Irony of ironies: The Ron Paul Libertarian's one way out is the "land of Chavez and Bolivar"

[Godhumor]

Can't imagine this is how Snowden thought everything would play out.

[truebluegreen]

1. Not "one" way...

Nicaragua has offered asylum too.

US throwing its weight around didn't go over well.

[pnwmom]

105. So you think the Libertarian would prefer to end up in Nicaragua?

[Scurrilous]

2. Cheap, readily available narcotics...

That aspect of the Libertarian wet-dream played out well.

[99Forever]

3. It really chaps your ass, doesn't it?

The high school drop out with too many boxes in his garage, is getting the best of the Royal Emperor and his best minions.

[geek tragedy]

8. "Royal emperor?" This place has become Infowars.

A good chunk of this website sees themselves as at war with Obama.

[99Forever]

10. When he joins the People and fights for US...

... i'll fight like hell for him, as long as he's continues to be a wholly owned tool of the 1%...

... all bets are off.

Deal with it.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

12. DU has turned into equivalent of GOP site

Bashing Obama and latching onto every little thing to attack.

Pretty sad.

[geek tragedy]

16. The childish simplicity of hating Obama

draws them in from all political tribes.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

27. So Obama has pissed off everyone on the entire political spectrum, including his base.

That's what you just said.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

35. Moderates tend to do that. They're never extreme enough on any point

for the true believers of any issue or ideology.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

36. Keep up the snark. Check back with me after mid-terms

[Pretzel_Warrior]

39. Ok. I will. Too bad Obama lost in 2012 due to bad economy

Oh wait. He steam rolled Romney. The GOP are acting like mean, woman-hating, Minority-hating children, so I like Dems' chances.

[CakeGrrl]

70. Well, I was told that those wouldn't be a problem due to mindless Obama-voting persons

So I guess those (are you among that number?) who want to 'teach him a lesson' will have to step up and make sure we have another oh-so-productive divided Congress to get as little accomplished as possible.

[geek tragedy]

38. No, I said the fringe weirdos on both sides hate him. nt

[graham4anything]

101. Someone mentioned a term 80-20. I am starting to think indeed that is true. nt.

[galileoreloaded]

31. from the expert of childish simplicity! bravo sir!

[Bonobo]

25. True. But not in the way you mean.

People such as you now shamelessly defend actions you would have opposed if done by Bush.

Apply the consistency test and it is quite clear who has changed.

[99Forever]

44. Unfortunately, not gonna happen.

Cognitive dissonance has become an equal political team sport.


Nothing, I repeat nothing in my principles has changed, yet those that used to claim me as an ally, think I don't see through their COMPLETELY partisan horseshit. They are wrong, very wrong. No politician get s a pass when they are being rotten scum, regardless of what "letter" they claim to play for.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

54. I have no problem with people demanding answers from their government

but the looking for conspiracies regarding Obama actions, name calling of Obama and his administration, and the whole nest of ridiculously counter productive posts against Obama aren't normal debate about the issues. It is mean spirited and often propped up by lies.

I remember what this place was like under Bush. I now there is a sizable percentage of people on DU who live to throw stones regardless of the party--nothing will ever be good enough. Got it.

How is your anger and animosity expressed on this board toward Obama doing anything to change things toward the utopia you seek?

[CakeGrrl]

56. +1000

The convergence is a shame.

The contrast when you step outside the bubble is more and more glaring.

[Scootaloo]

57. Now, don't forget the other half...

There's nit just "Obama attackers" running around making DU suck...

There's also the collection of Obama do-no-wrongers, a collection of imperialists and authoritarians, saw at least one poster who thinks we should start a war with Venezuela over Snowden (maybe they didn't realize a naval blockade is an act of war?) and so on and so forth.

Put on the scales? I'd say the people going apoplectic over Snowden show more "right-wing" traits than the people who throw jabs at obama over it.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

59. false equivalence. despite all the "freedom fighters" on here

what Snowden did is considered by most legal experts to be against the law and a lot of our allies and enemy governments feel the very same way. If one of their citizens outed national security secrets, they would wish they were dealing with the U.S. instead of their own government.

