You know, I didn't think Snowden was some kind of hero. Until today.

[burnodo]

Now with Obama scrambling to make his lie on Leno's show seem all the more palatable, I'm thinking Snowden (and Glenn Greenwald, thankyouverymuch) are heroes. They forced a public discussion about the anti-Constitutional practices of the NSA and the government. Now that Obama is trying to clean up, it's clear that 1) the American government IS extra-Constitutionally spying on its own citizens, and 2) the "already widely known actions" were NOT known prior to Snowden. That, of course, is why he's been so vociferously attacked by the Dem establishment types. They wanted to discredit him in order to protect the sanctimony of the State.

[Smarmie Doofus]

1. It's generally the way things work. Kick and Rec.

>>That, of course, is why he's been so vociferously attacked by the Dem establishment types. They wanted to discredit him in order to protect the sanctimony of the State.>>>

[burnodo]

5. ummm...on his jock?

what does that mean? who's jock?

[Bluenorthwest]

15. It's the standard homophobia flavored personal insult from the folks who seek to make reasoned

discussion impossible on DU.

[MNBrewer]

52. But it's only the Snowden/Greenwald supporters who resort to name calling and smears

According to some wannabe "Inside the Beltway Pundits". The people who support the President have clean hands.

[Fringe]

99. That is not a homophobic insult.

It's just a figure of speech meaning, a person is critical of another from the start.

[Scootaloo]

126. Opposite, actually

To ride one's jock is to be a brown-noser, a suck-up, to be ingratiating. It's in the same vein as "sucking his cock."

It doesn't mean "be constantly critical of;" That is "riding his ass."

These terms have some top / bottom coding going on, which is where the homophobia thing creeps in

[Fringe]

144. No it does not mean that either.

The way the person used it means ...let me give an example below without using that word.

"You have been against him from the start! You are critical of any and all decisions he makes , just waiting for any opportunity to be critical."

It's a way of saying a person has been judgmentally unfair.

[morningfog]

67. I think it means you were

giving him head.

[HangOnKids]

73. Ahh shit the post got hidden

I guess we will have to speculate about this.

[Fumesucker]

16. "On his jock"?

[City Lights]

20. What a rude post.

[pa28]

21. "You people"?

As in the people who have suggested Snowden was telling the truth about an abusive surveillance system?

[AppleBottom]

168. Awhhh man you're paying attention, that comment was meant to deride the whole thread.

Bomb throwing is an excellent tactic to deride conversation.

[phleshdef]

23. LOL, you must've struck a nerve with the jock comment.

Now you are being accused of homophobia, apparently only straight people wear jock straps or something.

[burnodo]

25. And what does "on his jock" mean?

Please enlighten us oh sanguine phleshdef!

[phleshdef]

26. I highly doubt that needs to be explained to you, its a very common phrase.

[burnodo]

29. I asked the question

you averred

[sabrina 1]

31. I wouldn't mind an explanation, I've never heard that phrase before either.

[HereSince1628]

32. me either I googled it and the answer I got was equivalent to brown nosing

which is equivalent to sucking up, which in my time was equivalent to doing something to get something in return...'

I can't follow all the dots enough to know if getting something in return is even a possibility.

[phleshdef]

34. Yea it can mean brown nosing or it can also mean riding someone's case.

It just depends on the context.

[burnodo]

37. on his jock?

What the hell does a protective undergarment have to do with anything? Is it a salacious way to bring the discussion down to dirt level?

[phleshdef]

42. Its a pretty widely accepted figure of speech for such situations.

Just because you haven't heard it before doesn't mean its an odd thing to say in this conversational situation. It isn't.

[burnodo]

49. So what was Cali saying?

Who's jock?

[phleshdef]

55. Read the OP subject title for context.

OP: "I didn't think Snowden was a hero until today"
Cali Dem: "You've been on his jock since day one"

This isn't difficult stuff.

[burnodo]

59. So, you're not able to answer the question

Check

[phleshdef]

62. You would only say I didn't answer it if you are either illiterate or dishonest.

Which is it?

[burnodo]

63. I am asking you. And you don't seem to want to answer

why is that?

[phleshdef]

76. I did answer and you know I did, you just don't want to get off my jock about it.

[burnodo]

78. Cali-Democrats post was already hidden

do you want yours to be?

Childishness is not a positive attribute for Obama supporters.

And, by the by, WHO's JOCK?!

[phleshdef]

82. I don't care. The jury system can kiss my ass.

I don't participate in it and when it results in a post of mine being hidden, it doesn't make me want to change the things I said. Its a roll of the dice as to whether or not you get people with an agenda who decide that.

Anyone that hides a post for that phrase is pretty much a prudish moron.

[burnodo]

87. so....no answer

[Fringe]

102. I voted to leave it alone.

This whole inquisition about an expression that is quite common and should not have been hidden is a Big bag of silliness.

I'm over 50 and that expression goes all the way back to the 80s, I'm amazed that there are people who have never heard of that expression.

Maybe, I'm hipper than I thought.

