Which is less defensible: BBV or TIA in the guise of a "no fly" list?

[stickdog]

I'm really not sure here.

The problems with BBV are more complicated for the average non-programmer to understand. However, the black and white nature of the issue (BBV = bad; voter verified paper trail = good) should be clear to any interested party with more than a few dozen firing brain cells by now.

Meanwhile, the CAPPS II program gives the goverment enormous new powers to invade the privacy of innocent citizens while helping terrorists to successfully hijack passenger flights. Furthermore, the ostensible threat that CAPPS II is supposed to protect us against -- a US citizen successfully hijacking a US domestic flight -- simply does not exist. The whole program is an utterly transparent and counterproductive excuse to implement Poindexter's scary Total Information Awareness Big Brother nightmare.

The common thread between these two horrid examples of anti-public policy is that they depend on the nearly univeral ignorance, dumbfounding stupidity and widespread apathy of our general citizenry to succeed. In addition, both are backed by many supposedly "good" Democrats -- leading us to the inevitable conclusion that these Democrats are either utterly clueless (at the level of Homer Simpson, Gilligan and/or Chrissy from Three's Company) or else they are in on the scams and simply praying that we won't notice.

[stickdog]

1. Not even one observation? (NT)