General Discussion

timdog44

(1,388 posts)

208. I then suppose you agree with what I was saying.

Sun Jun 16, 2013, 01:58 PM

Jun 2013

There are a few who seem to think that belittling others make them more of an expert. They are like the people you get into a discussion with and are fast talkers and never give an opening for rebuttal. This is the written way of doing that. I will read and try to digest and ascertain their motives. But mostly I come to the conclusion "get a life". I think incivility in most instances is not called for. If there is disagreement with a persons position, then give your reasons, don't just call them stupid. Everyone needs to learn or have the opportunity to learn. It is why I disagree with the Ignore option. I know have 16 people ignoring me. I am not a hard person to get along with unless I perceive I am being treated badly. I can ignore someone by not responding to them, but I still read what they have to say.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

270 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Naomi Wolf calls bullshit on the Snowden story [View all] ucrdem Jun 2013 OP

file under crazy as a shithouse rat. cali Jun 2013 #1

She's right about the interviews, one of which I heard on Democracy Now ucrdem Jun 2013 #6

oh my word. could you employ just a modicum of critical thinking? cali Jun 2013 #11

I don't agree with her conclusions, but I do agree with her observations. ucrdem Jun 2013 #14

her observations are flat out ridiculous. cali Jun 2013 #21

It also occurred to me that a stage-managed leak is a possibility, but I don't see any real leveymg Jun 2013 #47

Unless he's an operative or spy for a non-US intel service. ucrdem Jun 2013 #50

How is this really undermining Obama and the Dems in a way that would help, say, Jeb or Rand? leveymg Jun 2013 #54

Here are two specific ways it undermines Obama on an international stage: ucrdem Jun 2013 #66

1) Nothing was going to come of that issue with China, anyway - both sides knew what the other is leveymg Jun 2013 #78

I thought it was clear, but here goes: NSA-gate weakens his popular support ucrdem Jun 2013 #83

But, the rest of the world is now trumpeting that the US is again "engaging in dumb wars" leveymg Jun 2013 #89

I guess we disagree. It seems patently obvious to me. ucrdem Jun 2013 #94

It's okay to disagree. leveymg Jun 2013 #239

It is not a "possibility" it is a reality. reusrename Jun 2013 #126

"while she is dogged in her pursuit of information that doesn't mean she has an agenda" leveymg Jun 2013 #236

Ah yes, I see, two meanings. reusrename Jun 2013 #238

Not a U.S. plant, a Rand Paul plant, the Tea Party campaign for 2016. Coyotl Jun 2013 #19

Exactly. ucrdem Jun 2013 #23

Your sig line is a mini-blog Kolesar Jun 2013 #56

Agreed. It's almost as if they're here just to muckrake. Hmmm.... nt okaawhatever Jun 2013 #129

Edit: might have misread that, sorry. ucrdem Jun 2013 #132

I wasn't referring to you specifically. There are many who only seem to show up when something bad okaawhatever Jun 2013 #143

Thanks, yes I just realized I'd misread your post, sorry about that. ucrdem Jun 2013 #146

More ad hominem attacks BlueStreak Jun 2013 #26

that's got to be photoshopped ArcticFox Jun 2013 #148

Something looks awfully suspicious. ucrdem Jun 2013 #149

Dude, you are going down the rabbit hole. Comrade Grumpy Jun 2013 #195

Careless use of a polarizing filter pscot Jun 2013 #242

She DOES have a nice backstory, doesn't she? randome Jun 2013 #182

She does indeedy ucrdem Jun 2013 #189

But, Cali you must admit that his personality, the way he comes across Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #8

by what standards? look, naomi wolf's "theory" is shithouse crazy conspiracy crap cali Jun 2013 #16

I'm not talking about Wolf. I'm talking about the way the guy comes off. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #29

So you are saying he sounds TOO credible, ergo he must be lying!? BlueStreak Jun 2013 #39

The opposite. He's hyperbolic and dramatic. He comes across as staged and therefore Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #243

I don't deny he's a drama queen, with an inflated ego. BlueStreak Jun 2013 #246

He sets off alarm bells. aquart Jun 2013 #270

one thing I've learned in life, is that people can tell fibs about this or that and be truthful cali Jun 2013 #40

Evidence of Snowden's accuracy Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #109

It's already being walked back and disowned. randome Jun 2013 #115

You were at a secret meeting? HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #152

The text of the article does not support the headline. randome Jun 2013 #155

Yes, Nadler took it back, Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #220