[Number23]

118. Thank you.

[Fringe]

145. You are welcome!

[Turborama]

96. Jury results

an alert was sent on the following post:

I did answer and you know I did, you just don't want to get off my jock about it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3437916

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

same post above was hidden

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Aug 10, 2013, 11:16 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This was a tough call...the whole exchange here should have been pulled. I think reply #78 should be hidden though.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: alert abuse.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: Homophobic and insulting
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: These two both need to sit in timeout. Together. And hold hands.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Yes, hidden wrongly. Cali sadly had her post hidden because the jury obvious don't know that this phrase comes from a kids cartoon. But a juror in this one does because I bothered to Google it...

Aqua Teen Hunger Force: Get Off My Jock!

Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Lol, funny, but not disruptive.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

I was juror #5

[burnodo]

100. HAHA! FUnny stuff!

[DirkGently]

65. Dishonest? The phrase implies someone obsequiously clinging to another's crotch.

But you don't want to talk about that, do you? Because it illustrates that the poster was deploying the lowest species of weak, vulgar, juvenile insult.

It's about on the level of, and a parallel to, "sucking his d*ck" is what it is. Which is probably why the message has been hidden by a jury.

It's the kind of thing foul-mouthed children say on the playground.

Good job defending it though. Talking around the childish obscenity part was a great angle.

[phleshdef]

77. "aaaaaaaaaawwwww, they said sumthin' diiiiirrrtyyyy, awwwwwww"

[DirkGently]

80. Dirty as a product of an inability to argue with adults, yes.

Kind of like your attempts to defend it by talking in circles.

[phleshdef]

84. Everyone in this discussion is talking in circles at this point.

Stop pretending like you are contributing anything to a productive discussion here either. You aren't.

[burnodo]

88. does "everyone" include you?

WHO's JOCK?

[phleshdef]

89. Yep.

[burnodo]

90. still no answer

[phleshdef]

91. THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!

Deal with it.

[burnodo]

92. HAHA! A Trek reference.

Very cute but still no answer.

[DirkGently]

93. Dismantling your attempt at obfuscation was just fun. And easy!

And it got the the very worthwhile OP bumped.

More effective than making or defending childish insults, I'd say.

[phleshdef]

94. You didn't dismantle anything.

You just pulled the "dirty language" card and proclaimed victory. I've seen conservative Christians make a better case than that. Geez.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

69. NO!

Not "Cali".

Not even "Cali_Dem".

"Cali_Democrat," whose post was hidden, is an entirely different poster.

[burnodo]

70. capital C

I know the difference

[AnotherMcIntosh]

75. Capital C or lower-case c, as said before in "A shout out to DU's Cali"

"A real treasure to us all here. Thanks so much for your efforts to bring sense to the table."

And supported by 171 Recs.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023192213

A big difference, but not based upon a capital C versus a lower-case c.

[burnodo]

79. We're sub Cali_Democrat's subthread

I wasn't referring to cali

[AnotherMcIntosh]

105. At post #49, you expressly referred to "Cali" and not Cali_Democrat.

As you are aware, or at least now aware, some have referred to "cali" as both "cali" and/or "Cali".

You are apparently taking positions which are unjustified.

No one (except apparently you) has ever taken the position that the only way that cali is referred to is "cali".

No one (except apparently you) has ever taken the position that Cali_Democrat is referred to as both Cali_Democrat and "Cali".

A disreputable post which has been hidden by a jury should not be wrongfully attributed or allowed to be interpreted as being attributed to a well-respected DUer who did not make it.

[burnodo]

106. Please calm down

I'm sorry you interpreted "Cali" as "cali" As I said earlier, I knew the difference. I'm sure most people who read the post knew the difference as well.

[sabrina 1]

39. Thanks. It makes even less sense now in the context in which it was used

here. I doubt he/she was accusing the other commenter of 'brown nosing' the President. Anyhow, thanks for the explanation

[phleshdef]

45. It doesn't just mean brown nosing.

It can also mean riding someone's case. It depends on the context.

[sabrina 1]

57. Okay, that would make more sense.

[rhett o rick]

175. Not to me. Poster #2 was trying to deride the OP and claimed that the

OP was always supporting Snowden instead of just deciding he was a hero. Riding his jock means to "brownnose" and not "riding his case". At least that's the context I read.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=riding+his+jock

[burnodo]

81. IT DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT?

SO WHY CANT YOU ANSWER MY QUESTION?!?!

[rhett o rick]

146. That doesnt make sense to me. Brown nosing and riding one's case are

diametrically opposite.

[Sheepshank]

151. again...context

same with the words, sick, naughty, fat, nuts, insane, etc etc. sheesh. Suddenly a narrow POV to make a useless point?

[rhett o rick]

162. Fair enough. So what do you think he meant? nm

[Gravitycollapse]

120. They're saying you're riding his dick, to put it bluntly.

And, yes, that was very insulting and I'm glad it was hidden.

