Just one quick example? OK, I have a pace maker and cannot go through the metal detectors at the airport. Are we really safer after I am rudely "patted down" in the glass booth in front of everyone.

I lived on the dangerous border of Canada. The need for a passport to cross that border (after a good search of our random vehicle) to get to the Casino must make sense to someone.

My cell phone conversations can be monitored without a court order, emails can be viewed, all communication is subject to examination under the guise of anti-terrorism activity.

I have never been considered a conservative, but on this topic we agree about limits to government interference in our lives. Someone will have to explain to me how this law, that so erodes my personal right to privacy with "big brother" type government scrutiny, makes us safer, and is not ripe for abuse down the line?

OK, sorry that was more than one quick example.