I Am Beyond Sick/Tired Of Being Called An "Authoritarian NSA Apologist"

[Ptarmigan]

I Am Beyond Sick/Tired Of Being Called An "Authoritarian NSA Apologist"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3483538

There are DUmmies who are for NSA surveillance, the thing that Edward Snowden exposed.

KittyWampus (44,040 posts)

I Am Beyond Sick/Tired Of Being Called An "Authoritarian NSA Apologist". [View all]

Last edited Sun Aug 18, 2013, 03:18 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
 I insist on facts regarding the NSA and not exaggerations, falsehoods and lies of omission.

I question the timing of the NSA information coming out and the manner in which it is being released and reported on.

I question why the Republican controlled Intelligence Committee didn't pass on information from the White House regarding the NSA.

I question why the timelines built from various statements made by Greenwald, Snowden etc over the last month or so don't fit properly.

I question the motives of Snowden, Greenwald and the entire Wikileaks team because Snowden, Greenwald and Assange have all aligned themselves w/politicians who are intent on destroying the Democratic party. As imperfect as the Democratic Party is, it's what we have to work with.

I did a poll a few weeks back on DU and only one single solitary person voted a show of confidence in the NSA to leave it alone as it is.

EVERY OTHER PERSON WHO VOTED INDICATED AT LEAST IT NEEDED TO BE REIGNED IN.

So why the heck are so many of us getting called "Authoritarian NSA Apologists"?

Why are some liberal discussion boards shouting down those of us trying to sort through information and find out what exactly is happening?

Why, when something ends up being incorrect, exaggerated or incomplete do some liberals refuse to accept that?

Why are some liberals so quick to embrace Greenwald (who said outright he favors Nader's tactics), Snowden who is on the record as a social security hating libertarian and Assange who supports Paul?

So far the entire NSA story seems to have been quite well orchestrated well before Greenwald's first story from Snowden's leaks.

Who orchestrated this whole story and who funded it and what their motives are MATTERS. And knowing that it matters doesn't make me or anyone else an Authoritarian or an Apologist.

It matters because if facts are being massaged to further an agenda, then the facts may not be as cut and dry as some liberals want to believe.

I actually can deal with a political reality that exists as shades of gray. It is really too bad so many self-professed liberals typing away on the internet are obviously not comfortable with shades of gray but require a black/white dichotomy.

cthulu2016 (8,648 posts)
1. Shoes fitting, cakes having and eating, etc..

Webster Green (13,902 posts)
79. "Nader's aftermath"

Heh!

He had every right to run, and his critique of the difference in the two parties being the speed at which they drop to their knees for their corporate rulers is obviously right on the money.

Someone expressing pro-Nader at DU. DUmmies engage in Nader bashing.

Mojorabbit (14,039 posts)
78. Shoe fits etc. nt

stevenleser (14,870 posts)
120. It's always interesting to see who applauds cheap shots. It's bad enough to make one but

you couldn't even come up with your own you had to applaud someone else's.

Well played sir/ma'am. Please continue

Mojorabbit (14,039 posts)
128. I appreciate a good one. No need to try and top it.


Last edited Mon Aug 19, 2013, 12:07 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2)
I have had it up to here with people who defend the indefensible.

stevenleser (14,870 posts)
129. A cheap shot is a cheap shot. Saying it's a "good" one is like saying

that was a "good" child molestation. By definition, they're not good.

Thanks for playing.

Mojorabbit (14,039 posts)
130. It was a good one and in this thread deserved for defending what is indefensible.

Mojorabbit and Stevenleser duke it out.

leftstreet (23,548 posts)
9. Meh. The Democratic party has been destroying itself for decades

The corporate DLClinton Reagancrats have done more damage than any NSA whistleblower could dream of

arely staircase (7,211 posts)
14. so why do you vote for democrats?

makes no sense. you hate them and yet you support democratic candidates and work to get them elected. why?

(4,571 posts)
22. I increasingly ask myself the same question.

That whole "lesser evil" thing is growing increasingly threadbare.

On the ground level, the party generally seems to be okay, but by the time they achieve federal political office, they seem to have transformed themselves into Corporocrats.

