Its the data, stupid. Crap, political corruption, privacy and microchips The Bush administration and its cronies took a jackhammer to privacy rights with legislation like the Patriot Act. That's the good news. What the hell's it got to do with your dog? Does the Patriot Act extend to our pets? Are the Dems gonna save us? (Not freaking likely. ) Quick! What unites the USDA, the Humane Society of the U. S. and ex Bush cabinet Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson ? Answer: a plan to force you to microchip your dog and database your household information

Shamelessly peddling compulsory plans as a way to return lost pets to their owners, but not hesitating to shaft the millions of ordinary, law-abiding citizens whose private information would be captured and distributed through comprehensive microchip-based databases, diverse organizations are lining up on compulsory RFID microchipping for dogs and other pets. Through its support of Rick Santorum's PAWS bill many felt that even the American Kennel Club aligned itself with animal rights organizations, and the USDA's NAIS plan, and against the privacy interests of animal owners.

The push is definitely on to get pesky dog owners on board with requirements for mandatory use of radio-frequency identification microchips for dogs and other domestic animals. Privacy concerns?

Funny. No one seems to be hearing them.

Are they in it for the money, honey?

Let's get down to it. Microchips are a BIG potential market. HUGE. Just for dogs in this country--

Sales of microchips at $35/insertion on the estimated 65 million dogs in America? $2,275,000,000

"Aftermarket" sales (which would be the mandatory database registration fees) at $13.75 each? $893,750,000

Database of the household information on the 45% or so of U. S. homes that include a dog? Now, that's priceless.

But its not the windfall profits that's got me crazy. Nope. Its the people who keep saying. . .

"I've got nothing to hide."

Oh, yeah?

Wake up! That's a fox in the hen house! With mandatory microchipping of dogs and cats in place, the household information of about 63% of the U. S. population would be funneled into a huge database of people who have committed no crimes. People not accused of any crimes. We're talking about people who simply own pets. The database would hold the details on an estimated at 69.1 million U. S. homes. My home would be there. Probably your's would, too. Individuals and organizations with access to that database could run reports on who owns a big dog. Which households have "too many" cats. Where dogs and cats with their reproductive parts intact are located. Addresses. Phone numbers. Names. Shit, the NAIS regulations would require that your home's global positioning coordinates go into the database.

Still think databases are no big deal?

Imagine your insurance company with its hands on that database. In fact, take a moment to download and view this video. Go ahead. Do it. And as you listen to the guy struggling to get his pizza delivered, imagine that he owns a (duly microchipped, as required by law) "pit bull". Or Rottweiler. Or husky. Or mastiff. Or Great Dane. Or Chow. Or German Shepherd. Doberman. Akita. St. Bernard. Bull Terrier. Miniature Bull Terrier. Cane Corso. Malamute. Catahoula. . . .

Here come the Democrats!

Meet New York State Assemblyman and Democrat Jose Peralta, of Queens.

One dark and stormy night earlier this year, Assemblyman Peralta submitted a bill proposing mandatory microchipping and the creation of a database of all dogs over the age of four months in the State of New York. Four other Democrats promptly signed on to it.

What information would go into Assemblyman Peralta's database? Who would have access?

"An amendment that requires dog owners to implant a microchip that includes owner`s contact information and dog`s medical history. A registry of dogs shall be created at the time of dog licensing. This registry will be made available to veterinarians, shelters and kennels for the purposes of identification."

In other words, just about anyone with a little ambition could gain access to your household information, your dog licensing data, and your dog's veterinary records.

Think it could never happen in the U. S. of A.? Think again. Mandatory microchipping is already a reality in El Paso, Texas--where, by the way, both the city and the county vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

New Zealand's regulations just kicked in. Hong Kong already requires microchipping. So does Portugal. The list goes on.

Roe v Wade, Griswold, privacy and your ever-loving dog

Where does our right to privacy come from? Roe v Wade.

A woman's right to choose, protected by Roe v Wade, is the keystone. The decision is all about privacy. In fact, the Roe decision relied heavily on the earlier Supreme Court Griswold decision asserting the "right to marital privacy". Chip, chip, chip away at privacy--no matter what the rhetoric put out by the Tommy Thompsons, American Kennel Clubs, and HSUS's of the world--and guess what?

The tail you swallow will be your own. So-called progressive thinkers who mistakenly believe that they "have nothing to hide" and choose to support agendas sponsored by outfits like the Humane Society of the United States are going to find themselves in bed with some distinctly un-liberal people. Do ya still think threats to privacy, like mandatory microchipping for your dog, are no big deal? I sure hope not.