Obama, despite all the smearing from the GOP and the people who are so far to the left they've become right wingers, has not broken federal laws. (Please provide concrete proof if you believe he has).

One is a Joe Blow security contractor. The other is our duly elected president who I would venture to guess most people on here supported over his GOP rival.

So.....no. I disagree with your premise.

[Scootaloo]

69. You don't even seem to understand my premise

I'm not talking about whether or not Snowden broke the law. Obviously he did. Of course, "the law" is not a sufficient ethical guideline, becuase there are no shortage of fucked-up laws in this country, to say nothing of the rest of the world. Whether or not Snowden's actions are ethical is not a question i feel like addressing, and i'll save it for someone who's more interested in the question than I am.

What i'm talking about is your statement that "DU has turned into equivalent of GOP site" - I was addressing your premise, which is based on the number of posts decrying Obama.

My point was that there are way more right-wing things getting posted than just bile towards Obama, things happening on what i guess would be your "side." The approach that Obama is flawless and blameless is really no less of a right-wing ideology than the notion that he is totally bad and corrupt; it's just a different flavor of right-wingery. Add on accusations of anti-Americanism, add on the ludicrous cries for vengeance against nations offering or considering sanctuary for this Snowden weenie, add on this weird total defense of domestic spying I've been seeing... And suddenly between the two "sides" the people pointing at Obama and blowing raspberries are the lesser of the two problems.

[geek tragedy]

13. "Wholly owned tool of the 1%."

Childishly simplistic and reductive rhetoric, not the product of a someone who is serious.

[99Forever]

18. I can always tell when I strike a nerve...

... the immediate dismissive tone speaks volumes. Frank, buddy, I don't give a shit what you think of me. Now, run along and go find someone who does, cuz' it sure ain't me.

[geek tragedy]

19. That dismissive tone you get is because

you're deserving of being dismissed as a crank.

Last word is yours.

[arely staircase]

42. sloganeering does seem to have replaced discussion, even spirited argument

nt

[Kurovski]

46. Reducing intellectual views to "hate" and "love" rather than basing it on content and action...

that is what is the very model of what a child does.

It is disturbing to find individuals continually attributing nearly all criticism and questioning of president Obama to love or hate.


that reductive parody of reasoning is how we used to spot right-wingers in the Bush era.

A child is expected to do it until both maturity and intellectual development is gained. It's disgusting and vile when an adult does it. it is transparent and shameful. Manipulative and cheap.

Blibbity.

[geek tragedy]

67. People who proclaim Obama 100% evil and a servant

and property of the global plutocrat class are engaging in hero/villain passion plays rather than policy critiques.

Such people are incapable of rational discussion, having taken the same stance re the Obama administration as Orly Taitz--that Obama is a grand fraud foisted on the people by dark forces, that his agenda is solely dedicated towards advancing the evil agenda of those dark forces, etc.

They are the left's version of Teabaggers, with the only difference being no one in power feels compelled to even pretend to care about their nutty rants.

[Kurovski]

75. "100% evil", "villian"...those are your words.

In this thread I saw Obama referred to as an "emperor" which is what Bush was called when he sat in the White House with the same undemocratic policies that are still in place now.

You do what you do, and you are not alone. I'm at DU infrequently but it's always the same "Love-hate" squad "putting words in peoples mouths" and telling folks what their emotions are instead of sticking to the topic.

It's a tactic...and we know it. And the more it is engaged in, the more people figure it out.

[geek tragedy]

76. "Wholly owned tool of the 1%" is a verbatim quote.

If one believes that, then Obama is capable only of evil. It's childish, it's insane, it's hate posing as policy critique.

And, Obama is a democratically elected President, not an 'emperor' who attained his position by usurpation or inheritance. The 'emperor/king' references are part of the efforts to deny his legitimacy.

Much of this site temperamentally is no different than the Teahadists. The US government is their enemy, and Obama is the head of the US government.

