You've quoted me egregiously out of context. "silly little game" (not even verbatim) came from this sentence:
>I'm saying that this is important and meaningful and needs to be treated as such rather than another opportunity to win points in some silly political game.
You left out the "important and meaningful" part and the "treated as such" part. What I refer to as a silly game is the attempt to wrack up points for one side or the other rather than taking the debate seriously and analyzing it in a sober manner.
As I've said before. I'm very critical of these programs. But rather than contorting my mind through anger into assuming the NSA is the Third Reich, I try to take a step back.
To your point on the 4th Amendment. I agree that there is probably a violation there. I hope that there will come a time when the conversation about these programs is honest and sober enough to analyze these programs with the appropriate care.
Like several others, you've mistaken my reluctance to jump on your angry bandwagon as opposition. Far from it. At a gut level, I agree with most everything you've said here. Still, it's harmful to the public debate because it is hasty and hyperbolic.
My apologies for taking words out of context (I swear you must have edited) but this imagined attempt of mine to allegedly "wrack up points" is actually an attempt on my part to not let this issue die while the heart of the matter remains.
There is no question that the wholesale eavesdropping by the government and its agents upon innocent Americans is an "egregious" violation of the 4th Amendment.
Spying on Americans was no good when Hoover did it, it was no good when Nixon did it, and it is still no good today.
To add insult to injury our non-elected bureaucrats have repeatedly lied to us regarding the spying because they know that what they are doing is wrong.
I cannot sit idly by when my nation has delved into being a police state worthy of the term "Orwellian."
There is nothing "hasty and hyperbolic" about calling a spade a spade.
You left out the "important and meaningful" part and the "treated as such" part. What I refer to as a silly game is the attempt to wrack up points for one side or the other rather than taking the debate seriously and analyzing it in a sober manner.
As I've said before. I'm very critical of these programs. But rather than contorting my mind through anger into assuming the NSA is the Third Reich, I try to take a step back.
To your point on the 4th Amendment. I agree that there is probably a violation there. I hope that there will come a time when the conversation about these programs is honest and sober enough to analyze these programs with the appropriate care.
Like several others, you've mistaken my reluctance to jump on your angry bandwagon as opposition. Far from it. At a gut level, I agree with most everything you've said here. Still, it's harmful to the public debate because it is hasty and hyperbolic.