[Cali_Democrat]

40. LOL. No kidding. Now they're pretending to have never heard the term before....

Trying to call me homophobic.

Utterly laughable.

You just can't take these people seriously.

[City Lights]

41. There you go again...

"these people"

So rude.

[Cali_Democrat]

43. You people are so strange. n//t

[City Lights]

44. Thanks! nt

[Cali_Democrat]

47. NP. n/t

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

114. Why do you often resort to personal attacks and name calling?

It only serves as a bad reflection to yourself, and disrespects DU as well.

I strongly recommend that you think more carefully about what you're going to post, before posting.

[Gravitycollapse]

121. ...

[truedelphi]

123. thanks for the attempt to lighten the discussion.

Some humor here is often needed.

[Hissyspit]

46. Actually, there's lots of people who can't be taken too seriously.

[phleshdef]

50. Next time you should say "humping his leg".

That's the image I get in my head when I read a lot of these posts anyway...

[burnodo]

53. Who's jock?

I notice you didn't answer my question

[Fringe]

95. I think it's completely ridiculous that your post was hidden.

It appears to have been hidden because of your position and not the actual post...just a way of shutting down another point of view.


Shame, shame, shame!

[rhett o rick]

158. You could clear this all up if you just tell us what you meant. But

I am guessing you cant.

[rhett o rick]

148. I think his obsession with disparaging Snowden and everyone else that doesnt kowtow

to the President is what's striking a nerve.

Every day we have new revaluations that Booz-Allen and the NSA are violating our Constitution and even the FISA Laws. Those that are in DU for the sole purpose of defending the President are getting more and more desperate.

The President said he was against the Patriot Act six years ago. He also said he was for a more transparent government. He said the NSA isnt spying on us. Now you may not want to call these "lies" but you should be able to see that they were deceptive rhetoric.

The argument that there is no problem other than Snowden, Greenwald, and The Guardian is beneath "politically liberal" posters in DU.

[dballance]

28. You're a rude jerk. I don't know why you're still here.

"on his jock" and "you people." You are adding nothing to intelligent discussion here.

If you think so little of the people here and what they post why don't you go away?

[City Lights]

48. He/she is extremely divisive.

And bitter.

[Cali_Democrat]

51. Well well well

Now look who's being rude

[dballance]

60. Truth hurts - doesn't it?

I'm sure you'll get over it and post something snarky and rude soon.

[City Lights]

68. I call 'em as I see 'em.

[rhett o rick]

160. It appears to me that your reaction is the goal. Not at all interested in

decent discussion of issues. I recommend using the ignore feature.

[mike_c]

56. "you people?"

Divisive much? Although now that you mention it, I suppose I'd rather be one of "my people" than yours. Welcome to ignore.

[quinnox]

3. I have been saying he is a hero from day one, and will go down as a modern day Paul Revere

Welcome to the party! (I give full credit to Du-er "usgovtowesustrillions" for coming up with the Paul Revere thing, I unashamedly stole the concept from him!)

[ProSense]

4. Hero Snowden forces Obama to have a "weird" press conference

where he gives a pretty speech and announces nothing.

Snowden, my kind of hero...one who flees to Russia.

[burnodo]

6. better than suffering the torture that Manning suffered

[mindwalker_i]

12. Yeah, the little fucker should have taken his waterboarding like a man!

Or solitary confinement. Or whatever. Instead he ran away like a little baby.

[Little Star]

153. Bingo!.....

I do consider his whistle blowing to be heroic. I don't blame him one single bit for avoiding the Bradley manning treatment either!
Wish I could k&r your reply.

[caseymoz]

24. Ever hear the expression: Any port in a storm?

Apparently not. Heroes can't have self-preservation in your mind. I guess everyone has to have their standards.

If you're talking about going to prison as part of his protest, that really means nothing in our for-profit system. Actually, that's just another production unit for them. They'd say, "Bring it on." It turns civil disobedience on its head. I believe sitting out in one of those things is aiding the enemy. Russia is smart as an alternative.

And you seem to have heard a different speech than everyone else did, no surprise.

[Little Star]

154. .

[TomClash]

27. Actually he went to Hong Kong and then Russia

And why would he stay here merely to be jailed, tortured or worse by Big Brother?

Heroism is not in the location, but in the disclosure.

[sabrina 1]

38. Interesting, the failed strategy of attacking Russia has only made the US

seem as if it has something to hide to the rest of the world.

When a whistle blower comes forward, in a civilized society, the intelligent thing to do first is set the legal process in motion, which includes providing all the protections necessary of his/her rights. Next, investigations into the allegations made should start immediately.

This is not what has been happening to Whistle Blowers in this country. They have been persecuted, incarcerated, had their lives and careers ruined at best, tortured and isolated at worst.

Smear campaigns have been launched against them. Not ONCE have the crimes they have revealed been addressed over the past decade.

Silly, childish name-calling has been the only defense of government defenders, throughout the entire ten years since this dark period in our history began.