This is the crowd that views the US government as strictly a force of imperialism and injustice on the world stage.

[Marr]

95. That's not true at all.

The 1% aren't *evil*, they just aren't *us*. Their agenda is very different than that of the average citizen, as is Obama's. He seems to side with them on just about everything.

[geek tragedy]

96. Only if you aren't paying attention.

Obama could have let Mitt Romney win if he really was serving the interests of the wealthy above all others.

[Marr]

97. I'm going to assume you're being intentionally obtuse. /nt

[geek tragedy]

98. No, obtuse is pretending that Obama takes the side of the 1% against the rest of humanity

all the time.

If Obama supports them against us 100% of the time, it logically follows that Mitt Romney would have been a better choice since he had a much different agenda.

The notion that Obama is 100% behind the wealthy and against the middle class is childish nonsense.

[Marr]

99. What's childish is rephrasing everything in this binary, good/evil way like you keep doing.

Obama has been consistently behind the 1%. That is not always the same as being actively against the middle class. It's a description of his apparent priorities.

As to his throwing the election to Romney... I'm sorry, but that's just too silly to even address.

[geek tragedy]

100. Blah blah blah Obama serves the 1% blah blah blah.

Empty, childish sloganeering.

Sorry you weren't paying attention to the national tax debate from 2011-2012--the one where Obama and the Democrats pushed for higher taxes on the wealthy.

You are dismissed.

[Marr]

102. LOL, you mean the one where all he had to do was *nothing* in order to win?

That tax debate?

You are aware that taxes on the rich would've gone up automatically had he not made a 'deal' for far less, correct? The Bush Tax Cuts were weighted ridiculously in favor of the wealthy, so compromising to maintain its pittance of a tax cut for the middle class was the thinnest of fig leaves. I'm sure you know that.

Or maybe you don't, and you're not just acting obtuse.

[geek tragedy]

107. You're familiar with what a large increase in taxes on

the middle class and working poor would have done to the economy?

If your answer is 'very little' then you ought to consider remedial coursework.

[Marr]

109. Yes, that was the fig leaf of an excuse I just referred to.

The truth is that Obama could've had steep tax increases on the wealthy along with modest tax increases on everyone else by doing exactly nothing, then introduced the same middle class tax cuts, or even bigger ones, and dared the "lower our taxes" GOP to oppose that in an election year. If his priority was raising taxes on the wealthy without doing the same to the middle class, he would've done so. Those were not his priorities.

It's bizarre that you chose to make your argument with one of the issues that most sharply highlighted Obama's tendency to side with the 1%.

[arely staircase]

79. "DU has been infiltrated by bloodthirsty totalitarian fascists."

so far that is tonight's winner.

[geek tragedy]

80. That's funny. Some people need to feel like

victims. Pathological.

Is someone compiling these?

[arely staircase]

82. I hope so. I thought about it but ironically I would need the NSAs giant data bases

and supercomputers to keep up with them.

[geek tragedy]

83. Snork. nt

[dionysus]

40. like any of us give a good god damn what bets are "on" or "off" for you...

the keyboard revolutionary doth protest too much...

[MNBrewer]

55. Have you not seen the hagiographic posts about how BEAUTIFUL Michelle Obama is!

Or how LOVELY the First Family is. or how poised the daughters are? Or how "chill" the President is?

[geek tragedy]

62. That stuff has no appeal for me.

But, a mild dose of vapidity is vastly preferable to the toxic mix of hatred and derangement at the other end.

[KittyWampus]

65. WTF? It's hagiographic to comment on Michelle Obama's graceful beauty and fashion choices?

Did you just learn that new word today and HAD to use it somewheres to prove how smart you are?

Because Michelle Obama is a graceful and beautiful woman setting a powerful example for young women especially.

In a world where young black girls too often pick white dolls, having a beautiful black first lady who is intelligent and caring is an incredibly positive thing.

[geek tragedy]

68. They bitterly whine about nice things said

about Michelle and the daughters.

