Ooh... It's the big bad new PATRIOT Act 2.0. Everybody, let's celebrate this new release and forget about all our other problems. Wasn't version 1.0 all enough fun.

Okay, so now the government is going to watch us all a bunch more carefully. It's a rather boring job to watch some smuck like me all of the time. And that's not to mention how boring it will be to watch some construction worker do his job..

So do you think that the government is coming after you and I? I sure as hell hope so. I want my paranoia to turn out to the be truth. The government loves to chase radicals and try to put them in the place. And like usual, the government plays very well into their games (like that evil late bastard by the name of Jerry Rubin).

No Kids, Doesn't Stink to Me

Neither PATRIOT Act seems all that super odious to me. I mean, hasn't the government always had these powers, even when they aren't paper. Maybe we are setting precedence or some bullshit like that, but I doubt it.

We aren't a nation of laws and order, despite what some people try to lie to the masses about (how socialist?). Instead we are a nation governed mostly by popular opinion, no matter how remote that may seem from the current public opinion.

I doubt any US Senators will ever be procecuted in by any Patriot Act statue. While many Senators may be terrorists, there certainly not the kind the act intended. Don't forget that courts often consider the intent of an law—not just the exact statue.

And let's not forget the bad public opinion that would create. There would be a line ten miles long of people, wanting to change the law. You upset too many people, then we end up with riots in the streets—and turblence on Capitol Hill. Remember, no faction has enough power to run our country on their own—even the President can't control the armed forces against his own government and people.

But Why Do It We Need It?

If the EPA had written the PATRIOT Act it would have:

1. More Regulations and Buecracy
2. Be Based on a Cost-Benifit Analysis

Yeah, the second is particularly interesting here. Nobody has tried to apply any kind of utilitarian prinicipal to terrorism. Utilitiarianism would seem super-hard with terrorism—how do calculate the cost of human life or to the economy.

I've always viewed human life as something that's kind of disposable, unlike that stuff that humans create. True, there is no such thing as a clone of a human, and everybody is unique. At a deeper level it would seem the humans are pretty much biodegrable and won't be polluting the earth for the next 20, 100, or 1,000 years like some our inventions will. People come and go, and times change. I don't see many people around from 100 or 150 years ago.

Isn't freedom more important then life? I guess you need life to be free. At least that is what some people claim. O the same grounds, you need life to have slavery.

At any rate, does it make a lot of sense to go crazy about saving a few peoples lives? Blame the safety lobby, that is so loved by conservatives and liberals. Libertarians want to throw us to the sharks. They believe that even inexpensive safe guards are too expensive.

Terrorism in America Could Mean the Living Death of Freedom?!

That's always the risk we run if we oppose all terrorism measures. Let see, to stop the terrorism, that seems to hypotetically hits every day, some pretty drastic measures might be taken.

Look at Isreal. Isreal is truly a terrible place (I'm not bashing the Jews), if only because it's a land of drastic measures and terrorism going on every day. Peace is a joke in a land like that and so are civil liberties.

I guess that's the risk we all run.