Letters to the Editor

• "THE GREAT AMERICAN HYPOCRITE"

  [Read the article: Rendering public opinion irrelevant ]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  i simply Could Not Resist a reduxe posting of another's biting retort to the author's proclivities in viewing most (if not all) issues through the myopic Tunnel Vision of his kalaidioscopic tainted prejudices.

  Sez He: ... "ONE OF THE MOST STRIKING ASPECTS OF OUR POLITICAL DISCOURSE, PARTICULARLY DURING ELECTION TIME, IS HOW EFFICIENTLY CERTAIN VIEWS THAT DEVIATE FROM THE ELITE (i.e. Salon Elite) CONSENSUS ARE BANISHED FROM SIGHT."

  The following Post appeared in yesterday's "MOST READ" Blog ... just before being . . . "BANISHED FROM SIGHT" . . . in lieu of a barrage of Mostly Un-Read Babble that sticks to the Salon Table like a lot of ABC chewing gun stuck to the bottoms of Howard Johnson's restaurant tables.

  Said "banishment" hypocricy appears to be a chronic factor in the history of these Rooms. -------- Susan, take it away !!

  [susanowhite] Permalink Sunday, July 20, 2008 12:30 PM

  "4th AMENDMENT LAW

  "I would be more inclined to be persuaded by your FISA rhetoric if you knew more about 4th Amendment law. The issue of warrantless wiretapping is complicated and, under our Constitutional democracy, the deciders are the judges.

  "As a PhD political scientist who taught constitutional law and civil rights and liberties at a state university for 30 years (primarily case law), I can't disagree with the supporters of the recent FISA law. The compromise is certainly not perfect -- BUT IN FACT NO ONE HAS YET TO COME UP WITH A PERFECT SOLUTION TO THE TECHNOLOGICAL PROBLEM OF WIRE COMMUNICATION THAT FACES OUR NATION TODAY."

  "The OLMSTEAD decision in the 20's was the first time that our Supreme Court tackled the issue of 4th Amendment protection for wire communication. 4th Amendment law has included an exemption for "exigent circumstances" for many years."

  "In TERRY V. OHIO (1967), the Court exempted police from the warrant requirement for "stop and frisk" situations as long as they had "reasonable suspicion" )not the tougher standard of "probable cause") that their target had committed or was about to commit a crime."

  "There are other exemptions from the warrant requirement embedded in 4th Amendment law. Furthermore, it wasn't until 1961 that the Court required state level law enforcement to honor the 4th Amendment (MAPP V.OHIO)."

  "The OLMSEAD decision, in which the liberals were in the minority, came about because of the need to adapt the common law principle that "a man's home is his castle" to the new technological challenge of wire communication."

  "The OLMSTEAD Court's conservative majority refused to require a warrant for wire-tapping a home. Their position soon changed because of the large number of such cases that came to the Court and eventually they had to recognize the 4th Amendment problem posed by this new technological problem and apply the warrant requirement to wire-tapping."

  "In the KATZ decision (1960's) the Court affirmed that it was the person's "expectation of privacy", not the home, that needed the protection of the warrant requirement."

  "The problem of the FISA law is that we have not yet solved the newest technological challenge. 4th Amendment law as it stands today RELIES ON JUDGES to determine whether the threat to national security outweighs the threat to a person's expectation of privacy."

  "IN MY VIEW, we need a TECHNOLOGICAL SOLUTION to the NEW TECHNOLOGICAL THREAT, a way to sift the masses of wire communications so that personal privacy can be identified and protected."

  "It is IMPORTANT THAT CRITICS of the FISA law KNOW THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT of 4th Amendment case law in order to make a REASONABLE judgment. Read the cases!"

  "Would an Obama Supreme Court or a McCain Supreme Court be more likely to resolve this issue in favor of protecting personal privacy? Determining what is legal or illegal is their job under our Constitution."

  -- susanowhite

  [Read susanowhite's other letters]Permalink Sunday, July 20, 2008 12:30 PM

  .... As I Suggested Erlier in This Post .... the World is Divided up between People who view things from the two Opposing Ends of the Telescope ... Myopia versus The Big Picture ?? ... Not Necessarily ... both views ... All Views ought be factored into the conclusion. Nothing ought ever be Bannished ---

  Listen to the Coulters & Rosie O'Donnels of the world with an Open Mind to every nuance emoted, to every point being pointed to ---- bar none.

  Permalink Sunday, July 20, 2008 02:49 PM