Speaks volumes.

[Godhumor]

9. No, not really

He seems perfect for Venezuela.

[99Forever]

11. Uh huh, sure...

... and I really believe you.

[Godhumor]

14. What do you think his life would be like in Venezuela?

I think there is an even chance he turns down the asylum offer.

[99Forever]

20. I don't care...

... what "his life would be like in Venezuela." I don't care all that much about Snowden.


I care about the FUCKING GOVERNMENT SPYING ON HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS GOING ABOUT THEIR LAWFUL PURSUITS IN THEIR DAILY LIVES.

When you want to talk the REAL issue, get back to me, 'cuz so far, you just proved yourself another tool of the 1%.

[Godhumor]

21. So Snowden's life isn't important to you? What empathy for the man whose cause you support

Maybe he would make a better martyr, right?

[99Forever]

22. Lame.

Pathetic, really.

Run along, there must be some boots to be licked, somewhere.

[Godhumor]

23. You've already admitted the person who is at the center of this isn't important to you

Sounds like ideals before people, to me. Be honest, you ever think maybe the revolution wouldbe more widespread if Snowden was taken out or secreted away?

He put his life and freedom on the line to reveal all this, right? Would hope that meant something to those most outraged by what he has shown.

[99Forever]

24. Give it up.

I'm not interested in your lameass stinkbait. Even a little.

[Godhumor]

30. Well good luck fighting the fight, as Snowden represents only a means to an end n/t

[dionysus]

41. he's a hero, a sweet bebe jesus... but simultaneously... not important.

see how that works?

[Godhumor]

45. Dionysus! How nice to see you again! Ideals before people is always troubling

Any time the messenger is not as important as the message, you've lost sight of what is most important. Why you can't separate Snowden from the leak, and why people who don't care about Snowden's fate but are outraged all the same, worry me most of all.

[a la izquierda]

4. Bolivar was not progressive in a governing sense.

He was a dictator. A liberator, yes, but a dictator.
Chavez is another matter.

[HumansAndResources]

49. The origin of 'socialist dictators' is a circle leading back to Western opposition.

Chavez was able to out-maneuver the full-weight of Millions of dollars of "soft power" money (USA-NED, US-AID, NGOs, etc), which was used to create an 'opposition' to his policies in the service of the tiny Venezuelan Elite and Western Transnationals AND a hard-power coup attempt. In Bolivia, a foreign-funded secession movement, promising greater riches to groups in resource-rich areas by not sharing the wealth with the rest of the nation, is one ongoing tactic in play. Keep in mind, the Billionaires fund the so-called "left" foundations, think-tanks, and NGOs, too; just because the criticism seems 'leftist' in flavor, doesn't mean it tells the whole story.

I do not suggest we should fail to criticize any hindrances of civil-liberties and/or deprivations of human-rights anywhere in the world, though analysis of Morales actions should include the full context. Consider the Allende example to get an idea of the scope of the opposition to self-rule in South America:
[link:http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/NSA/CIA_Allende_LS.html|
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/NSA/CIA_Allende_LS.html]

[a la izquierda]

93. I have a PhD in Latin American history.

Allende in Chile and Arbenz in Guatemala are two examples of extreme imperialist overreach that make my syllabus every semester.

But, as a specialist in Mexico, and with limited time to discuss modern issues, I tend to stay away from Venezuela in the last day or so of class. Mexico's problems (drug trade, corruption, etc) are more pertinent to the lives of my students.

Thanks for the link.

[Th1onein]

5. Have you ever heard of someone who supports civil liberties?

Those used to be liberals. Like us, you know? It is one of the things, the very few things, that the current "Libertarians" have in common with us liberals.

[Godhumor]

7. Snowden is an admitted Libertarian in the Ron Paul sense

And Venezuela, I imagine, is not high on his dream places to live.

[Th1onein]

84. You know, everything is NOT black and white.

I'm sure Snowden is more into the civil liberty thing, instead of the "libertarian" thing. I mean, after all, he gave up his whole way of living for those civil liberties. Ya think?

