Which is it, Laura?

Laura Ingraham, the sometimes thoughtful conservative talk show host, yesterday was using the bombings in Jordan as justification for the Patriot Act’s excesses. Sure, her reasoning seemed to go, we should basically suspend the 4th Amendment because we’re in a crisis, and safety and security are government’s first job. She acknowledges the obvious dangers of her position, that giving government a blank check to run roughshod to be safe and secure in our homes and persons, is not the American way. But, with 9/11 and the ongoing al Qaeda operations, even though most of what they do is thousands of miles away, we need to look the other way on 4A, at least on some things. Which things seems to be up to Ms. Ingraham and the Bush Administration’s discretion.

Wow! This becomes especially strange view when you listen to Ms. Ingraham about immigration. Nope, we can’t give immunity to “illegal aliens” who live here now, because they are lawbreakers, and the US is a nation of laws. We can’t give a free pass to current lawbreakers.

I’m sure Ms. Ingraham, a trained attorney and former law clerk to Justice Thomas, knows that the Constitution can be amended. If it’s so obvious that our 4A rights should be abated by law, then why not use the very mechanism that the Constitution provides for?

Are we subject to the rule of law, or aren’t we? Apparently, Ms. Ingraham says yes to that on immigration, but no on 4A.

Hypocrisy is like a roadside wreck…we can’t stop looking at it.

-Robert Capozzi