Kerry: Snowden should 'man up' and return to U.S.
Source: Wash Post
WASHINGTON - Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday called for fugitive former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden to "man up" and return to the United States to face the legal consequences for his leaks about sweeping U.S. surveillance efforts.
"The bottom line is this is a man who has betrayed his country, who is sitting in Russia, an authoritarian country where he has taken refuge. He should man up and come back to the United States. If he has a complaint about what's wrong with American surveillance, come back here and stand in our system of justice and make his case," Kerry said in an interview on CBS This Morning.
In his first U.S. network television interview, a portion of which was broadcast Tuesday evening, Snowden told NBC News that he was "trained as a spy in sort of the traditional sense" and rejected the notion that he was only a low-level operative. Kerry said there was nothing new in what Snowden was disclosing about his past.
"It's the same disclosure that everybody's known," he said. "You know, he very cleverly wraps it into his language about 'I was a technical person, I didn't go out there and work with humans, with other people, I wasn't working and interacting with human beings.' Basically, he was doing his computer stuff and that's exactly what he said. So he wraps it into this larger language."
Read more: http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20140529_Kerry__Snowden_should__man_up__and_return_to_U_S_.html#Txh4kZLHoABqAbUv.99
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
KansDem
(28,498 posts)Kind of like how Bush made his case for war in Iraq and you voted for it?
The bottom line is this is a man who has betrayed his country...You mean, like Bush?
blm
(113,043 posts)What did you do - post on the internet and take potshots at those who were stuck actually voting and lumping them all together with no discernment and refusing to notice the one IWR aye vote that stood against the decision to invade even though it meant taking the scorn of those who lazily preferred mockery over discernment?
KansDem
(28,498 posts)He still voted to give Bush the authority to invade Iraq.
He could have stood with his fellow Democrats (and one Independent and one Republican) who voted "no." He could have questioned Bush about his motives. He could have pointed out that we were invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. He could have observed that 15 of the 19 attackers on 9/11 were from a country ruled by a family who were friends and business partners with the Bush family. There were myriads of "doesn't make sense" actions and responses at the time and no one wanted to discuss or investigate them.
And now that torture is okie-dokie, he might acknowledge that if Snowden were to return to the US, he'd no doubt be shipped off to GitMo, never to be heard of again. In that he's being disingenuous about Snowden's need to "man up."
blm
(113,043 posts).
George II
(67,782 posts)...maybe you should read it sometime.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....and there were a number of conditions attached to that resolution. It wasn't merely "a vote to grant president bush the power to attack Iraq unilaterally".
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I won't try to rationalize a yes vote for the Iraq War. It makes me cynical that anyone here would. I think Kerry should man up and not try to invade Syria.
George II
(67,782 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I was genuinely scared when I saw the look on Kerry's face when he appeared before Congress trying to goad us into war with Syria. I couldn't believe my eyes. He was trying to bully us into it and had that angry, aggressive look cops get when they order you to do something your conscience tells you not to. I don't pretend to understand what's going in anymore. I certainly don't trust Kerry now which is not by choice. It was much easier when I thought he was on our side but now he just seems like an informant for the war machine. There is a trust vacuum in our political system at the top on both sides.
Corey_Baker08
(2,157 posts)How could you possibly not know that? And As America' top diplomat he has a right to his opinion and he is entitled to share it...
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)Some people here, everytime the see those 5 letters, K-E-R-R-Y.....they need desperately to jump at him....
Corey_Baker08
(2,157 posts)I was 14 years old when I joined DU in 2004 and even then during the heat of the Democratic Primary I could post about why I supported John Kerry and not be met with as much negative feedback even when hardcore Deaniacs existed.
It seems to be the case with alot of post around here lately, Im proud that DU has grown even larger and met a broader base of Democrats in the last 10 years but at least back then we could disagree without being disagreeable we didn't have the amount on negativity back then that we had now, now I understand that with a large broad base of individuals your always going to run into 'that one' who always finds faults in what someone else supports, or what someone else says, etc. But it seems lately there has just been an overwhelming amount of negativity.
