It’s the Silence of the Left when government tracks American citizens

I can’t understand why the so-called champions of privacy have been silent for the last month. Wasn’t it just a year ago that their howls of protest over “domestic eavesdropping” echoed from dorm halls and student activity centers from sea to shining sea? Yet they are silent about a District 4 Court of Appeals ruling in Madison, Wisconsin.

Actually, it is quite understandable. There isn’t a Republican in the White House. So, the threat to our liberty and Constitution doesn’t exist even though it does, and to a far greater degree than any other time in recent history.

The court ruled that police can attach a GPS device to an American citizen’s automobile—and thus track their movements—without a warrant, without reasonable suspicion and without probable cause.

Is this a bid deal? Certainly government has better things to do than monitor a mother of three as she drives to the tanning bed or the grocery store. But, if that mother or her husband run afoul of political correctness--perhaps by home-schooling their children, joining the NRA, or voting third party—they could become a target of politically-motivated surveillance.

Such snooping is nothing new. Major American cities are full of street cameras that monitor daily activities. Our bank accounts have been open to government scrutiny since the early 1970s, when Washington passed legislation requiring banks to report single deposits above $10,000.

Red-light and speeding cameras observe traffic and mail citations to an offending automobile’s owner. This occurs without regard to who is actually driving the car at the time of the infraction. Government can condemn private property via imminent domain in the pursuit of increased tax revenues (thank you Kelo decision). And now government can track our automobiles without any reason whatsoever.

As stated, police have better things to do than track every Tom, Dick and Harry who drives down the street. But it’s still a troubling concept. Police states aren’t unprecedented in human history. In fact, they’re the norm. It is freedom that is the exception.

While the appellate court’s ruling is disturbing, the reaction from Leftists is even worse. They’ve said nothing about how such monitoring of US citizens violates individual liberty. I could find no mention of this case on Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, or MoveOn.org.

It would appear that the Left considers government surveillance intrusive and threatening only when exercised on foreign terrorists. Perhaps they believe that constitutional principles apply more to al-Qaeda members than to US citizens.

Warrants must be obtained to eavesdrop on some Muslim extremist, likely here on a student or work visa, who’s conveying the evils of the “Great Satan” to his uncle Amir in Waziristan. Otherwise the rights of all Americans are in jeopardy. There’s nary a word when the targets of government surveillance are American citizens to whom constitutional protections truly apply, like someone sporting a Ron Paul bumper sticker.

If government has domestic monitoring authority it should be used to target foreigners who are, or could be, members of a hostile international operation. Yet, somehow, American rights are endangered when government performs its prime function of defending the nation against unfriendly entities. But the Left apparently sees no problem whatsoever with having police watching our every move via street and traffic cameras or GPS devises.

It doesn’t bother me when government monitors the actions and movements of foreigners, whether they’re here legally or illegally. That’s part of defending the nation against external threats. But I care a great deal if government monitors an American citizen’s daily movement without warrant or probable cause.

American Leftist’s have proved once more that they care nothing for liberty, privacy, the Constitution, or the idea that government is our servant, not our master. They care only about politicizing issues, regardless of what the outcome may be.