[geek tragedy]

6. Proof that Paulbots can be turned into socialists.

Snowden better hope Maduro never loses an election.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

15. Since it is a de facto dictatorship, I doubt that will be an issue.

[geek tragedy]

17. Venezuela is a flawed democracy.

Eventually Maduro will lose an election,

At which point Snowden will be on the move again.

[The Link]

26. Hurts, huh?

[Godhumor]

33. It truly doesn't. If he accepts asylum and if he makes it there, he becomes marginalized

He becomes a puppet to be trotted out to talk about the big bad US for as long as it produces an international reaction. When that no longer happens his usefulness to the regime ends and he will fade into obscurity...in a country that is an anathema to his professed beliefs.

[Number23]

34. Nicely said.

[CakeGrrl]

60. Exactly. The irony is completely lost in rooting him on to Venezuela.

But some are so eager for him to elude the Evil Obama Empire, they're not thinking that far ahead.

[joshcryer]

28. Yeah, which itself has a rather remarkable surveillance state.

[baldguy]

29. For Ron Paul Libertarians, honesty, virtue & integrity are .... flexible.

Which is why they can never be trusted with even the most basic things.

[think]

32. Snowden should be more like the NSA, The Carlyle Group, Blackwater......

[baldguy]

37. What makes you think he isn't?

After all that IS why libertarians like Snowden love them, isn't it?

Tell me: has Snowden at any point expressed concern over the privatization of our intelligence apparatus? Has he ever been critical of Booz Allen, the Carlyle Group, or any of the other private corporations he has been employed by?

[think]

43. I guess he could support the crooks he just helped expose & embarrass

but that would seem pretty stupid don't ya think?

[baldguy]

48. He supports Ron Paul - which means he DOES support the crooks.

And if you support Ed Snowden, you support them as well.

[think]

51. So now I'm suppose to call you a supporter of the Bush Cabal behind The Carlyle Group?

is that how we are playing?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

63. Don't worry about BaldMcCarthy

He's attacking you from his limbic system, which kind of brings its own punishments. It also helps to explain why his accusations come out so thuggishly, so dark, so McCarthyesque. When all you have is fit or flight, and you're not well-equipped to deal with it, some ugly stuff can come out of the corner you've backed yourself into. He's actually attempting a two-step: a dehumanization of teabaggers (so that they can be hated more effectively), and a simultaneous bid to make you or anyone else who doesn't toe the line fall under a cloud of 'bagger suspicion. Don't misunderstand--teabaggers are some of the basest people around, but the dehumanization of any group is wrong-headed.

[think]

78. Thanks. I should know better.... /nt

[baldguy]

71. "How we're playing" is when you unequivcally support a liar & a hypocrite like Snowden

I point out the ugly destinations where that support takes you that you don't seem to realize.

[think]

72. Yawn..

[baldguy]

87. And you don't seem to care about those ugly destinations, either.

[think]

88. I care about the NSA & private contractor violations of the law not ulgy destinations

you are correct...

[baldguy]

90. Then why has Snowden not shown any concern about the privatization of our intelligence apparatus?

None at all.

In fact, those are the types of jobs he sought out. He's not criticisning private contracters either. All his criticism has been focused on the NSA & the Obama Admin - and his sycophants have followed exactly in the direction he's pointed them. No critical thinking involved.

Now, imagine if your wildest dreams come true, no matter how unlikely: The PATRIOT Act is rescinded, FISA is struck down as unconstitutional, the NSA, the CIA and the FBI are all disbanded. Do you really think, that after spending multiple billions of dollars to set up this surveillance infrastructure, that private corporations like Booz Allen et al is going to just give it all up?

Really?

