rumitoid

In any act of civil disobedience, such as these Snowden leaks, the perpetrator should be ready to take whatever punishment by the state that is within the law. Protestors not resisting but willingly allowing themselves to be arrested for code violations, and paying whatever fines. Drawing attention to injustice through the self-sacrifice of enduring arrest and even jail time.

Though I have to thank Snowden for these needed revelations, calling him a hero for the people might be going too far. Motives usually count when giving the kudos of hero.

Lou Loc: Florida

Hey mmccarty save all that blather and hot air for your next self help or therapy session . I can see how your "condition " would be easily exacerbated by gullibility and paranoia . I guess it wouldn't take too much to put you over the edge .
I reach my conclusions by A) VERIFIABLE FACTS B) OBJECTIVE OBSERVATION C) CROSS CHECKING INFORMATION -IN EARNEST .

Lou Loc: Florida

LOLOLOL....Snowden hardly did ANY of those "noble " things you mentioned . He chose the path of a coward , with very clouded intentions from his very time of hiring , and little concern if any for damage to his own country .
Motives don't "usually " count they ABSOLUTELY COUNT and they should be commensurate with actions taken . In Snowden's case , both are a disgrace . So much so that anyone like you , giving your kudos , brings your intentions into question .
Put simply , if you have problems with elements of a program , YOU DON'T SCREW YOUR OWN TEAM .
A notion that seems to be lost on TEEBAGGERS , and for very questionable reasons . But hey , this does sell well on TEEBAGGER STREET .

rumitoid

Perhaps you failed to read my post without your filter. Re-read and get back to me; your accusations are misplaced.

Lou Loc: Florida

rumitoid , you stated :
quote:
"Though I have to thank Snowden for these needed revelations, calling him a hero for the people might be going too far. Motives usually count when giving the kudos of hero." -end quote
"Thank Snowden" ??? How is that to be taken ?

rumitoid

You said, "So much so that anyone like you , giving your kudos , brings your intentions into question." I did not give him kudos, I questioned giving him kudos.
We can thank Snowden because of two things: 1) we are aware of abuses and those needed to come out in the open before America became a total police state. 2) the language in the Patriot is too vague and open to such abuses; seeing this fault we can now act to repair that dangerous flaw.

Lou Loc: Florida

That is what the senate Oversight committee is for . And THAT would have been without "giving away the store "to the Chinese and the Russians .
Aside from Snowden's allegations , neither you nor I know if in fact that there are abuses .

mmccarty12 Loc: Zionsville, Indiana

And yet you have posted nothing in any of your posts that support any claim you have made before, nor have you posted any supporting evidence with this post. My statement stands. You have no idea how to find and post verifiable facts. Objective observation is a multi-syllable phrase you are capable of spelling correctly, but have no idea what it really means. Your cross-checking, assuming you really know how to do that, is also non-existent. You do realize that objective observation is looking at both sides of the issue without bias, right? Cross-checking information requires you to, also, look at evidence from both sides of the issue and finding data that validates one side or the other and completely invalidates the other side.

At no time in any post you have written, have you done any of the three things you have stated you do. Saying something does not make it fact. But, once again, I seem to be repeating myself.

As for your comment above to MTHolster69's comment regarding Unions, you are once again speaking out of ignorance. If the Union gave one whit about his father, they would have had him reinstated immediately. Although, we have no idea why he was let go in the first place, did MTHolster69's father get Union representation before his dismissal? Did the Union fight for him to get his job back. You call it anecdotal, but nothing you have said in any post I have read of yours is anything but anecdotal. You would not know a fact if it hit you in the head. Your ignorance is not only saddening, it is hypocritical. Also, why is anecdotal evidence not allowed? Is it only because it disagrees with YOUR facts, so in no way could it be true?

As for your comment in the same post regarding the statement, "As far as where you work or spend your money , that's your business . But remember this , if working conditions . hours , vacations , break etc. are acceptable to you , they were won BY BETTER MEN THAN YOU ." You seem to believe that the wages negotiated by MTHolster69 with his boss were the work of others. How can that be when, obviously this is an assumption, the company he was interviewing with was a non-Union company, or at the least he was interviewing for a non-Union position? People should be paid on what they are worth and what they can negotiate, not on some arbitrary scale where everyone is equal. That is something you Liberals/Progressives cannot seem to understand, not everyone is equal in all things in all ways.

