Even Rep. Dan Lipinski voted to uphold the 4th Amendment today. Thank you to all 213 patriotic Congressmen who believe our 4th Amendment is working just fine.
For those of you not aware of the FISA issue, please be aware that essentially the Republicans seem to think our nation will be crushed by a flood of terrorists and lawyers (can’t forget the lawyers) unless Congress allows the White House to evade the 4th Amendment by wantonly tapping into your steamy phone calls about groceries and hair appointments through AT&T and other Big Telcos…
Oh, and since those Big Telcos (except Qwest, which then magically ran into all sorts of business problems as Administration Departments started to turn screws) already did this illegal activity before the Congress found out about it, the Republicans want to give them retroactive immunity for breaking the law.
As for those 197 Congressmen who voted the wrong way (including, unfortunately, my own Rep. Kirk), please go back and re-read the Fourth Amendment of our United States Constitution. It’s been around since 1791, so it should be rather familiar.
Should be.
If you also believe in our 4th Amendment, please express your gratitude with a phone call to a few of those 213 patriots, esp. those from Illinois…
House switchboard (202) 224-312
You can also donate to help them stave off the spinmeisters who think shredding our Constitution and tossing out red herrings about lawyers is somehow related to national security.
Illinois delegation voting for the Constitution (notice they’re all patriotic Dems):
- Bean, Melissa L., Illinois, 8th
- Costello, Jerry, Illinois, 12th
- Davis, Danny K., Illinois, 7th
- Emanuel, Rahm, Illinois, 5th
- Gutierrez, Luis, Illinois, 4th
- Foster, Bill, Illinois, 14th
- Hare, Phil, Illinois, 17th
- Jackson Jr., Jesse L., Illinois, 2nd
- Lipinski, Daniel, Illinois, 3rd
- Schakowsky, Jan, Illinois, 9th
And go ahead and spank those that voted to trample our Constitution (notice they’re all members of the Grand Old Party, which has clearly lost its way):
- Biggert, Judy, Illinois, 13th
- Johnson, Timothy V., Illinois, 15th
- Kirk, Mark, Illinois, 10th
- Manzullo, Donald, Illinois, 16th
- Roskam, Peter J., Illinois, 6th
- Shimkus, John, Illinois, 19th
(Ray LaHood, Bobby Rush and Jerry Weller did not vote.)
19 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 14, 2008 at 5:57 pm
dwlawson
I doubt the founder’s ever envisioned telephones much less cell phones…those weren’t envisioned until Gene Roddenberry!
The 4th Amendment clearly protects a collective right of the people.
Also, if they intended to restrict eavesdropping they would have included that language.
If it saves just one life, isn’t it worth it? It is for the children, after all.
March 14, 2008 at 7:23 pm
c-rock
Who needs to hide from a Big Progressive government that takes care of the lil people like Rob wants?
4th is overated anyways. Its a collective right,
March 14, 2008 at 11:21 pm
robnesvacil
DW, If the Founders intended for us to breathe, they would’ve included that language, no?
March 15, 2008 at 3:52 pm
robnesvacil
Crock — It’s supremely dishonest for you of all people to dismiss any of our rights as outlined in the Constitution. While you and I disagree on policy related to our rights, I still respect them instead of completely dismissing them.
“It’s a collective right.” Are you really that ignorant?
Tell that to the individual American citizen from Oregon who got nabbed by the FBI for supposedly being part of the Madrid bombings even though he had nothing to do with it.
The entirety of the Bill of Rights apply to both individuals and collective groups in one way or another. What Constitution are you looking at? I know of only one.
You are a hypocrite through and through Crock.
March 17, 2008 at 9:13 am
c-rock
you dismiss the 2nd, so why can I dismiss the 4th?
Besides,
who was supporting the consitutionalist this election? It was me dude. Your supporting a man who will grow government, and big government does not like, nor follow any of the consitution these days.
Like bailing out bear and sterns?
March 17, 2008 at 9:21 am
robnesvacil
Crock,
Do you read? It’s not too often one runs across someone so woefully ignorant they can’t understand any of what they read, but that’s what your response implies.
Re-read my post, just before yours.
I’ve never dismissed any of our rights. Rather, I’ve said all along that while we must respect our rights we also have a duty as a society to protect our citizens. We supervise our First Amendment rights with restrictions against libel, slander, fraud, etc.
