MJN - Good points. Seems that a majority of people are satisfied by the deluge of articles penned by PR firms to justify the spying & to clarify that, anyway, PRISM isn't even what we thought it was. Congress "briefings" given by the intelligence directors consist of sanitized talking points & what laws we do have get broadened widely in top secret court opinions. Meanwhile the news cycle moves on. The only wildcard I see remaining is this Snowden/Greenwald duo and whatever they might have left up their sleeves. Supposedly there are multiple leaked documents and Greenwald is working on a second round of articles.
Better send for Peter Graves (sorry Tom Cruise) because finding a balance between security and privacy in the 21st. Century is truly a Mission Impossible. The range of opinions is simply too great.
From anti-government, tin foil-hatted paranoiacs on the Far Right, to Libertarians with unrealistic ideas of how to run a society, to Tea Partiers who’re OK with spying on Americans as long as it’s limited to Muslims and other people they don’t like, to middle-of-the-raiders who claim to see both sides of the question but can’t decide which way to lean, to those who don’t give a damn one way or the other, to those who figure that the government is too incompetent to be able to misuse the information they gather, to those who distrust the government (or at least Obama) but feel that the risk of terrorist attacks is greater than the risk to privacy, to those who trust the government to do the right thing.
Now somebody tell me what balance or system of checks and balances can possibly be put in place that can satisfy more than a small percentage of the above groups?
Re: “Big Brother at work”
A good joke told by Jay Leno: ‘We wanted a president that listens to all Americans - now we have one’
A joke told by Barack Obama: "This is the most transparent administration in history"