We believe in freedom.

We believe in hard work.

We believe that good work should be well rewarded.

We believe in the right to own property which is the reward of our work; and we believe in the right of our spouses and children to inherit our property upon the occasion of our passing.

We believe in the rights of the individual to pursue their self-interest wherever it may lie. We also believe in the rule of law as a protection against the excesses of the few for whom the pursuit of self-interest crosses the border into the criminal and thereby threatens the health, safety, privacy, and security of our persons, our families, and our interests.

Therefore, we recognize the necessity for a government to enforce the rule of law.

We believe that all people must be treated equally by the law, and that a person’s genetics, heritage, fortunes, or social status must not be used to dispose the law toward that person in either a favorable or an unfavorable manner.

We believe that the interests of the people outweigh the interests of the state, and we agree that the people should look askance and even raise an outcry whenever the state seeks an expansion of its powers.

We believe in democracy, because we believe that the government’s purpose is to serve the people, and we believe that the right to govern can only be bestowed by the people.

We believe in the Constitution. We cherish the separation of powers which prevents our great nation from slipping into the clutches of tyranny.

We believe in the Bill of Rights.

We believe that we have a right to say what we want, how we want, when we want.

We believe that we have an inalienable right to organize, and to gather together without hindrance.

We believe that there is such a thing as a higher calling. We believe that there are forces at play in our universe that transcend the understanding of humans. We believe that the government has no place dictating to us what we should believe about the nature of the sublime and transcendent elements of the universe.

We believe that guns are tools, and like many tools they are dangerous and even deadly if used improperly. We believe that the existence of criminals in the world does not justify the elimination of such tools; on the contrary.

We believe in the right to privacy. We believe that the government does not have the right to search our property or to intercept our communications without a warrant issued based on probably cause.

We believe that our government is unduly swayed by special interests.

We believe that the power of the people has been diluted, and we want to see our democracy restored. We are in agreement that the only way to restore people’s faith in our system of government is to eliminate the influence of the special interests. Whether we choose to focus our ire on 501(c) groups, or on corporations, churches, or unions, we are in agreement that influence is the problem; and the solution is to get the money out of politics.

We believe that the government spends too much. We may not agree on specific line items; but back in 2008 when I wrote the book, I quite strongly voiced my objection to the astronomical federal budget deficit. This is not just a conservative issue.

We believe that the health care overhaul was largely misdirected. Back in 2008, I wrote in the book than an individual private insurance mandate is entirely the wrong approach to health care reform. (I staunchly favor the public option.) In the same way that Medicare reform under Bush was a giveaway to the pharmaceutical companies, now health care reform under Obama is a giveaway to the insurance industry.

To top it off, I’ll go one further. I agree with conservatives that most of the Democrats in Congress are corrupt politicians toadying to the interests of their campaign donors. Of course, I believe that the Republicans in Congress are even worse. They are both dirty.

Progressives and conservatives agree on all these points and more.

We aren’t so different, you and I.

I would like to remind America that the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution specifically prohibits the government from conducting any search without a warrant based on probable cause.

In the book I state in part:

I urge the House to stand firm on principle, because no one is above the law. The phone companies knowingly broke the law by handing over personal information without a search warrant. Their actions were inexcusable, and must not be pardoned.

Thus it was with nothing short of absolute and utter disgust that I heard the news that the bill in question had overwhelmingly passed both houses of Congress and was signed into law by President Bush. I am grateful to Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) for his apropos observation that:

“This bill is not a compromise. It is a capitulation.”

Feingold was in the minority, even among his fellow Democrats. In the book, I am highly critical of the so-called “opposition party” which has repeatedly failed to demonstrate any intention of actually opposing anything. The solution, which I outline extensively in chapter 7, involves drastic campaign finance reform.

Meanwhile, “disappointed” does not begin to describe how utterly our elected leaders have failed us. “Saddened” fails to invoke the magnitude of this horrific violation of our fundamental liberties which our President just signed into law. “Alarmed” is perhaps a more accurate description of how let down I feel by this extreme failure of leadership.

The Democrats, with their slim majority, should have taken a stand and filibustered this bill if they did not have enough votes to reject it outright. If the earlier bill, which this legislation was meant to extend, happened to expire because the Republicans insisted on unreasonable provisions, then the old bill should have been allowed to expire, and perhaps the Republicans would have learned that they don’t always get everything they want.

But that’s not what happened. As it turns out, the Republicans DO get everything they want, even when they don’t hold a majority in Congress. The Democrats simply rolled over, yet again; even the favored Presidential contender, Illinois Senator Barack Obama. I understand that Senator Obama was hoping to appear “tough on terror” by backing this bill, but I think that in this instance he should have chosen to appear “tough on crime” instead, by insisting that companies that broke the law should be punished for their criminal actions. He is a gifted rhetorician; he could have used his talents to turn the conversation around and point out to the American public why the Bush administration’s policy of trampling on Americans’ civil liberties is not in keeping with the American way.

We believe in freedom and individual rights as guaranteed by our Constitution. This awful bill must be overturned. Please, contribute to the ACLU to show support for the legal challenge which they have filed against this blatant violation of our Constitutionally guaranteed civil rights.