Nowhere in the Constitution did the Founders suggest we ought not to protect our citizens. Indeed, they said the exact opposite in the Preamble to the Constitution.
I respect your right to bear arms, but I don’t respect anyone who would (to use DW’s word) “abuse” that right. 2A is the only amendment which involves actual physical objects and so the only way to protect against abuse of 2A is to regulate those objects.
You disagree with any supervision whatsoever; and thus you disagree with the Preamble to the Constitution (which makes sense given how quick you are to dismiss other elements of the Constitution).
Again, you reveal yourself as a hypocrite, and apparently an ignorant one at that.
March 17, 2008 at 9:31 am
dwlawson
I think you missed the sarcasm, Rob.
Anyway, the 9th and 10th are supposed to cover “everything else”. Madison and others were initially opposed to a Bill of Rights because they felt the Constitution gave no power to the Govt than was explicitly granted. One concern was that people would then assume that only those listed rights were protected.
I’m glad that others prevailed upon them to do so anyway. It seems that certain truths are no longer self-evident.
March 17, 2008 at 10:22 am
c-rock
What do you do to protect yourself from government when its destroying your money?
Dont tell me your not seeing inflation in your food costs these days. It aint because of you and I.
Its because government in inflating the money supply, pulling moves the FED did during the depression.
I went to the garden fresh.
Bannans are up. Green peppers for $2.49/lb! Lunch meats, same thing. Everything is going up. That is the true crime rob.
March 17, 2008 at 10:28 am
robnesvacil
I got the sarcasm and returned in kind, DW.
It’s the “strict constructionists” who miss that point (and who strangely still find enough wiggle room in the Constitution to interpret it to their liking).
March 17, 2008 at 10:50 am
robnesvacil
Crock,
The monetary policy underlying inflation (and the energy policy which is, to a great degree, pushing that inflation) is set by “conservatives” in the White House and was ratified by the former Republican Congressional majorities.
Who was in charge at the start of the Depression? …Republican president Herbert Hoover.
March 18, 2008 at 9:54 am
c-rock
And democrats voted for it, and keep on voting for it. They are the same as the GOP.
March 18, 2008 at 11:09 am
robnesvacil
Crock, I think you need to reread your history books.
Americans do better financially under Democratic administrations going back to FDR and all the way through Clinton. The stock market has also risen during every Dem Admin since FDR — can’t say the same for the GOP. Etc.
March 19, 2008 at 1:57 pm
dwlawson
Sorry to get back to this so late, we just got back from DC. We managed to get a spot on the concrete and then later in the great room itself.
I don’t believe there should be any “wiggle room” when it comes to fundamental rights. There should also not be any federalism issues with regards to those same rights.
It pleased me to hear Mr. Heller respond to the question about how he feels that is name will be cited in many court cases in the future along with Roe, Wade, and others. He responded that he feels he has done more for the right to life than Roe v. Wade!
March 19, 2008 at 3:45 pm
robnesvacil
DW,
Note I was discussing conservative so-called “strict” constructionists finding that “wiggle room” you decry.
I agree with standing up for our fundamental rights, but I also recognize that our Founding Fathers very clearly intended our Constitution to be a living document and left it as a foundation for future generations to build upon for their times and scenarios.
On this it would appear you and I agree.
March 20, 2008 at 2:33 pm
dwlawson
Living in the sense that it has Article V for use to amend it as necessary not in the sense that you change the meaning by wordsmithing or revisionist history.
March 20, 2008 at 2:50 pm
robnesvacil
And the elastic clause… And the Supreme Court’s role involving precedents… And on and on.
It was intended to be a living document and nothing in the Founding Fathers’ writings and debates on the matter indicate otherwise (at least not when reviewed in actual context).
March 21, 2008 at 11:14 pm
dwlawson
Evidence supporting this “living document” fantasy?
So why have Article V anyway then?
March 22, 2008 at 9:12 am
robnesvacil
Dave,
Even the folks (ie, “strict” constructionists) who think of it as a “fantasy” interpret the Constitution through a modern lens. How else to explain the idea that corporations are somehow equivalent to individual people?
April 16, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Someone turn off Lee Newcom’s shredder « Illinois Reason
[...] really quite bizarre to see them flail around so. (I previously wrote on FISA a few weeks ago, so consider that post a bit of a primer if you are [...]