There was President Bush as Daddy Dearest, exalting the Patriot Act as his weapon of choice in the war on terror to nab the evildoers who would harm America.

But then Bush sparked applause from the other side of the aisle at the most inopportune moment, just as he mentioned early in his State of the Union speech that “key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year.”

Those members of Congress who decry the Patriot Act’s assault on our civil liberties — the lack of any constitutional checks or balances, handing the executive branch maximum power without even the need for a judge having to sign a search warrant, for instance — had the nerve to applaud when Bush said the law was about to expire unless Congress renewed it.

Daddy Dearest’s eyes narrowed, and he shot the kiddies a dirty look, for acting up. Shaking his head like a parent frustrated with the kids’ inability to figure out the obvious, he went on to his next sentence. “The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule,” he continued, only to have Republican members of Congress applaud wildly.

Why would anyone applaud the fact that terrorism remains a threat?

Simple. In this see-all-terrorist-evil, hear-no-one-but-Bush, speak-only-when-you-agree-with-Daddy-Dearest mania, there’s no need to think for yourself. Just follow the leader. Trust the president. Forget the Constitution that has served our country well for more than two centuries.

Such is the sad state of our American disunion in the name of fighting terrorism.

Bush had much to gloat about in his speech. We plucked Saddam from his mother of all holes. Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi has vowed to give up any nuclear-weapons ambitions and wants to buddy up to Daddy Dearest.

The stock market’s humming. (Although the number of unemployed remains high, and the tally of lost jobs remains at more than 2 million and, by some estimates, 3 million since Bush took office.)

Congress passed a prescription-drug plan for the elderly, though it’s debatable if it’s not really more of a Pharmaceuticals Relief Act. And, like any good father, Bush promises to leave no child behind in public school.

In case that’s not enough for you, Bush stood up for the sanctity of marriage between husband and wife and threatened judges to stop meddling — or else. Else being a constitutional amendment, which would open a can of unwieldy religious worms in a country based on individual freedom from government imposing religious edicts.

Every president tries to secure his base in the State of the Union, particularly during an election year. Bush left no doubt he means to lead his conservative Christian soldiers. The gay marriage issue certainly isn’t a battle worth fighting this year. Not if the Democrats want to win over much of middle America.

But mammoth tax cuts that continue to eat away at the federal budget, turning the surplus Bush inherited from Bill Clinton into a whopper of a deficit that will cost our children plenty to pay off the debt — well, that’s worth fighting over. The Democratic presidential wannabes would be wise to focus on the ever-growing budget deficit and how that affects Americans’ pocketbooks.

As for the Patriot Act and the recently passed Patriot Act II, Democrats aren’t the only ones worried about Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft’s excesses. Many conservative Republicans want checks and balances, too. Should people’s bank accounts, phone records, library books, Internet accounts and all the rest be open to government scrutiny simply because an investigator has a hunch? No judicial oversight. Nothing. That’s the core issue.

The question is: Can we fight terrorism, gather evidence against terrorists, track their Web chatter, seize their bank accounts and nab them, and still follow constitutional checks and balances? Certainly. Bush and Congress could tap a cadre of judges for such investigations, so as not to delay decisions that need to be made quickly.

One small step for constitutional muster, one giant step to protect our democracy from turning into a police state. Because there always will be terrorists. Always have been.

But when congressional intelligence, judiciary and other oversight committees face obstacles getting basic information from the Justice Department to determine if the Patriot Act is not being abused, that only leads to more public distrust of that misguided law. Ashcroft has resisted giving information even on the number of times searches have taken place without judicial review.

Trust the president?

Not when nagging questions persist about the reasons America went to war in Iraq. Not when so-called evidence Bush offered in last year’s State of the Union proved untrue about weapons of mass destruction. Not when there’s still the unsettled business of 9- 11 terrorist Osama (remember him?) being at large. Not when the president lets his special-interest timber and oil pals draft energy and environmental policies.

Daddy Dearest is asking a lot.

Myriam Marquez is a columnist for the Orlando Sentinel. Her e-mail address is mmarquez@orlandosentinel.com.