[think]

91. Don't be silly. I support these 22 Dem Senators & their demands from the NSA:

Bipartisan Group of 26 Senators Seek Answers from DNI Clapper on Bulk Data Collection Program

Friday, June 28, 2013

Washington, D.C. – The recent public disclosures of secret government surveillance programs have exposed how secret interpretations of the USA PATRIOT Act have allowed for the bulk collection of massive amounts of data on the communications of ordinary Americans with no connection to wrong-doing. Reliance on secret law to conduct domestic surveillance activities raises serious civil liberty concerns and all but removes the public from an informed national security and civil liberty debate.

In order to foster that debate, 26 senators sent a letter organized by U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asking Director of National Intelligence Clapper to publicly provide information about the duration and scope of the program and provide examples of its effectiveness in providing unique intelligence, if such examples exist.

“We are concerned that by depending on secret interpretations of the PATRIOT Act that differed from an intuitive reading of the statute, this program essentially relied for years on a secret body of law,” the senators wrote in the letter. This and misleading statements by Intelligence officials have “prevented our constituents from evaluating the decisions that their government was making, and will unfortunately undermine trust in government more broadly. The debate that the President has now welcomed is an important first step toward restoring that trust.”

The senators expressed their concern that the program itself has a significant impact on the privacy of law-abiding Americans and that the PATRIOT Act could be used for the bulk collection of records beyond phone metadata. The PATRIOT Act’s “business records” authority can be used to give the government access to private financial, medical, consumer and firearm sales records, among others. In addition to raising concerns about the law’s scope, the senators noted that keeping the official interpretation of the law secret and the instances of misleading public statements from executive branch officials prevented the American people from having an informed public debate about national security and domestic surveillance.

The senators are seeking public answers to the following questions in order to give the American people the information they need to conduct an informed public debate.

How long has the NSA used PATRIOT Act authorities to engage in bulk collection of Americans’ records? Was this collection underway when the law was reauthorized in 2006?

Has the NSA used USA PATRIOT Act authorities to conduct bulk collection of any other types of records pertaining to Americans, beyond phone records?

Has the NSA collected or made any plans to collect Americans’ cell-site location data in bulk?

Have there been any violations of the court orders permitting this bulk collection, or of the rules governing access to these records? If so, please describe these violations.

Please identify any specific examples of instances in which intelligence gained by reviewing phone records obtained through Section 215 bulk collection proved useful in thwarting a particular terrorist plot.

Please provide specific examples of instances in which useful intelligence was gained by reviewing phone records that could not have been obtained without the bulk collection authority, if such examples exist.

Please describe the employment status of all persons with conceivable access to this data, including IT professionals, and detail whether they are federal employees, civilian or military, or contractors.

The Senators signing the letter are: Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Dean Heller (R- Nev.),Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah).


http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/bipartisan-group-of-26-senators-seek-answers-from-dni-clapper-on-bulk-data-collection-program

[baldguy]

92. Why not try to show some critical thinking skills - and not just some cut&paste?

I'm not talking about the NSA, I'm talking about the corporatist private contractors who own our intel infrastructure.

Why hasn't Snowden shown any concern about the privatization of our intelligence apparatus? Why?

I bet you can't come up with a reasonable explanation without throwing Snowden under the bus.

[SunSeeker]

103. The privatization of our intel infrastructure is the real scandal here.

But as you point out, Snowden never expressed any concern about it.

[HumansAndResources]

47. No. Because Libertarians do believe in Civil Liberties ...

.. they just don't believe in a "human right to exist on Earth" without paying a private-master via paycheck-permission - unless you win the 'game' and become one of the masters, of course. In principle and platform, they even reject Cronyism (corporate welfare), though their focus seems curiously narrowed to attacking 'socialism' most of the time. Perhaps it is the Koch Brothers' money talking?

In any case, it is a mistake to conflate their half-truth economic policies, which I am fairly certain all of us here reject with emphasis, and their good civil-libertarian positions - such as ending the "War On Some Drugz" - which has given the USA the highest prison population (per capita and total) in the history of the world.

[baldguy]

50. If you're a left-leaning, 4th Amendment loving, anti-corporate, anti-establishment libertarian

then people who support Ron Paul are not your friends.

