General Discussion

treestar

(82,383 posts)

106. So i have to "hate" him in order to disagree with his actions?

Fri Aug 23, 2013, 11:38 AM

Aug 2013

Do you have that emotion for everyone who does things you don't agree with?

Just because he pounded Bushco doesn't make him always right. He draws lines in a different place than I do.

And President would prosecute leakers. They are supposed to.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

116 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If somebody like Edward Snowden had procured files in 2001 that the BushCo NSA was spying [View all] R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 OP

That would be different, of course. MannyGoldstein Aug 2013 #1

They didn't have to produce files. They told us they were spying on us. nt kelliekat44 Aug 2013 #68

Completely different. Apples and oranges. n/t Egalitarian Thug Aug 2013 #72

It is a small, but loud, minority who vehemently dislike Snowden and Greenwald. morningfog Aug 2013 #2

The most truthful, spin free statement I have seen Autumn Aug 2013 #3

It's the same 25-30 people who always rec up each other's posts. We fall for their Bullshit by leveymg Aug 2013 #4

You do realize this op has only 26 people who've rec'd it right? uponit7771 Aug 2013 #25

51 now. RetroLounge Aug 2013 #85

63 now Capt. Obvious Aug 2013 #110

Make me 56 cherokeeprogressive Aug 2013 #92

Good thinking. tblue Aug 2013 #27

I agree. Which is why I skip those posts now. You know it's going to be the same old sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #33

Already put a... prolific one on ignore Scootaloo Aug 2013 #39

Often they kick and rec their own. Savannahmann Aug 2013 #40

That's why most of them are on my ignore list. liberal_at_heart Aug 2013 #73

The reply to rec ratio is indicative. If you are here frequently enough and still have the capacity Egalitarian Thug Aug 2013 #74

Occasionally I think to myself, Quantess Aug 2013 #78

+1, I think I'll join you. /nt Marr Aug 2013 #84

Yes, when the purist left helps vote in the next reThug president who cut his horns and tucked his.. uponit7771 Aug 2013 #22

If they're the "purist left," are you the corrupt left? Scootaloo Aug 2013 #41

This reply was not constructive. I'm pitching in by supporting a congress that is progressive with.. uponit7771 Aug 2013 #97

"The purist left helps vote in the next reThug president who cut his horns" is constructive? Scootaloo Aug 2013 #98

zzzzzzz LondonReign2 Aug 2013 #52

yawn RetroLounge Aug 2013 #86

Maybe we stop picking shitty candidates. NuclearDem Aug 2013 #89

Want my vote Mr DINO? 99Forever Aug 2013 #90

CORRECT Skittles Aug 2013 #30

truth n/t RainDog Aug 2013 #69

I would say the same thing, but this is actually true of hardcore SUPPORTERS of these two idiots. AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #80

^^^this^^^ nt LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #102

naw--they love the Dems like the Tontons loved Doc, but don't care what the Dems actually PASS or DO MisterP Aug 2013 #5

it seems like DU was pretty happy with Olbermann's reports... grasswire Aug 2013 #6

Heck, Greenwald himself was pretty popular among liberals back then. n/t BlueCheese Aug 2013 #7

Greenwald was and still is btw, very respected on the Left. It was the RIGHT who hated him sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #34

Since it was illegal before 2008, there's a huge difference Recursion Aug 2013 #8

if it's legal, why is it super-secret? nt grasswire Aug 2013 #9

So that the people we're snooping on don't find out how it works? Recursion Aug 2013 #12

WTF kind of question is this?! ...bookmarking no doubt. The amount of dissidence it takes to ask uponit7771 Aug 2013 #23

dissidence? grasswire Aug 2013 #26

Dissidence: "Disagreement, as of opinion or belief; dissent" Celefin Aug 2013 #103

(cognitive) dissonance? Jackpine Radical Aug 2013 #57

That's what he meant, I think. nt AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #109

Cognitive dissidence :) - nt HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #113

So if it's legal, it's right? progressoid Aug 2013 #15

No, just not illegal and therefore doesn't fall under whistleblower status. If the public COULD have uponit7771 Aug 2013 #24

Neither the OP nor I said anything about whistle-blower status. progressoid Aug 2013 #47

Never said you did say anything about whistleblower uponit7771 Aug 2013 #48

Of course not. Recursion Aug 2013 #31

Sweet Jesus, do you see how lame that argument is? progressoid Aug 2013 #46

Presumably treestar Aug 2013 #62

"the Whistleblower Protection Act" Bwahahahaaa. progressoid Aug 2013 #63

He could have used avenues provided for treestar Aug 2013 #76

I would love to hear about these avenues. progressoid Aug 2013 #77

Lol, you forget that here and all over the Democratic forums, the vote to make legal sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #36

