have to make a choice. The only thing the federal government is required to do on our behalf is defend us from attack and protect our Constitutional rights. One of those rights is our right to privacy, and that’s exactly the reason our Founding Fathers put limits on what the federal government is allowed to do. In a speech before his fellow Virginians, Patrick Henry said, “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almight God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”
Posted on: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 03:11:49 +0000