Booze-Allen-Hamilton contractors are listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants. Blue State Bandit Jun 2013 #177

file under these suspicion appeared on DU right away, with far more substance! Coyotl Jun 2013 #13

Let's see--Naomi Wolf--or Keyboard Warrior Cali? trumad Jun 2013 #22

feel free. but it's hardly just me cali Jun 2013 #34

Let's see...Psycholical Anallise of someone Wolf does not know zeemike Jun 2013 #48

well thanks. we're just going with basic common sense here. cali Jun 2013 #63

You and me, Trumad. loudsue Jun 2013 #76

Agreed - since when is she a psychologist??? Cooley Hurd Jun 2013 #30

no she's not. I've never been able to understand why she's held in high esteem on the left. cali Jun 2013 #35

Agreed. Didn't realize she was this crazy. nt LittleBlue Jun 2013 #171

Why are we still doing ad hominem attacks on Snowden? BlueStreak Jun 2013 #2

The 'issues' are flat out wrong. He has shown us no evidence of his claims. randome Jun 2013 #5

Have you been in a cave for the past 2 weeks? BlueStreak Jun 2013 #17

What has Snowden revealed that wasn't on DU years ago? Coyotl Jun 2013 #25

The Verizon warrant, for one thing. BlueStreak Jun 2013 #32

Revealing a "warrant" pales to the fact that we knew everything was scooped without warrant! Coyotl Jun 2013 #42

When Obama shut down the Bush warrantless wiretaps, a reasonable person would have assumed BlueStreak Jun 2013 #184

You are quite mistaken. Coyotl Jun 2013 #225

Nonetheles, the NSA under BOTH Bush and Obama continues to operate exactly as before BlueStreak Jun 2013 #230

The woman doing the documentary has released this info before. She had already announced that the okaawhatever Jun 2013 #141

Tell that to the government, the whole M$M, and the rest of the world usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #73

See post # 25 Coyotl Jun 2013 #80

He revealed that the government is HARVESTING & STORING ALL US DIGITAL/PHONE COMMUNICATIONS usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #87

I guess you are new to DU Coyotl Jun 2013 #223

So you're in the MNBrewer Jun 2013 #167

There is never any point to rep[lying to posts like yours because Coyotl Jun 2013 #224

Funny you use the word 'claimed' so often yet fail to appreciate its meaning. randome Jun 2013 #27

The NSA Powerpoint says as much, and this is still a point of dispute BlueStreak Jun 2013 #36

The PowerPoint slide? A gross misinterpretation by Snowden and Greenwald. randome Jun 2013 #41

Please show me any place where Snowden accused the NSA of not following the law. BlueStreak Jun 2013 #49

Except he has not done what you claimed. randome Jun 2013 #52

Unconstitutional on the face of it? Um, yes (this rational person disagrees with you). truebluegreen Jun 2013 #191

FISA has been secretive since its inception in 1979. randome Jun 2013 #193

I know it has. truebluegreen Jun 2013 #197

"Lockbox" or direct line to NSA, a distinction without a difference except to a lawyer. leveymg Jun 2013 #61

How do you transfer information from one site to another? randome Jun 2013 #65

You're playing semantical games and frantically waving that stinky red-herring around. leveymg Jun 2013 #68

You have no idea if that's being done. randome Jun 2013 #70

He's shown us the slides. You haven't shown squat to the contrary leveymg Jun 2013 #81

There is a HUGE difference between... randome Jun 2013 #85

Doesn't make sense Chathamization Jun 2013 #176

No, I'm saying that those servers are likely secure FTP servers. randome Jun 2013 #179

Pure speculation Chathamization Jun 2013 #190

The speculation at this point is all Snowden's. randome Jun 2013 #192

Regret what? Chathamization Jun 2013 #194

It's a misleading term on the PowerPoint slide. randome Jun 2013 #198

It's a distinction that it seems like everyone has trouble with Chathamization Jun 2013 #219

I get you. Then again, it's PowerPoint. randome Jun 2013 #222

This is like 'Obama is a Muslim' Whisp Jun 2013 #135

I don't buy Wolf's contention that Snowden is a plant of any kind. randome Jun 2013 #140

I think there is someone else involved Whisp Jun 2013 #147

No, just that Greenwald said he was talking to Snowden in February... randome Jun 2013 #151

Now that would be the big question to put to Greenwald, wouldn't it? Whisp Jun 2013 #161