[HumansAndResources]

94. The 4th Amendment ??

Last I checked, Ron Paul spoke positively of Snowden, and opposed the Patriot Act when he was a Congressman. Ron Paul is not a part-time civil-libertarian (i.e. only when his party isn't in power), and has a voting-record to prove it.
It is his economic conclusions / policies which are the problem.

My screen-name is about the root of that problem - shared to a large extent by the left and the right - where "humans" are treated as "resources" to be "traded in a market" (right wing) or "managed like a herd by bureaucrats" (left-wing) - instead of "people" with a sovereign right to live without "serving" the wishes of a billionaire's-board or government-committee.

I am perceived as "left-leaning" because I recognize that Socialist-Sweden is a hell of a lot better than Capitalist-Indonesia (which drives the AnCaps and Libertarians up the wall) - though I would prefer actual "freedom" to either.

[alcibiades_mystery]

52. Part and parcel of the Left's incoherence these days

People want social programs but hate government.

Fucking idiots, the lot of them.

[CakeGrrl]

58. Snowden hates Social Security, but he is 'Revered' here.

The dissonance is...well...

[alcibiades_mystery]

64. I want huge, 1950's style social program...I want

Oooops: that means huge government. You know what? I like big government. Libertarian (read; ruthless capitalist shitheads) have managed to convince some portion of the left that government is BAAAAAAAD. Yes, the dumb left. I'm perfectly happy to entertain anarchism. If you can give me a version where my daughter doesn't get raped or have her abortion rights abrogated, I'll be 100% behind you. But don't dress up shitty capitalist libertarianism as anarchism. That's just the worst of both worlds.

[ForeignandDomestic]

66. ....

The dissonance is strongest for the people on the same side with Dick Cheney on this issue!

[CakeGrrl]

73. I'll raise you an Al Franken.

Who's on which side of the issue is not relevant here, because you're going to find a mix on either "side".

There is no dissonance; there is an apparent inability for some to conceive that people can hold multiple thoughts at once.

For Snowden supporters, there is this strange belief that if one wants to see him called to account for his crimes, one must ALSO support the "Surveillance State" (TM Greenwald). They are NOT related concepts.

One can say there needs to be discussion about the level of domestic surveillance and believe that Snowden should go to jail.

He didn't blow the lid off. He got his exploits in the news, but decided to up the ante and share stolen information with foreign nations. You pay to play if you're gonna "play" like that.

[think]

85. You mean the Al Franken who is 1 of 22 Dem Senators signing a letter demanding

answers on bulk data collection?

Bipartisan Group of 26 Senators Seek Answers from DNI Clapper on Bulk Data Collection Program

Friday, June 28, 2013

Washington, D.C. – The recent public disclosures of secret government surveillance programs have exposed how secret interpretations of the USA PATRIOT Act have allowed for the bulk collection of massive amounts of data on the communications of ordinary Americans with no connection to wrong-doing. Reliance on secret law to conduct domestic surveillance activities raises serious civil liberty concerns and all but removes the public from an informed national security and civil liberty debate.

In order to foster that debate, 26 senators sent a letter organized by U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asking Director of National Intelligence Clapper to publicly provide information about the duration and scope of the program and provide examples of its effectiveness in providing unique intelligence, if such examples exist.

“We are concerned that by depending on secret interpretations of the PATRIOT Act that differed from an intuitive reading of the statute, this program essentially relied for years on a secret body of law,” the senators wrote in the letter. This and misleading statements by Intelligence officials have “prevented our constituents from evaluating the decisions that their government was making, and will unfortunately undermine trust in government more broadly. The debate that the President has now welcomed is an important first step toward restoring that trust.”

The senators expressed their concern that the program itself has a significant impact on the privacy of law-abiding Americans and that the PATRIOT Act could be used for the bulk collection of records beyond phone metadata. The PATRIOT Act’s “business records” authority can be used to give the government access to private financial, medical, consumer and firearm sales records, among others. In addition to raising concerns about the law’s scope, the senators noted that keeping the official interpretation of the law secret and the instances of misleading public statements from executive branch officials prevented the American people from having an informed public debate about national security and domestic surveillance.