You think you are better than me or MTHolster69, but I have yet seen no indication from you that I am nothing but your superior. You are unable to think for yourself.

Your anger toward me is evident in the way you post. You make too many errors in your sentence structure and punctuation. Your spelling at times is error-prone. You need to calm down and think more and write less when you are angry. It only goes to that you feel what I say is true, but your belief system does not allow you to accept that fact.

You think there are better men out there than me and MTHolster69, which is true, there are better men than either of us out there, BUT, there are also lesser men, such as yourself out there as well. Another one of those things you cannot believe but are true. Each person has their strengths and weaknesses, including you. It is true, there are some things that you are better at then others, but there will always be someone out there that is better than you.

You need to denounce the dark side and come into the light. Once you do, you will be the better for it.

rumitoid

Dead wrong, my friend, about the Senate oversight. Also, the abuses have been well-documented over the ensuing weeks.

Lou Loc: Florida

In addition rumatoid , we do know that information gathered by Prism , which is massive , is not accessed if and when a WARRANT is issued by a U.S. Judge . Since this is all of a National Security and Intelligence , things of this nature are handled in closed door sessions , presided over by our elected Senators and Representatives .
So what is implied here is A) We do not trust our judges to issue LEGAL WARRANTS B) We do not trust the Senators and Representatives seated on the Oversight Committee whose purpose it is to precisely this sort of thing . The Patriot act has been signed into law , and it is not murky , all the negative aspersions and suspicions have been cast by one person- Snowden . Who chose to cut and run .And with property of the United States . Forgive me If I can find NOTHING good or correct in Snowden's actions when there are several other avenues he could have took had his intentions been genuine .

Lou Loc: Florida

mmccarty , I stand by my position on Unions ,and the very idea of a light and dark side reminds me of adolescents still enthralled by Star Wars . Snap back to reality .
I did not refer to you in my reply to MTholster69, however if you hold the same views , you may take it as such .

mmccarty12 Loc: Zionsville, Indiana

So you do not believe there is good and evil, right and wrong, left and right, up and down, in and out? The reference is what is called a metaphor, but you have no clue what that is.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/metaphor

Just because you did not reference me in one of your post directly does not prevent me from responding to the post. Otherwise, there could be no discussion.

A discussion works something like this.
Person A says something to Person B in a public forum where any other Person
in the vicinity can hear said statement. A Person C joins the conversation, sometimes in support of Person A, sometimes in support of Person B, and sometimes to put forth their own beliefs on subject. In this case you were Person A saying something to Person B, MTHolster69. I being in the vicinity, interject. There is nothing that is preventing me from inserting myself into the conversation. Now, had you sent MTHolster69 a private message through this forum and I interjected, you would have a right to complain. (Insert comment about NSA surveillance programs here). By the way, Person C's interruption of the conversation does not preclude Persons A or B, or for that matter, currently unknown Persons D through infinity from joining the PUBLIC conversation.

This goes back to the discussion with rumitoid and the irrational statement. You want to believe my insertion into your conversation with MTHolster69 to be wrong, which is irrational. I do not feel that my insertion into the conversation was wrong, which is not irrational. See, rumitoid, another subjective proof.

Lou Loc: Florida

mmccarty , I realize you like playing word games and longwinded dissertations , but let me stop you there . YOU mentioned the term "darkside " did you not ? And that indicates to me the frame of mind you're in . Of course I believe in good and evil , but I do not apply those in the way you do . Yours is a position based in neurosis and paranoia .
As for you inserting yourself into the discussion I was having with MTholster69 ? You QUOTED me in your post . Who are you kidding ? And since you did , indirectly expressed the same sentiments , I stated that you could then consider my estimation of MTholster69 , to be the same towards you . Do you need a schematic to understand that ?

You know what you are mmccarty ? A bullsheet artist . and a longwinded one at that . And I do believe you when you say you have issues , indeed you do .

David Kuhns Loc: Centerville, OH

If we are going to call names I'd much rather be called a teebagger than a liberal, (whatever a teebagger is.) The proper slur is tea bagger.

David Kuhns Loc: Centerville, OH

We wouldn't to do anything to hurt the country while Obama or anyone is in office! Obama is trying to destroy our country as founded. Snowden is not a hero but without him we wouldn't have known what Obama and the NSA is doing. You libs. didn't like Bush but at least he told us what the NSA was doing. Obama and his goons have taken it up at least 2 levels and told no one.