We should all remember that we are all Democrats & while we always may not agree, thats what makes DU great, the hostility & the negativity though is not what attracted me to become a member, or what has kept me as a member for 10 years now....
YvonneCa
(10,117 posts)...completely. Nice to see you still here fighting the good fight. 
Thanks for this great post!
Dopers_Greed
(2,640 posts)And face decades of torture and imprisonment for exposing wrongdoings that Kerry facilitated.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)shut up.
I voted for you in 2004 but would never vote for you again.
Snowden did the American people and those around the world a tremendous service by revealing the practices of our government that even our elected representatives were told could not be revealed to the American people.
Screw you Kerry and the NSA and the whole lot of those thinking they are protecting us. What are they protecting us from? I venture to say that for the billions of dollars we have spent on these "enhanced" practices since 9/11 they have maybe identied a handful of threats. I'll bet the rest would have been caught by the pre-Patriot practices. It was only Dumbya and company that let the 9/11 attacks happen by refusing to act on solid intelligence briefings that has brought us here.
blm
(113,043 posts)For what it's worth, I think Kerry is being pretty kind to Snowden. There isn't anything Snowden 'revealed' that I didn't know by paying attention to what Bush was doing from before he took office. Heck - I can go back to Promis and TIP and see that all of this was happening long before we ever heard the words Senate candidate Barack Obama.
And I find it laughable....no, not LOL....sad.... that few of you ever bothered to put Snowden's 'revelations' in context of what else was going on around that same time.
You would think that after all this time DUers would be more cognizant of how BushInc operates.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)but from everything we were led to believe this was targeted to communications between Americans and foreign contacts that had been identified as targets or at least subject to surveillance.
But nothing suggested the NSA was recording every telephone number you called or from which you received a call or every URL you entered into our browser.
I consider myself fairly well-informed and did not appreciate the scope of the surveillance dragnet. It took Snowden to reveal this.
I certainly was aware that Bushco were renegades hell-bent on destroying the Constitution and making money doing it.
blm
(113,043 posts)And that somewhere just happens to be CIA linked firms known to be more loyal to BushInc than to any US president. Pay close to attention to when he dissembles during that interview. He sounds fine through much of it - his dissembling at certain points should be eye-opening.
MBS
(9,688 posts)I found the whole interview unimpressive. Williams' questions were superficial and incomplete (In her NYTR critique of the interview, Alessandra Stanley raised some obvious questions in NYT, such as, for instance, who is paying Snowden's bills during this lengthy stay? but nothing on this or many other obvious topics from Williams. . ), and Snowden was, as you said, dissembling in his replies to Williams. The interview left me less sympathetic to Snowden, and less impressed with the MSM, than I was before.
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)
BumRushDaShow
(128,847 posts)
karynnj
(59,501 posts)and there were tons of threads in late 2007 and then in August 2008. RIGHT HERE ON DU. Not to mention there were any number of diaries on Daily Kos.
Do you remember that Dodd tried to lead an effort to stop the bill that would give retroactive approval of this and immunity to all the telephone companies that helped?
This was also in the mainstream papers.
I am stunned that you suggest you never heard about this before Snowden. It may be that you were busy those years and missed this, but it was out there.
QuestForSense
(653 posts)
truth2power
(8,219 posts)Glenn Greenwald explained this, somewhere -
I'm sure I'm not articulating this well, but Snowden's defense for his actions is prohibited under the charge against him. Something like that. Kerry knows very well, and is being, shall we say, disingenous in this regard. Ugh!
karynnj
(59,501 posts)I have never heard that a law has prohibitions on certain defenses. Here, if the defense is that he thought that people needed to see something that was classified - and that is his defense, that is really not unique. You can think of that applying to any law - generically as (there is justification to do what the law prohibits)
I would guess that what Kerry knows is that Snowden, who had a security clearance, made classified documents available to people not allowed to have them. Snowden broke the law. It is Glen Greenwald, not Kerry, who is being disingenuous.
truth2power
(8,219 posts)"Why Edward Snowden Wouldn't Get a Fair Trial" - Jeselyn Radack
truth2power
(8,219 posts)More people weighing in today (Fri.) on Kerry's fake call for Snowden to "man up".
