Isn't it amusing to watch people who have called Obama-supporters 'worshippers'

[TheKentuckian]

170. Deified? Really? Even if someone is considered a hero that doesn't make them a god

or one to be worshiped but rather acknowledgment of doing something considered heroic. No one gives a damn if a firefighters motivation is girls loving a man in uniform, a paycheck, continuing a family tradition, proving women can do anything a man can, camaraderie of share dangers, or learning to avoid prosecution for arson when they pull your ass out of the fire.

I worship a deity, lauding some man for a heroic action isn't even in the same continent, much less neighborhood.

Heroic doesn't mean saintly either. I have no idea why some have this idea that a person must be unblemished or even generally considered decent to be capable of heroism. The same person who wiped out an innocent village might in the very same day put his life on the line to save his platoon, you get the guy that he pulled out of the burning wreckage not to see him as a hero or the cousin of one of the villagers not to think of him as a devil and I'll consider you amazing.

That said many that oppose dragnet surveillance haven't gone even as far as calling Snowden a hero but they are just as likely to be accused of deifying Snowden as those that did and somehow all of those folks are made out to be making the man their god. According to your framing if one is pro-Fourth or anti-surveillance/Security state then they are by definition not just pro-Snowden (I guess he was loved before he was even known) but consider him God on Earth and are also racists, Paulittes, and traitors.

Also, I think there is some dishonesty built in to the whole premise which is anti-surveillance or pro-fourth Amendment equals Snowden fan (or worshiper which I've never seen in action) and I think that deceit is purposeful and used as a tactic to tie the issue to this one man as if it has no consequence before, aside from him, or after he is no longer news. Hell yes your tactics will be scoffed at, the fourth amendment long predated Edward Snowden as do our government's history of abuse, overreach, poor stewardship of power which are often defended by citing Obama wasn't President then but the same voices change the subject, threats to the family, who started it, or start crying about dirty nukes and shit when some says they expected THIS Administration to use its considerable discretion in these matters differently WHILE it worked to curtail the power for future Administrations permanently but if nothing else while our people held the reins there would be an end to the Bushshit and that if a future Executive wanted to go back to this well they would have to reboot it rather just keep on keeping on.

I also think that comparing the scrutiny to an elected official or appointee who will be making rulings impacting all of us, leading large pieces of the government, and actually instituting policy to this situation makes little to no sense, I just don't see what one has to do with the other. Snowden has no ongoing role, won't be hiring anyone, he won't be on the bench for life, he won't set policies, he won't negotiate treaties, he has no budget authority, no enforcement duties, no ability to provide influence for corporate interests.


Here our only test of importance is it possible and is it true and some of this had not only been admitted as fact but proudly stood behind there are other aspects that have been denied that have not been supported but they are possible and even probable technologically and some of us don't give secret programs that we oppose the benefit of innocent until proven guilty because we can't escape that the government was trying to prevent us from having any facts.

We must also account for where the money and the power lead and those paths demand a critical eye of what the government and private contractors are up to here not faith.
Snowden lying costs him far more than it benefits him, the government lying means billion dollar contracts, expanded power, increased census in private prisons.

Who has been fighting a generational war on self determination utilizing ever increasing encroachments on our individual rights (who thinks that information gathered "in error" won't be a boon for the drug war?)? I don't see compelling motivation and potential for reward for those on the other end of this on anywhere approaching the same scale.