What does that tell us? Any intelligent person wonders, 'why are they not addressing the issues, why are they lashing out at the messengers'? Clearly we have a whole lot of intelligent people in this country because that is exactly what is happening.

And finally, the President realizes that none of it is working.

This is far to serious an issue for the American people, and for the rest of the world, to make it go away by calling Greenwald a 'Paulbot', most of the world never heard of Paul, nor do the care, or attacking Snowden for having boxes in his gargage, or calling people racists for asking that something be done about all this etc etc.

What the reaction we have seen is telling people is this, it must be WAY, WAY worse than we thought it was.

The downright insulting of people who CARE ABOUT THEIR COUNTRY has been an outrage, and serves only to make them more determined to fight for the rights that are being stolen from them by their own government.

I was used to this from the Far Right in the Bush years, but to see coming from Democrats is simply sickening.

[snappyturtle]

103. +1000! nt

[GoneFishin]

117. +1000

[Agony]

130. double thumbs up for the clear eyed world view

thanks for taking the time to articulate your thoughts

Cheers,
Agony

[Enthusiast]

134. Nice post with some excellent points.

"Interesting, the failed strategy of attacking Russia has only made the US seem as if it has something to hide to the rest of the world."

"And finally, the President realizes that none of it is working."

"I was used to this from the Far Right in the Bush years, but to see coming from Democrats is simply sickening."

I share your sentiments.

[Little Star]

157. .

[riderinthestorm]

159. +++++1000000 nt

[LittleGirl]

164. *applauds*

thank you.

[laundry_queen]

184. Great post. Spot on. nt

[burnodo]

191. +1

And Thank You!

[99Forever]

7. "Wag the dawg" is an authoritarian...

... specialty and Obama is using Weasel Words to try and put out the fire he and his lit when he didn't come straight IMMEDIATELY upon the revelations Mr Snowden, a true American Patriot, becoming public. Instead, he doubled down on insulting our intelligence and grasp of reality. We SEE you.

[randome]

9. Good God, you sound like you have anger issues.

Obama started this process rolling back in May, before the world knew of Snowden.

The only thing Snowden succeeded in doing was isolating himself so he no longer has to face those he felt he didn't measure up to. He will remain as he always was -a friendless outcast.

We will never hear from your 'hero' again.Just my armchair analysis but I am convinced this is what he wanted.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[millennialmax]

11. I wonder if he's ever screamed in someone's ear so loud they became partially deaf?

In a jaw-dropping postscript in Philip Norman's new biography, "John Lennon: The Life," out next month, Sean Lennon tells how his father flew off the handle and screamed into his ear as a young boy.

"[He was] teaching me how to cut and eat steak, which was a mystery to me at age 4; how to stick the fork in and cut behind it, and that was how you got a piece in your mouth," writes Sean, 32, whose mom is Yoko Ono. "I think it was that night when he got very upset with me, I think because of something I did very cheekily with the steak. He did wind up yelling at me very, very loudly to the point where he damaged my ear, and I had to go to the hospital."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/21/sean-lennon-opens-up-abou_n_128028.html

[randome]

13. What would a role model be without flaws?

But yeah, the 'Snowden is Paul Revere' meme is going to get louder the more people realize he simply never felt like he belonged.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[JimDandy]

104. So you've talked to Snowden and he said

&quot I) simply never felt like (I) belonged"? Fascinating. Do tell us more about your conversation with him.

Or fall back on some intellectual honesty and preface your statement with "I think he simply...".

[randome]

132. Obviously it's just my opinion.

But he doesn't mention friends, family or fiance since he ran. That, to me, speaks of someone who felt he never measured up to those around him.

The one friend we heard about was a CIA agent who said she didn't know him very well. That tells us something.

There are people who have done the same before. Walked away from what appeared to be benign, even successful, family relationships, but on the inside felt like failures. Disappeared to be found years later living in Florida or somewhere.

And no, people who feel that way never express themselves so succinctly or directly. They keep it bottled up inside until some part of them reacts.

I think Snowden fits that pattern. Something has been 'off' with him since the start. And I truly do think we will never hear from him again.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[rhett o rick]

161. It seems your mission here is to discredit Snowden. Why is that? Do you think

that if Snowden is punished severely it will make Pres Obama look better? Or maybe it will scare others that dare think to speak truth to power.

[randome]

171. No 'mission' at all. I'm calling it as I see it. Nothing more than that.

I offer my opinion to the world at large. You can use it as a data point or discard it as you will.

I am not, by any means, omniscient. But I had the same kind of alarm bells ringing when I predicted that the woman who claimed she had been set afire by KKK thugs had set fire to herself.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[rhett o rick]

174. Yes, and rationalization is the key to happiness. nm

[MelungeonWoman]

163. It's great that we all have opinions.

Bill Frist opined that Terri Schiavo suffered from cortical blindness.

[Aerows]

165. You can't beat armchair

psychology as the new tactic to smear a person.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

115. Too funny

[sabrina 1]

54. Did Obama tell Ron Wyden and the other Members of Congress who

had been expressing so much concern over what was going on, that 'he was rolling back this process' in May?? That might have helped Wyden et al not to feel so desperate to warn the American people?

