PICAYUNE —
Having often invoked Thomas Jefferson’s warning that We the People are the ultimate guardian of our liberties, I’ve been criticizing the citizenry and Congress for their weak resistance to the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations’ muzzling of our constitutional freedoms. But now I see signs of hope from the growing resistance to Obama’s drones.
Behold this headline from a recent Associated Press story: “Talk of drones patrolling U.S. skies spawns anxiety” (Joan Lowy, June 19).
For example, “Jeff Landry, a freshman Republican congressman from Louisiana’s coastal bayou country, said constituents have stopped him while shopping at Walmart to talk about it.”
Said Landry: “It’s raising an alarm with the American public.” Pay attention, Mitt Romney!
And as Kyle Scott reported in The Washington Times: “Last week, there was a drone sighting in Washington D.C., that caused a major traffic disturbance as some drivers thought they were seeing a UFO” (“Drones Threaten Privacy,” June 21).
The other drivers knew it wasn’t an unidentified flying object from another planet, but was flying under the aegis of President Obama.
The AP reported that “the level of apprehension is especially high in the conservative blogosphere, where headlines blare ‘30,000 Armed Drones to Be Used Against Americans’ and ‘Government Drones Set to Spy on Farms in the United States.’”
But we don’t know if all 30,000 drones will be armed. And it’s misleading to claim that the most anxious of us are conservatives. In the same AP story, “an American Civil Liberties Union lobbyist, Chris Calabrese, said that when he speaks to audiences about privacy issues generally, drones are what ‘everybody just perks up over.’”
Now here comes the increasingly recognizable Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky. Like his father, Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the son has internalized the Constitution, but less explosively than his dad, and he is widening his own audience.
He was interviewed on CNN “a day after a U.S. Navy drone crashed in Salisbury, Maryland” (“Sen. Paul says no to domestic drones,” cnn.com, June 12).
Paul was asked about a drone bill he is introducing after getting the idea from Rep. Austin Scott, a Republican from Georgia.
The senator insisted that surveillance drones must first have a warrant.
“Not only do I like the Second Amendment,” he said, “I like the Fourth Amendment.”
“I mean, police do have power and I want police to catch rapists and murderers,” Paul added. “But they ask a judge and we separate the police from the people who finally make the decision on someone coming in your house.”
You hear that, President Obama? Surely that Fourth Amendment protection was in one of your lectures when you taught the Constitution at the University of Chicago?
Unlike the president, Paul speaks with admirable, stubborn clarity about We the People’s privacy rights. Domestic drones, he said on CNN, “could be used if you have a proper warrant. But that means you go through a judge. A judge has to say there is probable cause of a crime. But I don’t want drones roaming across, crisscrossing our cities and our country, snooping on Americans.
“And that’s the surveillance state that I’m very concerned about. And that’s what our bill would stop.”
While Paul has declared that he is supporting Mitt Romney for president, he has castigated the Republican nominee for saying he could act on Iran without congressional approval (“Rand Paul Rips Mitt Romney’s Statements on Presidential War Powers,” Doug Mataconis, outsidethebeltway.com, June 20).
It would be a very good idea if Paul sent Romney, who’s said very little about his civil liberties convictions, that quote from his CNN interview about protecting Americans from surveillance drones with our Fourth Amendment. He also might want to remind Romney about the Constitution’s separation of powers.
It would be just as important to the future health of our Constitution if Rand Paul explained to Romney why, in May 2011, he “argued that, in the rush to meet the terrorist threat in 2001, Congress enacted a Patriot Act that tramples on individual liberties” (“Patriot Act Extension Passes Senate, Rand Paul Amendments Fail,” AP/huffingtonpost.com, May 26, 2011).
I reported that the senator’s father said very accurately on one of the televised Republican presidential debates that the precipitous decline of our individual constitutional liberties began with the passage of the Patriot Act.
And earlier this month, Sen. Paul introduced a bill that discontinues the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) “screening program and requires screening of passengers at airports to be conducted by private screeners only” (“Sen. Paul Introduces Legislation for Passenger Bill of Rights, Privatized Airport Screeners,” paul.senate.gov, June 15).
The younger Paul’s opposition to the Patriot Act and to the TSA’s serial constitutional violations at our airports, along with his exposures of Obamacare, are some of the reasons I would vote for him as president.
The main reason why I’d support him, of course, would be that he’s not Barack Obama. And because he’s only 49, it’s not inconceivable that some day he may be running for president. I hope I’ll still be around then.
In introducing his TSA legislation, Paul made clear that “travelers should be empowered with the knowledge necessary to protect themselves from a violation of their rights and dignity.”