The senators are seeking public answers to the following questions in order to give the American people the information they need to conduct an informed public debate.

How long has the NSA used PATRIOT Act authorities to engage in bulk collection of Americans’ records? Was this collection underway when the law was reauthorized in 2006?

Has the NSA used USA PATRIOT Act authorities to conduct bulk collection of any other types of records pertaining to Americans, beyond phone records?

Has the NSA collected or made any plans to collect Americans’ cell-site location data in bulk?

Have there been any violations of the court orders permitting this bulk collection, or of the rules governing access to these records? If so, please describe these violations.

Please identify any specific examples of instances in which intelligence gained by reviewing phone records obtained through Section 215 bulk collection proved useful in thwarting a particular terrorist plot.

Please provide specific examples of instances in which useful intelligence was gained by reviewing phone records that could not have been obtained without the bulk collection authority, if such examples exist.

Please describe the employment status of all persons with conceivable access to this data, including IT professionals, and detail whether they are federal employees, civilian or military, or contractors.

The Senators signing the letter are: Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Dean Heller (R- Nev.),Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah).


http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/bipartisan-group-of-26-senators-seek-answers-from-dni-clapper-on-bulk-data-collection-program

[ForeignandDomestic]

61. Nothing incoherent at all...

We just want an open and transparent government that functions as a tool of the people not a tool for corrupt corporate oligarchs.

[geek tragedy]

86. Yeah, they don't seem to realize that hysteria

about an all-powerful big government state will help the party of small, ineffective government.

The Republicans have their theme for 2014-"we need to roll back the abuse of power by Barack Obama's big government approach to governing"--and Boehner's useful idiots on the left will help spread it.

Democrats are going to get whipped in 2014, and the result will be smaller government and more suffering for the poor.

At which point the self-important braying jackasses on the left will . . . complain about Obama.

[Nay]

106. To be fair, though, Democrats can generally consider several points at once without

cognitive burnout; we can protest NSA overreach without simultaneously wanting 'smaller government.' The fact that most of the un- and under-educated citizens can't parse even the simplest arguments and discussion points is hardly the Democrats' fault.

It IS our fault that we haven't built up our own propaganda arm with a full complement of noisy think tanks, Fox-news-type TV and radio, advocacy newspapers, etc., in the last 30 years. That's how we're getting killed. The Pubs have taken over the daily atmosphere in which everyone lives -- that's why so many people repeat RW talking points without ever really knowing where those talking points come from.

If Democrats get whipped in 2014, it will be because simplemindedness prevails, not because Democrats want the NSA jerked up by its shorts.

[Marr]

104. Yes, I know-- liberals are clamoring for more domestic spying.

Give me a break. You know very well that liberals aren't pushing to cut food inspections or education or Social Security or anything else that any sane person would call good government. The fact that you're conflating such things with (I assume) drone attacks and domestic spying speaks volumes.

"Fucking idiot", indeed.

[MNBrewer]

53. It just shows that leftists and Libertarians CAN work together toward worthy goals

[baldguy]

89. And who do you think will get screwed in that exchange, huh?

If the leftists think they're made now for having their unrealistic expectations ignored under Obama, they should wait until the enemy of their enemy gets to be in charge.

[Cha]

77. Has to go someplace.. Iceland voted against his sneaky

ass.

[Rex]

81. I said this guy was not very bright from the beginning.

[Egalitarian Thug]

108. Not the mutual admiration club and circle jerk you were hoping for?

What you guys aren't getting is that nobody but you cares about Snowden (or Greenwald, or Paul, or any of the other commentators). You didn't get it during the Wall Street bailouts or the Health Insurance Industry Profit Protection Act fiasco, either. Each additional step they take to the right loses more and more support.

[Godhumor]

110. With what DU has been like lately, do you honestly think I expected a circle jerk with this thread?

There are very clearly separate sides on this in DU.

[animato]

111. k and r