So which Amendment is it that permits subordination of the Constitution to "safety from terrorism?"

[MsPithy]

50. ... more caterwauling.

Hard to know where to begin...

You seem to ignore, "... but upon probable cause, ..." It is inconceivable that the Framers would agree that capturing all phone calls and the whole internets, meets the standard of reasonable searches based on probable cause.

Courts decide on the basis of cases. Until now, no one has had standing to bring a case against secret, massive data collection. The ACLU filed this case almost immediately, after the release of these documents. Contrary to your claim that the courts have decided massive collection of private data is a reasonable search, this is only the beginning.

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/aclu-files-lawsuit-challenging-constitutionality-nsa-phone-spying-program

Now, as for this,

"Not to mention that when you tell a third party, like a phone company, a person to contact on your behalf, that is not your "person, house, paper, or effect"."

I would laugh, if this wasn't so sad. Let's just think about this for a minute. Why have law enforcement agencies spent so much time and effort getting warrants to listen to phone conversations, when all along phone calls are not privacy protected by the Constitution? According to you, the FISA court isn't needed, at all.

Very few people are affected by terrorism. Ordinary American crime affects millions, seriously harming people and their property. Why shouldn't every local police department be able to screen every phone call and monitor everyone's internet use? They could solve, or even prevent almost all crime.

I find your characterization of Democrats like me, who care about policy, deeply, DEEPLY offensive.