Open Letter to the White House - Doubts in Your Mind

Dear Mr. President:

I seriously considered giving you a break on the issue of illegal wiretaps on American citizens' phones. God knows why; maybe I just felt tired. My thanks to you, therefore, for your comments at the "super-secret" NSA headquarters yesterday (and what's with the "super-secret" moniker? What is this, a James Bond movie?). I feel like those remarks really woke me up.

Let's see - you said two things in particular that really struck me as even more cute than your usual meaningless fluff. First, there was your declaration that "the American people expect me to protect their security and their civil rights, and that's what I'm doing." Second, there was your reassurance, "There's no doubt in my mind" that those NSA wiretaps are constitutional.

Now, sir, I've addressed you before on the subject of what the American people expect from you. Your poll numbers have gone up slightly since that time, but not enough to bolster your claim. It's obvious that the American people, contrary to your assertion, expect nothing but further bumbling from you and your administration, whether deliberately or through mere incompetence.

I won't bother to repeat myself any further than that when it comes to yesterday's statement, though. Let's discuss exactly what you seem to think the American people expect from you - protection of our security and our civil rights. Where in the world did you get the idea that those items reside in your personal job description?

Time for a quick civics lesson. You, sir, are the head of the Executive Branch, not the emperor. Your job is to implement the laws enacted by the legislative branch, that is, the Congress of the United States. You are indeed the commander in chief of the armed forces; that does not mean that you make all the decisions having to do with national security, or with anything else, nor does it mean that you may not be questioned or investigated. Your decisions and orders are subject to review, just as are the decisions and orders of Congress and of the courts. Protection of our security is a joint responsibility to be shared between the three branches of government, not your personal bailiwick.

As for protection of our civil rights, that is even less your personal task than national security. You are commander in chief of the armed forces, and therefore may be considered to have some leeway in your military actions. You are certainly not commander in chief of the Bill of Rights - that is utterly outside your jurisdiction. If, as is undeniable, our national security is a matter for joint administration among the three branches of government, our civil rights and freedoms are even more a matter for joint oversight. They are not to be molded to the will of any executive, least of all a secrecy-obsessed power-hungry demagogue like yourself.

So much for what the American people expect of you (and I might add, your statement that you are indeed protecting our national security and our civil rights is simply another lie, but we'll cover that sometime in the future). Let's move on to your other statement. You said "There is no doubt in my mind" that the NSA wiretaps are unconstitutional.

Mr. President, I could not possibly care less what is in your mind. Your mind is not the final arbiter of what is and is not constitutional, and you may not simply wipe away your misdeeds by executive fiat. I would not trust Abraham Lincoln, our greatest president, with that power - I certainly will not trust you with it.

There has been a lot of talk from you and your administration lately, attempting to reassure us that no telephone conversations between American citizens have been subject to illegal wiretaps; that our government is listening only to phone calls originating overseas; that the information thus obtained has prevented several terrorist attacks; that revealing this secret program gives valuable information to this nation's enemies; and so on. These claims, too, do not weigh with me in the least whether true or false. As usual, you and your cronies are missing the point in a quite spectacular fashion.

Once again, allow me to educate you regarding the American governmental system. You may not simply do as you please - you are required to submit to judicial oversight. If you cannot convince Congress and the courts that your contemplated actions are necessary and legal, you may not undertake them, but you are required to make your argument nevertheless. You may not violate the law at any time, nor attempt to excuse your conduct later, when it becomes known, no matter how critical you may consider your actions to be. If you find governmental processes slow or inefficient, you are required to work with the other branches to fix them; you may not simply go around them. In short, when it comes to your job as an employee of the American people, no matter what is in your mind (or whatever you call your mind), you are to submit its contents for review before you act.

I notice that, in your first comment, you evidently claim to read the minds of the American people, to know what they expect of you. In your second, you evidently ask us to read your mind and to trust what's there. We refute both claims, sir. Henceforth, we require that you obey the laws and do your job properly, rather than destroying all democratic institutions within your reach while claiming to preserve them.

If you find that requirement uncongenial, you can pack up your things, head back to Crawford, and let your cows try to read your mind. They could not possibly be less successful than the American people in figuring out just what the dickens you're up to.