Dignity? Yes, that goes with freedom.
Justice Hugo Black warned us: “We must not be afraid to be free.” He would find it hard to recognize the current condition of the Bill of Rights. But he would realize that Rand Paul is not afraid to be free, whatever disagreements they might have.
How many of us remain free to be Americans?
Opinion
Sweet land of Liberty....?
- Opinion
-
-
Not your mother’s Ladies’ Home Journal
By Rheta Grimsely Johnson/Syndicated columnist
I haven’t seen the Ladies’ Home Journal in about a million years, except maybe in the dentist’s office when I was trying to avoid a television permanently set on Fox News.
Somebody’s grandchild was selling magazines for a school project, and Ladies’ Home Journal was the only one on the list I recognized. Now it comes to the house.
Let’s just say: It’s not my mother’s Ladies’ Home Journal. This month, right behind a feature called “A Country of People Who Never Stop Eating” is one called “Nice Girls Do Get Tattoos.” -
Health care market needs oversight
By Gene Lyons/Syndicated columnist
Sometimes the best journalism explains what’s right under our noses. In Steven Brill’s exhaustive Time magazine cover article, “Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us,” it’s the staggeringly expensive, grotesquely inefficient and inhumane way Americans pay for medical care.
-
VA’s appalling failures not recent
By Sid Salter/Syndicated columnist
While recent national press attention to ongoing problems at Mississippi’s G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery Veterans Administration Medical Center in Jackson is welcome and needed, the failures of the overall VA service apparatus in Mississippi are not recent problems.
In short, former U.S. Rep. Sonny Montgomery — Mississippi’s “Mr. Veteran” and author of the modern G.I. Bill that bears his name — must be spinning in his grave. There have been significant failures and poor service to veterans documented by state and local media since 2008. -
Dolley Madison politically savvy
By Cokie and Steven V. Roberts/Syndicated columnists
When Dolley Payne Madison became first lady in 1809, she instituted Wednesday evening gatherings at the White House where political rivals could meet and talk. They were called “squeezes” because so many people showed up and crowded the room. As Cokie wrote in her book “Ladies of Liberty": “All were welcome as long as they were appropriately dressed. And all went — skipping a Wednesday night might mean missing a vital piece of political information or being left out of a crucial deal.”
-
Mississippi isn’t immune from national college tuition trends
By Sid Salter/Syndicated columnist
Higher education in Mississippi has not been immune from national trends cited in a recent Center on Budget and Policy Priorities report which concludes that over the last five years, the global economic downturn and a “no new taxes” political climate have increasingly shifted the burden of higher education finance to students and parents at a time when enrollment is increasing and the percentage of state support is decreasing. -
Right to vote not ‘racial entitlement
By Donna Brazile/Syndicated columnist
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Shelby County v. Holder — a challenge to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, specifically Section 5, which requires states and localities with a history of voting discrimination against racial and language minorities to get “pre-approved” by the federal government before changing how elections are conducted or voters are registered. -
1st day of spring brings memories
By Wyatt Emmerich/Southside Sun
The first day of spring! My favorite month, April, is just around the corner. Now we just need one big gullywasher to get rid of the pine pollen.
Normally, spring gives me a strong sense of rebirth and renewal, but this spring I seem surrounded by moments crystallizing the passage of time.
It was a year ago, I walked up the porch to my mother’s home to box up her possessions following her funeral. -
Soaking up in tiger paw-shaped hot tub
By Rheta Grimsely Johnson/Syndicated columnist
No springtime ritual was better at Auburn than sitting on hard rocks at a nearby state park to let cold water rush over your feet. You wore cut-off blue jeans and Dr. Scholl’s sandals, the unofficial uniform for coeds in the 1970s, and when you left, you felt ready to tackle tests, term papers and blind dates.
-
Medicaid or not, costs will be paid
By Sid Salter/Syndicated columnist
While the battle continues between state Republicans and other fiscal conservatives intent on focusing on the long-terms costs of Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act and Democrats, health care advocates and state hospitals intent on focusing on the short-term benefits, the fact remains that one way or another, the costs of providing health care for the poor, the blind, the aged and the disabled will be paid by the taxpayers one way or another.
-
Multiculturalism is not rational
By Thomas Sowell/Syndicated columnist
Among the many irrational ideas about racial and ethnic groups that have polarized societies over the centuries and around the world, few have been more irrational and counterproductive than the current dogmas of multiculturalism.
Intellectuals who imagine that they are helping racial or ethnic groups that lag behind by redefining their lags out of existence with multicultural rhetoric are in fact leading them into a blind alley. - More Opinion Headlines
-
Not your mother’s Ladies’ Home Journal




