General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: We can applaud media's greater NSA scrutiny AND think that Snowden's resume/timing/motives [View all]stupidicus
(2,570 posts)and continuing it like the common strawman factory laying claim to "logic" use.
I made no case that I "fully trusted" Snowden's motives, I made the case that they are largely irrelevant to anyone not a dedicated BHO cheerleader, who coincidentally, are guilty of the same offense you fallaciously or erroneously, but certainly illogically, charged me with here.
The same case could be made with your "believe BHO has 100% control..." BS, which is something else I never even implied.
If all that is what you call "logic and reasoning", I'd say your thought processes have been poisoned by too much irrational BHO-love seasoning.
The simple fact of the matter is that whatever "control" BHO may or may not have had or yet has for that matter, served as no bar to him proposing whatever remedial measures he's proposed since the revelations, even if they effectively change nothing https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.zdnet.com/obamas-proposed-nsa-reform-changes-nothing-7000025329/&sa=U&ei=87YfU-ncBKbmyQGrhIGYDQ&ved=0CBsQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNE7xvtRs1pUy3k3EAVeXpuQf2sPPQ now does it?
And from Snowden's and the common "BHO-haters" pov, if he lacks sufficient control then who are we to blame that on -- anybody besides the guy that never actively sought it as one who was so opposed to this and that on that front before getting the job? WHat's next Mr "Logic", there's no diff between trying and succeeding? And isn't that lack of control, if it exists, also a problem he should be correcting. Bush didn't seem to have any problems dictating illegal wiretaps, so why aren't they listening to BHO?
Why he hadn't tried prior to -- even to give such an effort some lip service -- the Snowden revelations http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/12/16/131216fa_fact_lizza?currentPage=all is the question, and will remain the only important one until he does propose and pursue meaningful changes.
But you stay focused on your shiny little Snowden bauble, no? I'm sure the history books will share your interest in and focus on ferreting out the many ways Snowden lied or undermined his own credibility due to the speculation as to his motives such spawned.
"Naive"? That's pretty funny coming from such an illogic master. I'm almost 60 and have been living politics since before graduating from college. You should go back and retake a logic class, or find some of the integrity you're so avidly arguing Snowden lacks.