And since when did you begin to admit that there WAS something to 'Roll Back'??? Airc, you have claimed all along that this is 'old news', that nothing of interest had been revealed, that 'we didn't know already'..

You can count me in on the 'anger issues' also. And nearly everyone I know, on all sides of the political spectrum, anger doesn't begin to describe it.

To even suggest that people in a democracy should NOT be angry over all this is simply shocking to me and any other Democrat I know ever since these abuses began with the Patriot Act and continued right up to now.

But then again, as you told us, you don't agree with the Constitution because of who wrote it. You need to check that info, btw, most of what is in the Constitution really IS old, going back centuries before they put it together for the new country they had established.

I support the US Constitution and all the history behind it and applaud those who put it in place, because it's clear that without it we would long ago have been living in a totalitarian state.

[Enthusiast]

136. PLUS ONE! nt

[Pholus]

137. This exactly! Thanks! nt

[randome]

141. 'Expressing oneself' is evidence of nothing.

What is your point here? That I should be upset that at least one member of Congress is doing his/her job? I'm not.

Wyden and Udall and everyone else are supposed to be finding things out and making proposals. That's why we elected them in the first place!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[sabrina 1]

155. ONE, member of Congress?? You really don't know what has been going on, do you??

And where did I say 'expressing himself' btw?? Wyden and others KNEW what they were up to, or at least part of it.

And yes, you are right about ONE thing, it IS the job of elected officials to 'be finding out' things and warning the people to the best of their ability that something has gone very wrong in this country. But it's hard to do when they are gagged, isn't it?

NOW thanks to Snowden, the cat is out of the bag and we know WHY those members were asking that they be allowed to reveal what they knew.

I would think ANY American, and especially any DEMOCRAT, would be happy to finally some light being shone on something that Democrats have been screaming about for over a decade. Most are thankfully, concerned MORE about this country than politics.

[randome]

172. "expressing so much concern".

I am glad light is being shed on the NSA. More transparency, less secrecy, we are all in agreement on that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Ed Suspicious]

196. Keep running with that "may" narrative.

Last edited Sat Aug 10, 2013, 09:21 PM - Edit history (2)

If you repeat it enough it will likely become true .

[Enthusiast]

135. Plus one!

Pay no attention to the distractors. Keep your eyes on the man behind the curtain.

[Luminous Animal]

8. Here is a great summary from the ACLU of what we've learned to date about the NSA...

not just from Greenwald, Snowden, and the Guardian but from other sources and news outlets, as well.

A Guide to What We Now Know About the NSA's Dragnet Searches of Your Communications

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/guide-what-we-now-know-about-nsas-dragnet-searches-your-communications

[Electric Monk]

36. Good link, thanks. More people should read it. nt

[klook]

66. Oh yes, the NSA spies on all of us,

all the time. I almost forgot that was the key point here, wading through all the diversionary posts on this thread. Thanks for the link.

[millennialmax]

10. Think of him as you like.

It doesn't change the fact that he'll never be able to return to this country, except in handcuffs.

And the longer he lives in Russia, the more the majority of people will grow to have an aversion toward him.

In 5 to 10 years, his memory will fade. In 15 to 20, he'll be nothing more than a Wikipedia page.

[burnodo]

14. Maybe we'll have government that abides the Constitution by then.

[DeSwiss]

18. Well, you've gotten it partially right......

...there will be handcuffs involved.

- But they won't be for Snowden.

[millennialmax]

19. And who will they be for? Enlighten me. eom

[Dustlawyer]

22. Probably but, what if he is waiting for the dust to settle and then turn himself in?

It would start the discussion over again and if history is any guide, not much would have changed in reality. The record will show that now a few FISA requests were denied! The issue is way bigger than the man. All of that info is too much, too valuable, and will either find its way into the wrong hands, or the government will start looking at it all.
There doesn't appear to be any other bombshells his leak caused except the one where our government lied to us about collecting info on practically everyone! Snowden had two competing issues; his oath to keep our secrets, and his oath to uphold the Constitution. I for one am glad he chose the latter!

[sabrina 1]

113. I wouldn't count on that. Countries have gone periods, such as the one

we are in the middle of right now, throughout history. But eventually sanity is often restored, those persecuted, whistle blowers eg, by the government, often become heroes for their role in helping to restore that sanity.

Funny, but during the Bush years, I got the impression we were all on the same page as far as these Bush policies were concerned, The Patriot Act eg, the Surveillance policies, all were viewed on the Left and by some more sane individuals, on the Right, as a huge threat to this democracy.

When Whistle Blowers, like Tice eg, emerged we on the Left did not view them as traitors, we viewed them as heroes and slammed the NYT for holding back the info he had.

I still feel the same way but a few people here seem to have learned to live with Bush's policies. Any idea why this has happened to them?

[truedelphi]

124. Very well said, and thank you Sabrina.

Wish I could answer your question.

