Political Pundits Mind-Fucked by NSA Leak Story

I find this amusing and refreshing. You have pubs agreeing with Obama, dems agreeing with Bush conservatives, and when anybody comes on a political talk show, the host doesn’t know what the fuck their opinion will be on the issue and they look scared.

Well…but…good stuff.

Right wing immoderates taking a pro-privacy stance. (Roe v. Wade?) It certainly is a card game in a hurricane: the cards are everywhere!

I noticed that both CNN and Fox News have had the same headline yesterday: “Hero or Traitor?” I also don’t know where they come down on the issue (or if they do at all).

You can see the same thing happening in the recent SCOTUS DNA case. Scalia and the liberals were on the same side (dissenting). In the GD thread, bleeding-heart me and Hamlet are arguing that it’s not a big deal while conservative posters wring their hands. Maybe stuff like this will force people to think about the issues rather than wait and see what the people who support their sacred cows are doing.

This seems like a more reasonable thread, so I’ll voice my opinion here.

It’s a big deal, but it’s being overblown. I was wrong in the past about Obama decrying it–I confused that with the drone thing. But he should.

The big deal is that probable cause is not being observed. Only a 51% chance of being a terrorist is necessary. That’s a problem.

What is not a problem is the general idea of the government keeping track of this stuff.

What is debatable is whether or not it should have been kept a secret. Yes, you don’t want the terrorists knowing and then encrypting everything. But, then again, if I’m an anti-USA terrorist, I’m going to assume that I am being watched. It won’t hurt and it might help.

It is definitely unfair that non-terrorists didn’t know about it, and the only logic for not letting them know is to prevent the terrorists from knowing, which, as I mentioned above, is debatable if it was worth anything.

I’m reserving judgment. There’s all kinds of hinky-looking stuff going on with Snowden and Greenwald and that makes me a bit wary of taking a side at the moment. Charles Johnson over at Little Green Footballs has been really good on the Snowden-skepticism since this all broke.

If there is a 51% chance that someone is actually a TERRORIST, that absolutely is probable cause, is it not? Do you know how few people that can be said of?

The standard for probable cause must, logically, be vastly lower than the standard for indictment, which in turn is far short of the standard for conviction.

They’re not investigating people if they have a 51% chance of being a terrorist. They’re investigating people who, according to an algorithm, have a 51% chance of being foreign.

I noticed how Glenn Beck and Michael Moore ended up taking the same position. Can anyone think of another situation where there were two sides to an issue and they ended up on the same one?

I think my head just exploded. :smiley:

This started with a lot of stupid outrage over something everybody knew was going on, or should have known. In the end it’s some asshole who thinks he’s a whistleblower by telling everybody the the government has secret spy programs, that don’t turn out to be a secret at all. Then the media focused on the program itself, which according to all the known information isn’t some gigantic invasion of privacy. The whole problem here isn’t what we know is being done, it’s how it was done, and how we don’t know what else is being done, and how we’ll stop this system from being misused.

So of course talking heads and politicians from all stripes are going to agree with each other. They all fucked up the same way, too many of them were there at the time and voted for the Patriot Act, and they have no idea how to extricate themselves and the country from the mess they created. And it didn’t even start then, this has been business as usual going back decades.

And with that “revelation” that the NSA hacks China’s networks, ISN’T THAT WHAT WE PAY THEM TO DO? Big fucking surprise. Not even Henry Stimson stuck with, “Gentlemen do not read each others mail,” when things started getting real.

Go ahead and defect, dickhead. Let’s see how cozy Hong Kong is when you start squealing about China.

  1. At what point did anyone not 99% know the government was monitoring all communications?

  2. As more than one political cartoonist has noted, the government collection of big data on citizens pales in comparison to private industry doing the same. At least the government is somewhere, sort of accountable to us, and doing it for almost defensible reasons. Acxiom et al. answer to absolutely no one, and are doing it to mind-fuck people into buying shit.

Fly to Hong Kong. Release classified documents showing that the NSA hacked Chinese networks. I mean, if you don’t want to be viewed as a traitor, there were plenty of other options. I can’t help but think that Snowden is a blithering idiot.

Hannity, of course, has come down squarely on the side opposite the one he came down strongly on when a different guy was in the White House. I guess his views have “evolved”.

It’s starting to look like Greenwald may have stepped in the smelly at this point, too. Especially if that enigmatic hint that he was working with Snowden on this before Snowden even started working for BAH means what it looks like.

:dubious: And what else are the sacred cows there for, but to save us the trouble?!

Hookers and blow?

Hey, the good news is, at least we’ve finally got some bipartisanship in the house right now. :smiley:

No they aren’t.