That is flat out BULLSHIT, and that discrepancy was addressed in Greenwald's original article usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #93

Direct access to FTP servers. Not at all what Greenwald & Snowden wanted us to believe. randome Jun 2013 #96

More Bullshit! WTF Right At the Top of the Original Greenwald Article it points out the discrepancy usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #102

These folks apparently don't realize that even Greenwald has hedged on that slide BeyondGeography Jun 2013 #108

But even with the most nefarious interpretations of any of it... randome Jun 2013 #112

This issue has become a rage funnel for many here BeyondGeography Jun 2013 #120

Yeah, poor things.. it's like debating this.. Cha Jun 2013 #211

They have presented proof, WTF do you think everyone is reacting to on the hill, & around the world? usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #125

I suppose if you can't fool the world, Marr Jun 2013 #157

exactly, as they are the only ones they are fooling usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #163

You're the ones being paid treestar Jun 2013 #174

He did NOT 'hedge' he called it out at the TOP of his original article. usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #124

And, if they did know.. unfortunately don't care. nm Cha Jun 2013 #213

Doesn't it look to you like the names added to the top of the slide were added after the fact? okaawhatever Jun 2013 #153

They look like the kinda internal docs cobbled together by non-graphic designers that are ubiquitous usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #158

The documents authenticity has not been disputed by the government usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #79

Sure, and that's why the government is reacting usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #71

What vitriol? You mean Boehner calling Snowden a traitor? randome Jun 2013 #74

He isn't the only one, and you know it. usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #84

Soerry, but it DOES matter what country he goes to NT 7962 Jun 2013 #15

Why? Does that make any of his claims any less true? BlueStreak Jun 2013 #20

If he can't stand the heat he shouldn't have come forward treestar Jun 2013 #169

I think the 'talking points' are only those he has created for himself. randome Jun 2013 #3

Well, Greenwald is an attorney. ucrdem Jun 2013 #7

I'd forgotten that. randome Jun 2013 #9

It makes sense that the attorney would be prepping him for his closeups. ucrdem Jun 2013 #18

You imagine lots of things. Hissyspit Jun 2013 #31

This is only a guessing game temmer Jun 2013 #4

+ quite a bit. well said. cali Jun 2013 #24

And suspect as he went to the media who know a thing or 2 about presentation usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #117

A preemptive, controlled, and then "discredited" leak? Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #10

I think she might be overanalyzing. reformist2 Jun 2013 #12

Naomi Wolf is not Naomi Klein. Quantess Jun 2013 #28

Why do you think people are confusing the two women? Does that make Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #33

People confuse them here all the time. Hissyspit Jun 2013 #37

Well, actually, it does. BlueStreak Jun 2013 #38

I don't think musings equal facts and her article Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #240

Okay, but, you just mixed up the Naomis, right there! Quantess Jun 2013 #255

Yes, I know the difference. You misread. Those were two different thoughts. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #256

And I am just as aware as you are Quantess Jun 2013 #258

Didn't say you we're stupid. I'm telling you that I know well the different Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #262

In other words. is your name cellophane Quantess Jun 2013 #260

I don't get it. Unless you're tall, dark, SINGLE, and smart... Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #261

Yes, people definitely confuse Naomi Wolf and Naomi Klein every time one of them is mentioned. Quantess Jun 2013 #118

I have to admit, I often confuse them when I read the names. Marr Jun 2013 #159

Who is more credible, Wolf or Klein? reusrename Jun 2013 #168

True I have done that in the past davidpdx Jun 2013 #44

Yes, davidpdx, most of us have an easy time mixing them up. Quantess Jun 2013 #122

Here's what Google/wiki say about Naomi Wolf: ucrdem Jun 2013 #64

Cue the assassination of Naomi Wolf davidpdx Jun 2013 #43

cue the fucking melodrama, hon. oh wait, you already brought in a truckload of that shit. cali Jun 2013 #45

No, I think you have that covered all by yourself davidpdx Jun 2013 #58

Interesting how you clipped points d. and h. which even her critics acknowledge have merit.... Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #46

So you think the right wing machine would put this story out when they were already dominating BlueStreak Jun 2013 #51

mughba dunnnaa kxnmhh <- Me trying to talk with your words in my mouth Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #55

Reporter gate is part of this nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #88

I don't agree with "D," and "H" is mistaken since GG is an attorney, ucrdem Jun 2013 #53

H is mistaken because the investigative reporter is an attorney???? Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #57