[DeSwiss]

17. K&R

[Amonester]

30. Quite a hero you've got there.

One with zero courage (to face the 'music').

ZERO courage.

[burnodo]

33. yeah

you leak something and tell me where you're at

[Sheepshank]

152. your incessant need to push up your post #'s with the most idiotic responses, is pretty lame

Really? You are wanting to assume that the only reason others don't divulge state secrets to to China an Russia are because they fear imprisonment? Good god!

[sabrina 1]

156. Who has released secrets to the Chinese and Russia?? For fear of imprisonment?? THAT

would be headline news, I would think. Can you explain please??

[Sheepshank]

167. it would appear you are not following the thread correctly

i was responding to someone who thinks Snowden is a hero and others would be doing the same thing...the only thing holding them back from breaking the law is their fear of imprisonmnet. My assertion is that people don't want to give up state secrets for more patriotic purposes, and not because they are afraid of being punished.

[frylock]

177. what are you doing to effect change, typing comfortably from your home?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

35. Uh huh,...the ONLY reason this is being done is because they think they found their scandal.

[madamesilverspurs]

58. A real hero comments on Snowden:

“At the end of an interview about the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, I was asked what I thought about Mr. Snowden’s actions. I said he has a right as an individual to act according to the dictates of his conscience, but he must be prepared to pay the price for taking that action. In the movement, we were arrested, we went to jail, we were prepared to pay the price, even lose our lives if necessary. I cannot say and I did not say that what Mr. Snowden did is right. Others will be the judge of that.”

-- Congressman John Lewis
http://johnlewis.house.gov/press-release/rep-john-lewis-no-praise-snowden

[backscatter712]

61. Ah yes...

Snowden must immediately report to be supermaxed, stripped, suicide-watched, nasally force-fed, waterboarded, given "diesel therapy", dumped in the most violent shithole in the federal system to get worked over by the Booty Bandit, cut from all communication with family, friends, anyone, and he's obviously a coward for avoiding it.

[Amonester]

64. Yep. He's no Nelson Mandela like, that's for sure.

Get your hair on fire some cool air soon is my advice.

[backscatter712]

107. Ah, bringing up prison abuse means my "hair is on fire."

Yep. I'm sure flailing and wailing over something of no consequence.

Snowden sure deserves to be thrown in a torture dungeon, frog-marched in front of a kangaroo court, and given all the treatment waiting for him in the Land of the Free!

Obviously from your words, I can tell you're a big progressive activist! Boy, you sure know how to express empathy towards your fellow human beings. You must sure be a delight to be around.

[MannyGoldstein]

72. But Lewis performed his actions in a much different time

Back then, the federal government worked to prevent torture and ensure due process. Today, the federal government practices torture and claims it need not follow due process. Given such an awful environment, it would be folly for Snowden to come to the US and be Manninged, e.g.:

Snowden made the right call when he fled the U.S. by Daniel Ellsberg

"Many people compare Edward Snowden to me unfavorably for leaving the country and seeking asylum, rather than facing trial as I did. I don’t agree. The country I stayed in was a different America, a long time ago."

[snappyturtle]

109. +1 nt

[backscatter712]

110. Another +1.

Also, where did the meme come from that civil disobedience requires you to sit in jail afterwards.

It's something that the detractors and apologists would have us believe to be an inviolable norm. It isn't.

Letting yourself get arrested is a tactic, as civil disobedience itself is a tactic. And like all tactics, they work in certain situations, and they fail in others.

It's a matter of measuring benefits versus risks.

For John Lewis and others in the Civil Rights movement of the 60's, deliberately getting arrested was a working, useful tactic. The jails couldn't hold all the people getting arrested for marching or doing sit-ins. And the political climate was such that they couldn't keep people like Lewis or MLK Jr. in jail for very long or make criminal penalties very severe. And the whole cacophony that went with civil-disobedience/arrest/crowded-jails/jury-trails created earned-media publicity that helped the cause.

That tactic is also useful in Wisconsin - Scott Walker can only get away with so much abuse when it comes to protests at the Wisconsin State Capitol, so the rule there is catch-and-release, with a media circus around the entire conflict.

That's not the case for Snowden - the day he ends up in U.S. custody, he's in for life. The military-industrial complex is vengeful, and they'll be at least as brutal towards Snowden as they were towards Bradley Manning. Once he's in prison, there will be no media circus - the media will at best disparage him, but usually be silent about him.

Snowden's not stupid. If I were him, I'd flee the country too. Civil disobedience and direct action do not demand that you be suicidal.

[chimpymustgo]

133. Excellent post, backscatter. OP material.

[Number23]

119. I don't know whether to laugh or sob at your post

Back then, the federal government worked to prevent torture and ensure due process.

What does that have to do with John Lewis getting his ass whipped and put in jail for fighting for the rights of black people? What does anything you've written have to do with what John Lewis endured? And are you seriously saying that the government, state or federal, ensured the "due process" of black Americans during that time?

