The Bill of Privileges

In an earlier discussion about the probably illegal warrantless spying programs revealed by the press, an acquaintance asked, "What about the Fourth Amendment?"

I responded, "Bush has informed Congress that it's no longer valid."

I did so because some backers of the war on civil liberties contend that so long as the president lets Denny Hastert and Bill Frist know about what he's doing, then it is, by definition, legal.

My comment was half-joking but half-serious. Maybe it was in fact more than half-serious.

Take the most recent column by far right commentator Cal Thomas. In it, he (surprise surprise) trashed The New York Times, falsely accusing it of 'giving aid and comfort to America’s terrorist enemies.'

Ever since the start of the Iraq aggression, any criticism of the president, his policies or the implementation of those policies has constituted for some 'aid and comfort to America’s terrorist enemies.'

This is a brilliant smear because it's false but the nature of the accusation makes it impossible to prove or disprove. The far right does the same thing when they say that if there's another terrorist attack, it will be The Times' fault. Again, defame your opponents with something that's impossible to prove or disprove.

In reality, any expression of democracy may give aid and comfort to the enemy. They don't understand the concept so they see the free exchange of ideas as a sign of chaos and indiscipline. The expression of democracy is really a sign of strength, but it can be intrepreted as a sign of weakness. By this standard, the only way to fight terrorism is to suspend democracy, lest the enemy get the wrong impression.

In the midst of his anti-New York Times screed, Thomas made an interesting, if unwitting, admission to that effect Bush has unilaterally suspended the Constitution. He writes of the paper:

This isn’t about the privileges guaranteed by the First Amendment. It is about the agenda of the Times and some other newspapers and media outlets that clearly want the administration to fail in Iraq — and in everything else — so that Democrats will retake the reins of government.

Last time I check, we had a Bill of RIGHTS. Not once, to the best of my knowledge, does the word 'privilege' appear in the First Amendment or anywhere else in the Bill of Rights.

A privilege is something that's given to you by the state and can just as easily be taken away from you by the same state. Or in this case, by the Leader.

Driving is a privilege. You are not automatically allowed to drive on public roads. You have to pass a written test. Then you take a road test and someone decides if they deem you qualified or not. Rights are different. You have them by the mere virtue of being a citizen. In this country, there is no test you must take to become a government-licensed reporter. Articles are not subject to government authorization before being published, no matter how much the administration would like different.

According to Cal Thomas, we have lost the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. And by the looks of things, many of the succeeding nine amendments as well. It was indeed religious extremists who took them away. But they weren't foreigners. And they weren't Muslim.