My commentary (see link here) about how the government is slowly eroding our right to privacy under the guise of protecting us from terrorism - and the boiling frog story that went with it - generally hit a supportive nerve with people.

Then there were those like Greg Kerber: "In my opinion, the only people that whine about civil rights are people that have something to hide. You're obviously one of them."

Scott Garr thinks I am, indeed, paranoid. He writes: "In a world where maniacs will stop at nothing to kill Americans, the cost of being safe may be that we lose some aspects of privacy...would you rather be dead?"

Steve Cover says I may not be paranoid, but I am a partisan hypocrite: "You look the other way...when liberals...eat away our freedoms...If this (was) the Clinton administration, all we'd be hearing from you is how much safer we will be now."

And from Ken Wildin: "Government continues to bring up ways to make us safer...all for people like you who say 'I will not give up any of my freedom'."

I guess I just don't get the concept of defending freedom by surrendering it.

I read every single e-mail I get, and answer as many as a can.

Thanks to everyone who takes the time to write.

Want to share your thoughts with Ken Schram? You can e-mail him at kenschram@komo4news.com