Daniel Ellsberg
Robert. Parry
Juan Cole
etc.
So, SOS Kerry is either lying or he's stupid. Personally, I don't think he's stupid.
karynnj
(59,501 posts)Even if Obama pardoned him for everything he said about domestic spying --- he would STILL be in trouble for the over one million documents on international intelligence.
There was nothing fake about Kerry's call for him to return and be tried. Even in the 1970s, as a protesters, Kerry spoke of how non violent protesting included submitting to arrest. In addition, Kerry went out of his way to keep things legal. he was the one who got all the needed permits for that weekend. (Also note that the job he took out of law school was as a prosecutor. He did not opt to be a radical defense lawyer -- or use his talents to make John Edwards type money (other than for 2 years after leaving the prosecutor's office.)
You can disagree with whether Snowden should return and/or be tried, but it is not fake and quite consistent with things Kerry has always said.
truth2power
(8,219 posts)The point is that if Snowden came back to stand trial he would be prohibited from submitting any evidence to a jury as to his intent.
This has been said over and over, here. Since I believe that most DUers are as capable as I am when it comes to parsing a sentence or a paragraph and finding the weasel word therein, I can only conclude that some are being deliberately obtuse.
90-percent
(6,829 posts)As I understand it, the Obama Administration has prosecuted more whistle blowers than any other administration combined!
I wonder if the CIA torture sub contractors told Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to "man up" each of the 183 times he was water boarded?
And I wonder if Snowden is concerned about the kid gloves treatment of other whistle blowers like Julian Assange and Bradley Manning?
Kind of hard to chose to accept the justice of a totalitarian American government, if you ask me.
-90% Jimmy
George II
(67,782 posts)90-percent
(6,829 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)...there have been 10 cases in 43 years going back to 1971. Hardly a statistical sample to draw a definitive conclusion.
And just which of those were bona fide "whistle blower" cases?
BeyondGeography
(39,369 posts)He comes off as petulant in that clip, which is a shame when you have the facts on your side.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)uhnope
(6,419 posts)
Octafish
(55,745 posts)How's PFC Manning doing? Manning blew the whistle on war crimes and got sent to prison.
How's Agent Kiriakou doing? Kiriakou blew the whistle on war crimes and got sent to prison.
What do these two have in common? The war criminals are free and in the clear.
Your Friend,
Octafish
christx30
(6,241 posts)criminals that Manning exposed? People can actually commit murder and that's no problem. But if someone embarasses the MIC with exposing that murder, they are to be crushed and destroyed for that "crime".
Yeah. Snowden is better off staying in Russia. I dislike Putin with the fury of a thousand firey nuns, but Snowden is better off there than naked in solitary confinement in a federal prison being tortured.
George II
(67,782 posts)....and gave them to a foreign national.
As a member of the United States military, he's lucky he didn't face a firing squad for his espionage.
Oakenshield
(614 posts)What country do you think you're defending soldier? Your iron-fisted definition of justice certainly doesn't sound American.
90-percent
(6,829 posts)His political imprisonment rankled me. his crime was to expose the CIA secret torture.
The torturers all roam free and the guy that exposed their crimes ends up in prison?
I remember John from a few appearances on Keith Olbermann. He writes a diary from prison about all the shitty stuff they do to him just because they're mean and they can. Nice police state government we got here.
-90% jimmy
Psephos
(8,032 posts)As you note, the fact that Kiriakou rots in prison, and the actual torturers he called out are home grilling steaks, is everything you need to know about Kerry's mockery of Snowden.
truth2power
(8,219 posts)You're speaking to those who will not hear, because it's their job not to.
