Amendment Nine:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Just because the Constitution doesn't explicitly say "Citizens of the United States have a right to privacy" does not mean that the right to privacy doesn't exist.

Thank you for listening.

Ummm, the argument you are advancing would generally be construed as a "strict constructionist" argument. I thought you should know.

In other words, the philosophy is self-contradictory.

Thankfully, if those rights continue to be alienated, eventually the American people will do something about it, or, in the worst case, we shall simply have "... to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Careful, you'll end up on Homeland Security's watchlist.

It's a shame that it's a possibility when one holds some truths to be self evident.

You can take some solace in the idea that Jefferson probably had his name on some Royal roll of "people We don't like".

No, it means you have mis-identified the meaning of "strict constructionism". Work on that, mmmkay?

So-called strict constructionists complain about court decisions that grant, for instance, a right to privacy because it's not in the constitution.
Bork, for instance, argued that the right to privacy “does not have any rooting in the Constitution” and “comes out of nowhere.”
Clarence Thomas: "...just like Justice Stewart, I can find neither in the Bill of Rights nor any part of the Constitution a general right of privacy, or as the Court terms it today, the liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions."
Stewart: "I could find no general right of privacy in the Bill of Rights, in any other part of the Constitution, or in any case ever before decided by this Court." (1965)

I would contend that anybody can be labeled as a "strict constructionist" and then say anything. These quotes are opinions, likely taken out of context.

There is also a qualitative difference between an implied right (such as privacy) and an enumerated right (such as freedom of the Press) in the context of legal opinion. This may be the genesis of these quotes, but I don't know, since the context is missing.