Greenwald is an attorney, yes. nt ucrdem Jun 2013 #67

Just to be clear, you're joking, right? Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #69

How many times are you going to ask this question? nt ucrdem Jun 2013 #77

Here's Markos Moulitsas' profile at CATO: Hissyspit Jun 2013 #119

KOS is at least trying to drum up votes for Democrats. ucrdem Jun 2013 #127

And Greenwald is trying to stop the horrific abuses of the War on Drugs. Hissyspit Jun 2013 #156

Thank you for highlighting points D and H suffragette Jun 2013 #150

Did you ever think that maybe it is Wolf that is the "operative"? Vinnie From Indy Jun 2013 #59

lol an earthtoned operative cali Jun 2013 #62

Possibly. Now the NSA knows exactly who disagrees with them Generic Brad Jun 2013 #123

Naomi Wolf has written for the Guardian. JoeyT Jun 2013 #60

According to your links she's also a Rhodes scholar and Huffpo writer: ucrdem Jun 2013 #75

how in hell would you or wolf know what an operative of some sort looks/sounds/acts like? cali Jun 2013 #137

You're assuming they have brain cells.... HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #164

Snowden is bait on a fishing line. hunter Jun 2013 #72

She's not the first commentator to mention that there is something Cleita Jun 2013 #82

Thanks Cleita, ucrdem Jun 2013 #97

I too think Snowden stinks. timdog44 Jun 2013 #86

There's a too-long tradition of beating down uncomfortable ideas with over-the-top put downs... Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #91

If I take what you are referring timdog44 Jun 2013 #201

second paragraph... Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #205

I then suppose you agree with what I was saying. timdog44 Jun 2013 #208

Yes, his speeches make us angry ucrdem Jun 2013 #116

Help me please. timdog44 Jun 2013 #202

I was elaborating a little on your first point. ucrdem Jun 2013 #204

Yes, I think I am agreeing with you. timdog44 Jun 2013 #210

Link please to proof he has sold info to the Chinese. snagglepuss Jun 2013 #214

Here's a five-in-one: ucrdem Jun 2013 #218

No proof he's sold anything nor proof he disclosed anything other than snagglepuss Jun 2013 #226

Fine, let's say he procured them. ucrdem Jun 2013 #231

Naomi Wolf? ReRe Jun 2013 #90

Naomi Wolf is just another fascist enabler. baldguy Jun 2013 #92

I'll bet she secretly voted for Obama. ucrdem Jun 2013 #100

Damn you Snowden! How dare you! JackRiddler Jun 2013 #95

So where did he get his "architecture of surveillance" line? ucrdem Jun 2013 #98

Words! This high school dropout presumes to use words! Big ones! JackRiddler Jun 2013 #101

Here's two for you, coincidence theorist. nt ucrdem Jun 2013 #104

And speaking of co-inkydinks: Whom could Republicans just NOT bear as SOS, but ended up at patrice Jun 2013 #257

a 29 year old high school drop out who sounds like a high priced lawyer on TV NoMoreWarNow Jun 2013 #106

Thanks for the disgusting dose of class prejudice. JackRiddler Jun 2013 #183

Ahem, the Shax avatar does not exactly scream working class solidarity. ucrdem Jun 2013 #187

Shax? JackRiddler Jun 2013 #196

"I don't trust the NSA at all" and neither do I trust spooks. NoMoreWarNow Jun 2013 #266

Sure... JackRiddler Jun 2013 #267

fair enough... NoMoreWarNow Jun 2013 #269

I think she is speculating by way of precaution. freedom fighter jh Jun 2013 #99

Hong Kong is not exactly China. ucrdem Jun 2013 #103

So he sang to an allied intel agency and a junior partner nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #107

Yes, I'm sure they're all one big brethren. ucrdem Jun 2013 #113

Actually yes, yes they are nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #145

Cognitive dissonance at it's best nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #105

I think you mean "its." ucrdem Jun 2013 #110

From the poster who spelled "Gaurdian" wrong several times last week, Hissyspit Jun 2013 #160

So nice that you noticed. ucrdem Jun 2013 #165

Cognition is a great deal more about dissonance than many wish us to pretend that is. patrice Jun 2013 #259

Bullshit! caseymoz Jun 2013 #111

Naomi Wolf isn't claiming that anything Snowden said is false. Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #114

That's where I part company with her. ucrdem Jun 2013 #121

Who wants Snowden to transmit talking points Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #206