^^^^ Excellent summary of the core problem! Pholus Aug 2013 #45

It's not legal now either Hydra Aug 2013 #49

Maybe prosense can talk some sense into you LondonReign2 Aug 2013 #53

if it was WRONG before 2008, then it's wrong now.. frylock Aug 2013 #65

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, Egalitarian Thug Aug 2013 #79

Only in your mind. Some of us have values, morality, and principles TheKentuckian Aug 2013 #95

If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle Pretzel_Warrior Aug 2013 #10

For all we know she does and is, but that wasn't the question. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #11

Everyone knew UKUSA spies on the entire globe. In Wikipedia: DevonRex Aug 2013 #13

And did you know that private individuals can purchase SIGINT setups? DevonRex Aug 2013 #14

Of course you don't define what you mean by spying & you neglect to mention that what bush did WAS KittyWampus Aug 2013 #16

Conversely likewise. Fearless Aug 2013 #17

That's why the ambigious term "spying" is used in the first place. JoePhilly Aug 2013 #54

Bush 2 is the asshole who lied us into a war and enabled this fucking Stasi shit ...now this admin L0oniX Aug 2013 #18

I didn't like it when Obama voted for telecom spying immunity. joshcryer Aug 2013 #19

yeah, should've voted for McKKKlan hunh?! wow.... uponit7771 Aug 2013 #21

Nope. joshcryer Aug 2013 #37

the kind of simplistic response I've come to expect burnodo Aug 2013 #67

Yeah, because that EXACTLY what was said RetroLounge Aug 2013 #111

That was just one of MANY signs that he wasn't what he claimed to be... truebrit71 Aug 2013 #51

FUCK YES!! Especially if the idiot gave the secret evidence to the fuckin Chinese media!!! You're... uponit7771 Aug 2013 #20

I Like Spy Movies otohara Aug 2013 #28

no, which makes them major hypocrites Skittles Aug 2013 #29

Frankly I would welcome being spied on or even attacked by a drone - as long as it was Democratic Douglas Carpenter Aug 2013 #32

Yeah, you're right...dems advocated a war of agression and crashed the economy too... uponit7771 Aug 2013 #35

I bet I was campaigning for Democrats long before you were a gleam Douglas Carpenter Aug 2013 #38

Safe bet. Democracyinkind Aug 2013 #42

Given the general feeling in 2001 this bunch Thinkingabout Aug 2013 #43

kr Norrin Radd Aug 2013 #44

That's completely different, of course. :( Fire Walk With Me Aug 2013 #50

I already got an answer from one them here. Puzzledtraveller Aug 2013 #55

You fail to note the difference between Bush the Younger and Obama -- truedelphi Aug 2013 #66

Please define "spying" using specific details and techniques. JoePhilly Aug 2013 #56

They don't care. Bobbie Jo Aug 2013 #93

Bush's CIA would NEVER have groomed a Snowden to use against Bush. blm Aug 2013 #58

Nailed it. ucrdem Aug 2013 #94

Yep. It really is that simple, but, some refuse to put it all in its proper context. blm Aug 2013 #108

Of course not. City Lights Aug 2013 #59

If it were the same thing, I would not consider it something to get upset about treestar Aug 2013 #60

I read Glenn all the way back at Unclaimed Territory and then at Salon afterwards Fumesucker Aug 2013 #96

So i have to "hate" him in order to disagree with his actions? treestar Aug 2013 #106

I was responding to what you wrote, which was untrue Fumesucker Aug 2013 #107

If it was stolen. one_voice Aug 2013 #61

That's not what he did that was wrong. pnwmom Aug 2013 #64

Please document the information he has given Russia. Thank you. nt Mojorabbit Aug 2013 #71

Haven't you been reading the Guardian? pnwmom Aug 2013 #82

You can't be serious. Mojorabbit Aug 2013 #83

Exactly! What else do we need to say? n/t AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #81

This thread is a sort of partial Who's Who? Stinky The Clown Aug 2013 #70

No LearningCurve Aug 2013 #75

Nope, they are hypocrites RetroLounge Aug 2013 #87

It is not a hypothetical. It happened and it is in the archives. Coyotl Aug 2013 #88

That would require principles and integrity. 99Forever Aug 2013 #91

But the sixpack the sixpack. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #99

Still think that those rightwingers let into the tent will be content to merely "piss out"? Romulox Aug 2013 #100

Apparently that is not their style, and we are paying dearly for it. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #101

FBI agent Coleen Rowley, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds ? Frosty1 Aug 2013 #104

Nope. Hardly. I was aiming more at an exact NSA reveal. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #105

Never Liked Greenwald in The Bush Years otohara Aug 2013 #112

Perhaps you need to re-read the OP. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #114

Yeah Well, The Glut of Shoulda, Coulda, What If's otohara Aug 2013 #115

Did you re-read the OP? R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #116