I'm not opposed to everything in the Patriot Act. For example, with technology as it is today with cell phones and Blackberry pagers, a properly obtained wiretap warrant should apply to the suspect, not a specific phone number. The caveat in that sentence is "properly obtained." The issue with the Patriot Act is that the definition of who is a suspected terrorist is far too broad. (If you haven't, read about my search by the Chicago Police.) The ability to detain a suspected terrorists without charges, subjecting them to secret military tribunals, and withholding evidence for national security reasons thereby denying any possibility of a fair trial -- that's 1984 shit.

These are extrodinary times, however, and if you aren't a terrorist, a little search by the cops, a peek at your library records, and a few days in jail without charges are nothing more than a minor inconvience. In fact, the Patriot Act even has a "sunset" clause that retires the expanded law enforcement actions at the end of 2005.

Of course, 1984 was almost 20 years ago, and we have a lot of catching up to do. Therefore, Republicans are now kicking around the possibility of making the Patriot Act permanent. And let's not forget Patriot Act II (the sequel is always worse than the original).

How's a little police state going to hurt you if you're a law abiding citizen? Well, what if you disagree with the President, the Secretary of Defense, or Fox News? Let's say you know somebody who knows somebody who purchased pot. The government says buying pot supports terrorism (which, by the way, is horsepuckey -- pot is grown domestically or smuggled from Mexico or Canada; terrorist groups deal in cocaine and heroin). The more broadly we allow the government to define "suspected terrorist," the chance of you being harassed for knowing somebody who knows somebody increase dramatically.

Write your congresspersons and tell them to oppose making the Patriot Act permanent and to oppose any further attacks on the Bill of Rights.