Go have a beer!
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)I lose respect for them.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Because people that really care about women's issues love to die on hills of irrelevance... 
blackspade
(10,056 posts)'Man up?' WTF? Kerry sounds like an idiot.
The bottom line is that Snowden, in Kerry's opinion betrayed his country. That is not a fact.
Until it is adjudicated all such statements are opinion.
"If he has a complaint about what's wrong with American surveillance, come back here and stand in our system of justice and make his case," Kerry said in an interview on CBS This Morning."
He has made his case and it is blindingly obvious that the PTB will do little or nothing to change course based on Kerry's prejudicial and inflammatory statements.
George II
(67,782 posts)....he's just a cowardly fugitive, or worse.
Clyde Tenson
(65 posts)"How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam?" Since then - squat.
He friggin blew it in the presidential election, losing to a man that couldn't articulate his way out of a wet paper bag. And to get on his high horse and blurt treason! Well that means that this face altered (badly I might add) bumpkin wants to see Snowden in front of a firing squad. You don't bandy about the word treason. (unless you're a tea bagger)
bettydavis
(93 posts)"man up". It is beneath him and the courage it took to do what he did in '71. And yeah that was a long time ago but it was brave as hell and I have immense respect for THAT dude. But I think they truly are in a DC bubble and actually believe that repub machismo nonsense speak actually articulates the real anger of some conservative Americans toward Snowden. I think it's an attempt to appeal to someone or something I don't know what. but he's better than bullshit terms like man up. Ugh. He knows how nuanced this whole thing is.
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)YvonneCa
(10,117 posts)...stretch of the imagination.
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)was independent of his wife's wealth-John Kerry had $193M+ in 2012.
John Kerry (Wikipedia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry
YvonneCa
(10,117 posts)...because of their wealth. Do you?
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)LOL!
YvonneCa
(10,117 posts)...age. 
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)YvonneCa
(10,117 posts)...of whistleblower is an important one. I remain open about Snowden.
Where I may disagree is that all in the 1% are only FOR the 1%.
frylock
(34,825 posts)it would've been nice to see him "man up" in Ohio in 2004 as well. Who knows how the 2004 elections may have turned out if Senator Kerry "manned up" against the swiftboaters, rather than electing to ignore them.
montanacowboy
(6,083 posts)I have no respect for Kerry - I remember Ohio 2004 and the Swift Boaters - he tucked tail and retreated - so screw him
I am not interested in anything he has to say
Response to uhnope (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
olddad56
(5,732 posts)mylye2222
(2,992 posts)90-percent
(6,829 posts)If the good guys of history ever do end up on top again, Snowden's service to his country will be far more historically significant than anything Kerry ever did in his life.
-90% jimmy
Dopers_Greed
(2,640 posts)dballance
(5,756 posts)It's a real shame that a person who testified against the system has become part of it.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
Jerry442
(1,265 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
BlueInPhilly
(870 posts)and he broke the law. The people here who hurl invectives at Secretary Kerry and the Obama administration are why I hardly come to this site anymore. You are being divisive and turning your own against their party. GOP operatives? When will you talk about Benghazi next?
olddad56
(5,732 posts)MBS
(9,688 posts)
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)where there were no instances of Obama saying no bothers me much more than Snowden exposing it. I agreed w/ candidate Obama for his calls for transparent and enforcing/finding terrorists without short-cutting the law.
GOP operatives? Why. This is one issue where he has shown little change from the previous administration.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)people know what the hell is going on .. how else would we even have clue as to the extent of their collection of data on U.S. citizens? Is this the U.S.S.R now? Mr. Snowden would be treated with the same contempt as Chelsea Manning. Mr. Kerry needs to ''man up".
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)I haven't always agreed with everything Kerry has said or done in his career but I have immense respect for the man and all his service to his country. The courage Kerry displayed during the Vietnam war, while both a serviceman in that country and an outspoken critic of it here in America, is a billion times greater than anything that sniveling shitbag in Russia, whom many people here sickeningly refer to as a "hero", has ever shown.