[LiberalAndProud]

180. It was a time when getting his ass whipped and thrown in jail

made a difference in the struggle. Today such events go unreported and unremarked. The silence that surrounds arrest and abuse is deafening. Had Snowden followed that path, he may have martyred himself for no good result. As a tactic, it simply doesn't work any more. Journalists stopped being our watchdogs long ago. Today they are little more than carnival barkers.

[Number23]

192. "Had Snowden followed that path, he may have martyred himself for no good result."

It astonishes me that there are people here who think that a) black people getting murdered, killed fighting for their rights was just "a sign of the times" and not at all indicative of how this country is and always has been towards people of color.

and that b) Snowden is somehow to precious/valuable/smart to have to do the same thing even though he's not fighting for any rights at all.

Not everyone was thrown in jail back then. But a hell of alot of people were willing to, because that's how strong their convictions were. The fact that Snowden doesn't think those rules apply to him is almost as telling as the folks that are willing to minimize and completely distort history in order to back him up. Unbelievable.

[LiberalAndProud]

195. I don't think it was just a sign of the times, and didn't say so.

I was speaking to the topics that are considered newsworthy in these times. It's the Kardashians and the teabaggers today. News has devolved to punditry and opinion pieces. It changes the landscape for civil protest, IMHO.

I really don't care about Snowden except that he made our surveillance state a topic of national conversation. Should he suffer as a result? That's his call, not mine.

[sabrina 1]

170. Snowden is paying the price for taking that action. What is your point?

I think Snowden when he made this decision, knew he could lose everything including his life, and still could.

With top elected officials calling you a traitor, charges filed against you, your government threatening anyone, see Russia eg, who gives you any kind of support, I think that is a price few of US would be willing to pay.

I know I woudn't have that kind of courage. I'm glad there are others who do though. Where would this country be without those willing, as Snowden has done, to risk everything in order to return this country to the Rule of Law? Not much was happening wrt to that until now.

[shawn703]

71. Not really

But the Snowdenites are free to have their beliefs, just like the people who believe in magical beings in the clouds that control their destiny are free to have their own beliefs. As long as their masturbatory fantasies don't cause me any problems and keeps them occupied, I'm good.

[burnodo]

74. ummm....ok

whatever you have to tell yourself....I guess?

[frylock]

178. masturbatory fantasies?

[Turbineguy]

85. he's almost as heroic

as a suicide bomber. He just lacks the courage to go the full monty.

[burnodo]

97. ohhhh!

What a jibe! You're clever.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

86. well the already widely known actions were well known

the only difference is that it wasn't on Primetime TV.

[burnodo]

98. well known...except for the reaction to the revelation

which would suggest otherwise

[AppleBottom]

101. +1000 dead on correct. nt.

[Fringe]

108. I usually avoid Swowden post like the plague..

Because I just don't give a damn about him. However, I voted on a jury and decided that this discussion could use some diversity.

My take? Swowden is a liar, and a coward. Swowden had a top secret clearance and when you have a clearance you of course agree to abide by certain rules and regulations.

There are people who struggle to get a clearance/ and be hired by the federal government, yet Swowden received one and dishonored his agreement.


How many more people now won't be able to get a job because of that liar? The whole thing to me seemed political rather than about principles.

[snappyturtle]

111. ..........

Did you ever think that if the gov't wasn't violating the Constitution that Snowden
could have remained at his job?
















;

[Fringe]

112. Isn't that like joining the military and

Then being upset because you have to kill people? He didn't have to take the job to begin with and he didn't have to lie and sneak about. He had a choice.

[muriel_volestrangler]

129. You're saying a good government employee will shut up and obey illegal orders?

In your world view, I can't see that any whistleblower could ever do anything.

[Fringe]

142. Im saying he knew the job when he took it.

A person has to go through a heck of an investigation to get a secret and even more to get a top secret and there is no way a person can interpret the agreement that they sign as an obey the rules only if I like them sort of thing.

It is cleanly evident for a person who goes through a background obtain a clearance that a top secret means that a person is not to share the secrets of the government.

A person who is confused about that should not be working for the government in the first place.

[truedelphi]

125. In your argument against Snowden, you conveniently leave out how our

Totalitarian-leaning government and its officials, and its hired contractors are conveniently dishonoring the agreement that they have made with us. They are supposed to be our public servants, and not spying on us, just so they can get kickbacks and employment through the revolving door between government and the MIC/Surveillance agencies.

[Fringe]

147. Seriously?

This is the same government that has been murdering people that don't look like them/ who are culturally different from them for years overseas/ since I was born in the sixties.

This government has been Involved in very unsavory things, the least of it is spying.



He should not have agreed to keep secrets in the first place.

[AverageJoe90]

122. I didn't think so either. And I still don't. Because he isn't.

Regardless of what may come out of this.....Snowden is still not a fucking hero. Never was. And in fact, there's been plenty of evidence suggesting that he was up to no good; his support for Ron Paul and his hypocrisy regarding how leakers oughta be treated is just the tip of the iceberg. And yet, some people on here can't seem to see through him. I thought we were supposed to be more informed than the average American?