Good question. Wouldn't one of the last things that Susan Rice would have managed patrice Jun 2013 #263

Sounds like a South Park episode to me n/t usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #133

I've noticed some oddities too, but its not central to the conversation. napoleon_in_rags Jun 2013 #128

It seems that the bigger problem is that a "private firm" has this kind of access to anything we do. world wide wally Jun 2013 #130

I'm not convinced Snowden had the access he claimed. randome Jun 2013 #136

I have no opinion about Snowden, but Naomi Wolf is batshit crazy, so who cares what she says? (n/t) MadrasT Jun 2013 #131

Implication here. Madmiddle Jun 2013 #134

She does a lot of speculating on his motives but doesn't refute what he revealed. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #138

Exactly. NT Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #251

The character assassination of Lindsay Mills in the media really bothers me Jarla Jun 2013 #139

I agree completely with that. randome Jun 2013 #142

The fact that slut-shaming has become part of the Snowden smear DirkGently Jun 2013 #162

I find it a bit ironic that a self-proclaimed feminist is participating in the slut-shaming Jarla Jun 2013 #178

Apparently we're learning a lot, very quickly. DirkGently Jun 2013 #188

Welcome to DU, and you raise a good point. (n/t) spooky3 Jun 2013 #215

Thanks! :) Jarla Jun 2013 #221

LOL. Yes, Snowden must be dismissed because of his "unusual stagecraft." PSPS Jun 2013 #144

He's also known to listen to bad music & pay tolls DirkGently Jun 2013 #170

And the same cadre of smear campaign posters... HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #172

One could easily conclude the same about the Obama detractors, ucrdem Jun 2013 #175

Yes, some disapprove of Obama's performance. Therefore, domestic spying is OK. Is that how it goes? PSPS Jun 2013 #216

That's a good point. Marr Jun 2013 #229

It's possible, of course, but this seems awfully thin to me. Marr Jun 2013 #154

wag the dog ellennelle Jun 2013 #166

Let's arm al-qaeda in Syria! usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #180

you must be young ellennelle Jun 2013 #209

at heart, but I do believe that "wag the dog" refers to a war who's sole purpose is to distract usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #212

no; methinks 'wag the dog' means... ellennelle Jun 2013 #244

. Didn't realize she was this crazy. LittleBlue Jun 2013 #173

I think she knows a lot about the craft and is simply projecting usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jun 2013 #185

And the hero-worshippers attack Wolf for her observations that raise questions railsback Jun 2013 #181

This isn't a matter of left and right. Marr Jun 2013 #232

She isn't giving testimony in a trial, she's blogging her observations of Snowden. ucrdem Jun 2013 #233

I know, and he has boxes in his garage, too. Marr Jun 2013 #234

I'd say the timing is what's really relevant here. ucrdem Jun 2013 #235

Honestly, I find the timing suspicious as well. Marr Jun 2013 #237

There are international conferences every month. NT Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #253

Most of her "opinion" is just uninformed ignorance. reusrename Jun 2013 #241

Greenwald is not a "CATO Libertarian." Hissyspit Jun 2013 #248

Like Snowden offering up empty evidence? railsback Jun 2013 #268

"hero-worshippers attack for observations that raise questions" Hissyspit Jun 2013 #250

Is there any way for the 1% to substantially gain more wealth/power/control as a Zorra Jun 2013 #186

If the Patriot Act is repealed... Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #207

Don't hold your breath waitng for the Patriot Act to get repealed. Zorra Jun 2013 #249

I pretty much on the side of Snowden but am always willing to entertain doubt. snagglepuss Jun 2013 #217

I had similar thoughts about Snowden agent46 Jun 2013 #199

Next up: The secret NSA directive to impose Sharia Law on us all! randome Jun 2013 #200

Or Snowden has put some thought into his message think Jun 2013 #203

"Missed it by that much". Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #227

Yea because we absolutely MUST felix_numinous Jun 2013 #228

The pole-dancing girlfriend has got to be the most baffling part of this whole equation Number23 Jun 2013 #245

It shows Snowden's sacrifice. Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #252

So a guy in his thirties with a $200K salary and a hot girlfriend.... decides to throw it all away DontTreadOnMe Jun 2013 #264

Are you saying that Ed Snowden was authorized to leak Eric J in MN Jun 2013 #265

Interesting take on the situation thanks for posting /nt jimlup Jun 2013 #247

Dear Naomi... MrMickeysMom Jun 2013 #254