MBS
(9,688 posts)It took courage for him to volunteer in Vietnam,and even more courage to oppose the Vietnam war. He tried, against all odds, to call attention to the roots of the BCCI scandal, despite the opposition of both Democrats and Republicans in Congress. He has fought for the environment for more than 35 years, in Congress, and now at the State Department. At State, he has put real energy and creativity into solving a slew of thorny diplomatic problems, whether or not the armchair pundits proclaim the problems "soluble". He has put his life on the line, and his career on the line, for causes he believes in, usually without sufficient recognition, and often at some political cost to himself. (The lingering resentment of his public opposition to the Vietnam war led directly to the creation of the @#$ Swiftboat Liars, whose campaign lies arguably cost him the presidency).
Bill Clinton captured this well in his 2004 speech on behalf of Kerry. Kerry's motto, he said , is "Send me." Clinton got that completely right. Sec. Kerry is a patriot in the highest and best sense.
I can imagine that Kerry would have limited respect for American citizens who choose to flee the country rather than stay and fight for their convictions. Fleeing to Russia (or Hong Kong or Ecuador or wherever) rather than staying and fighting is not a life choice that Kerry would ever make. And that is something that I admire Kerry for.
YvonneCa
(10,117 posts)... about John Kerry.
Reter
(2,188 posts)I'm not voting for anyone in 2016 who doesn't support a full presidential pardon.
yurbud
(39,405 posts)I think Kerry means cut off your balls and give them to Wall Street, like he has done himself.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)And hers came from a Republican senator and corporate heir. I notice that he sure likes spending it.
Somehow, I've just never felt the hot burning love that brought them to the altar.
Man up indeed. Snowden's the real man here.
MBS
(9,688 posts)See my post #67.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)Let the chips fall where they may.
YvonneCa
(10,117 posts)karynnj
(59,501 posts)First of all, Kerry inherited millions from his own mother. From what can be seen from a distance, both Teresa's marriages were/are strong and based on love. It is completely presumptuous that you would ignore that Teresa, in addition to her wealth, was extremely beautiful, very intelligent and shared many interests with John Kerry. The comments of Teresa's adult children on their respect and love for Kerry suggest that they differ from your completely baseless (other than Republican 2004 smears) opinion. Not to mention, they have now been happily married for 19 years.
I think your character assassination here are on a par with those, who rather than speak of what Snowden did or said - attack him with derogatory names and cheap attacks. I really think it would be better for EVERYONE NO MATTER WHAT THEIR POSITION avoid this.
I suspect that the anger and invective on both sides makes it harder to even consider any intelligent discussion -- and there are many that could happen. I did not see anywhere as many threads on the work of Senator Leahy's committee as I have on Snowden. Yet, it is via Congress that oversight could be increased.
Additionally, there are likely interesting side issues - including blue sky ideas that could be developed to provide clearer avenues for whistle blowers. From my point of view, it is not reasonable to rule that ANY person with classified information could give it to anyone in the media without consequence. Doing that means that - in effect - nothing is classified. But, where that is the danger on one side, the danger on the other is that government could classify anything that could embarrass those in power.
I also think far too much is classified. Could there be a bipartisan board that regularly reviews classified material to determine whether it can be safely declassified? Are there dangers for political circuses with this -- as in Benghazi!!? How could that be minimized - keeping government as transparent as possible without crippling its function?
I get where Kerry is coming from. He fought leaks throughout his career - including when he led on the investigations of Contra gun and arms running, BCCI and the MIA/POW investigation. In all cases, he wanted the output to be the public hearings and the reports where he included just what he could prove in a court of law. That is why all the Senators on the MIA/POW committee signed on to the final report - including RW Bob Smith and why his Contra and BCCI reports are important. In the 1990s - to end investigation - the CIA publicly agreed that Kerry was correct in the Contra report.