[Number23]

127. "You know, I didn't think Snowden was some kind of hero. Until today." LOL!

Oh wait, you were serious? Well I guess "today" can have many definitions.

[Douglas Carpenter]

128. knr

[Enthusiast]

131. The sanctimony of the State

is a thing that should not exist.

[nradisic]

138. welcome to the club

I immediately recognized Snowden as a real, true American Patriot. Thanks to Glenn Greenwald for continuing to publish what our government is getting away with.

[NorthCarolina]

139. "Pity the country that needs heroes" ~ Bertolt Brecht nt

[burnodo]

190. I didn't need a hero

I did not think of Snowden as a hero before.

[Bradical79]

140. Id rather not label him

as a hero or villain. I originally thought of him as a traitor, but came around to "whistleblower" after the early round of arguments for and against showed up on this forum. His biggest critics had nothing but character assassination, wild speculation about his motives, and occasionally outright lies that were even refuted directly by the politicians they were trying to protect. Labeling him a hero in my opinion makes it all about his character and motivations again, rather than his and our government's actions. Snowden's character is ultimately irrelevant, it's the content of what he's exposed and how that fits with our constitutional rights that's important.

[questionseverything]

181. glad to see open minds like yours

it is not about snowden or even about the current admin..it is about WE THE PEOPLE AND OUR BILL OF RIGHTS

the collection of the "haystack" is the first unconstitutional thing,the blanket warrants are another,the secrecy and lies another

[Union Scribe]

143. Looks like some anti-Snowden heads exploded in here.

[cantbeserious]

149. Protect The Sanctimony Of the State = Protect The Oligarchs And Corporations And Duplicitous Politicians

eom

[great white snark]

166. Meh, vindictive criminal then vindictive criminal now.

And a coward to boot. Nothing heroic about that.

[burnodo]

189. He totally worked over the comfort of the security state

So, yeah, he's a hero

[Progressive dog]

169. you wrote " Obama scrambling to make his lie on Leno's show seem all the more palatable"

Why am I not surprised that you think Snowden is a hero?
I object to having my Democratic president called a liar, based on the claims of a self proclaimed whistle-blower with
a hate for a Democratic president and government.
The liars are Snowden, Greenwald, and the rest of the RW scandal mongers.

[burnodo]

188. "a hate for a Democratic president and government"

Do you think making things up is helpful to the discussion?

[Progressive dog]

193. I'm not making things up

Snowden and his buddies are.

[burnodo]

200. his buddies?

See? You ARE making things up

[Progressive dog]

202. His buddies, the ones who call him hero,

the ones who compare him to heroes like Paul Revere. The ones who call our elected President a liar, based on his word.

[SidDithers]

173. "protect the sanctimony of the State"...

Sid

[burnodo]

187. Don't worry, Sid

Canadians aren't in love with government like some Americans are. Well, SOME Canadians...

[cantbeserious]

176. Kick And Recommend

eom

[WillyT]

179. K & R !!!

[gulliver]

182. Being anti-"State" is a catostrophically wrong and poor decision.

It makes zero sense unless you are framing the "state" in the fictional, paranoid world of George Orwell or the non-fictional, paranoid worlds of Cambodia, the Republicans, etc. It's just plain wrong, and frankly piss poor thinking. You might be stuck in a false nightmare based on one or two lazy or stale decisions. In that nightmare, Snowden is a hero, I'll grant you.

On the other hand, you might be the type who wants to cheat people in business, oppress the poor and keep them down, discriminate, etc. That's another type of Republicanism. Or you might just be someone who wants to reorder the world in an undemocratic way, commit crimes, or generally destroy things. From those "anti-human" points of view, the democratically elected government might look like an impediment. Snowden is a hero from those points of view too.

Snowden and Greenwald are extremely counterproductive. They are the kind of hero who drills holes in the bottom of the boat to let the water out.

[burnodo]

186. Judgmental much?

The State, like many other things, is a useful tool. but it is not something to be revered as if the State will always do the bidding of its people, and not the powerful among them. Your accusations against me and people who think like I do are more partisanship than anything else. Partisanship is anti-progressive.

[blackspade]

183. well said

[burnodo]

185. Thanks!

[4bucksagallon]

194. So now a hero is defined by someone being a traitor, who would have known.

[burnodo]

197. he's a "traitor" because the spying unconstitutional government says so

not much of a case

[4bucksagallon]

198. And he's a "hero" because, you and a few others say so. Of course he is, that is what heroes do

they do their "heroic deeds" and steal from their employers and then run away. LMAO@the idea Snowed In is a hero.

[burnodo]

199. LIKE VALERIE PLAME?!

She must be a Libertarian!

[4bucksagallon]

201. Well see I learned something new today Ms Plame stole from her employer

made the info public and ran away to a foreign country like a coward. All this time I thought she was outed as a CIA operative by the Bushco White House. Thanks for the information you have been very very................Fox like, well actually more like Sludge.