[miskie]

On the ground level, the party generally seems to be okay, but by the time they achieve federal political office, they seem to have transformed themselves into Corporocrats.

Very good, primitive.

You are just a few steps away from realizing that the Democrats at the top are some of the wealthiest, dirtiest players on the planet. - much more so than rethugs - because at least wealthy rethuglikkkans are honest about their successes, whereas wealthy Democrats support policies that work against amassing wealth, and then exempt themselves from said policies, as well as the enforcement of any penalties their wealth-gathering techniques may result in.

If Warren Buffet were a rethug, he would be in a cell next door to Bernie Madoff. George Soros would be on the other side. Al Gore is all about Green-living.- As in living to earn as much green as humanly possible. I could go on and on, and fill this entire thread with examples.     

[freedumb2003b]

Methinks the Authoritarian NSA Apologist doth protest too much.

[jukin]

Whatever the democrat party does is evil. Always has been, always will be. To believe any different is to be correctly labeled "stupid."

Still amazes me that people that self-describe as "liberal" are the ones that are always for more bans, more restrictions, more control.....

These types of people think they are smarter because they know they are wrong yet convince themselves they are soooooooooooper smarty jeanuses because they think cognitive dissidence is a sign of that.  0bama is sooooooooooooooooooper smarty jeanus because he says "ahhhh', "errrrr", and "ummmmm" when he answers evades a question.

[DumbAss Tanker]

KittyWampus (44,040 posts)

I Am Beyond Sick/Tired Of Being Called An "Authoritarian NSA Apologist".

OK, then.  You're an authoritarian Obama apologist.  Does that make your hurt li'l butt feel any better?

 

[98ZJUSMC]

arely staircase (7,211 posts)
14. so why do you vote for democrats?

makes no sense. you hate them and yet you support democratic candidates and work to get them elected. why?

Because, you're idiots?  Just a guess.

[Aristotelian]

That this is still rumbling on shows the schism in the DUmp. There are some true liberals whose eyes are starting to peep open to the authoritarianism of the Obama administration; then there are the fellow-travellers who cannot imagine the Rat party ever doing anything wrong.

Of course, this infighting won't be allowed to continue for ever - as soon as the next election comes round, obedience will be required from all of them...but in the mean time it will give us plenty of entertainment.

[BlueStateSaint]

That this is still rumbling on shows the schism in the DUmp. There are some true liberals whose eyes are starting to peep open to the authoritarianism of the Obama administration; then there are the fellow-travellers who cannot imagine the Rat party ever doing anything wrong.

Of course, this infighting won't be allowed to continue for ever - as soon as the next election comes round, obedience will be required from all of them...but in the mean time it will give us plenty of entertainment.

When they have to 'kiss and make up' with the latter of the two groups in the first paragraph, the pretzel logic they will use to justify their actions will be mind-boggling.  And a lot of fun to observe.

[txradioguy]

Interesting tie in to this little "issue":

As conservatives, we know what happens every time we criticize the policies of the liberal occupant of the White House: We're instantly branded as “racist” and “intolerant” while our views are quickly and summarily dismissed.

However, Kevin Drum, a political blogger for the liberal Mother Jones website, has received similar treatment as he learned that no matter which side of an issue he supports, his mailbox on the Twitter social media website quickly fills up with emails from people taking the opposite view.

Drum described the situation by discussing reactions to policies of the National Security Agency from the “emo-progs” -- emotional progressives -- or the O-bots, people who believe that President Barack Obama can do no wrong.
 
If you express anything short of absolute condemnation of everything the NSA has done, your Twitter feed quickly fills up with hysterical proclamations from the emo-progs that you’re a right-wing shill, a government lackey, a useful idiot for the slave state, and an obvious fool.
 
“Conversely,” he noted, “if you criticize the NSA’s surveillance programs, your Twitter feed quickly fills up with equally hysterical proclamations from the O-bots that you hate Obama, you’ve always hated Obama, and you’re probably a racist swine who’s been waiting ever since 2009 for a chance to take down the nation’s first black president.”


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/randy-hall/2013/08/20/liberal-blogger-learns-hard-way-what-its-be-conservative#ixzz2cVFWcA00