In his current job, he more than anyone else has had to deal with the disclosures - including many of things done by the British, Australian, or other allied governments. He has long term good relations with many of his peers - which are not affected by this, but in many cases, they are affected by the problems that Snowden caused for their governments. He argued long and often in 2004 for international intelligence and law enforcement as a better response to non state terrorism than attacking country after country. Obama's recent speech shows they are not far apart. How do you think the inability of the US to keep FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE REPORTS safe affects that goal?
There are several committees that could, within the law, investigate what the intelligence committee is doing. At this point, there is nothing that has shown that the NSA has broken the FISA law. Rather than idolizing Snowden or Greenwald, why not get busy in grassroots efforts to get Congress to change the FISA law to make illegal things that people are angry about.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)Kerry can be serially shown, with his own words and actions, to have changed his convictions like I change my socks.
He's a patrician, he has little emotional connection with those he considers his social inferiors, and he likes to spend a lot of money on aristocratic pursuits. He demonstrates a sense of entitlement to me.
A man of his caliber has no business impugning a man of Snowden's caliber. I feel obligated to call for Kerry to "check his privilege" when he mocks and impugns a guy who bests him in every way except for blue blood.
Why we in the Democrat Party coddle and defend men of privilege who revel in authoritarian politics is beyond my understanding. I do not suffer reactionaries well.
I respect your point of view, regardless of our differences. Please refrain from calling mine idiotic. It seriously impedes the chances that I'll be swayed by what you say.
karynnj
(59,501 posts)Kerry has been able to connect with people of far less priviledge than he has - starting with all the men who reported to him during his over three years in the NAVY. I have heard some of those on the swiftboat speak to him. I also know people from MA who personally know of cases where he not only related to people, but went out of his way to quietly help them - with absolutely no publicity. I personally know people - of no power or position - who Kerry has not only related to but was very nice to. You might consider that virtually everyone who worked for him in the many positions he has had has spoken of him with respect and affection - including many interns.
Not to mention, it is ridiculous to call everything that is not 100% libertarian - authoritarian. There is no way that looking at the entire scale, that Kerry is closer to authoritarian than to anarchist (the other extreme). Not to mention, he is not and has never been a reactionary.
Why you think it is credible for you to repeat a RW talking point that Kerry can not relate to people, in defense of Snowden, who has been alienated from most of the people around him since he dropped out of school - if not before - is hard to understand.
I certainly disagree that Snowden is the better person - in any dimension - much less all of them. However, you will NOT find a post where I am repeating any of the negative names. The criticism is for actions - actions that you agree with as do others, but which I don't agree with and which are against the law if proven to be true.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)I am appalled at the constitutional violations the government has undertaken - and denied until caught red-handed - in the name of "security." Any fool who reads history knows that when states begin surveilling all their citizens and assembling universal dossiers, abuse of power, coercion, and enforcement of "correct" thinking and actions will follow. This is the literal antithesis of liberty, and of the liberal mindset. It shocks me to have to point that out over and over on a liberal board.
Kerry is reactionary because he wants continuance of the system that Snowden exposed. He enjoys that system's privileges, and long ago made a decision to defend it, as evidenced by his actions.
I didn't say that Snowden is the better person. But he is ten times the man Kerry is.
karynnj
(59,501 posts)Kerry is a far better man than Snowden will ever be. My opinion of Snowden is that he extremely bright in ONE area and is rather weak else wise. His answer on not speaking out in Russia is disingenuous. The reason he can't has nothing to do with language. Not to mention as you care if people have the ability to relate, I assume if I were stranded in a country for a year, I would learn the language, the culture and meet people - not hole up watching TV.
Not to mention Kerry is not reactionary - look at everything he proposed for 2004 - He demanded major change on the environment and health care -- and on foreign policy. You might look back to 2007 - when Kerry was one of the few to join Dodd on fighting the FISA bill. He was against ILLEGALLY collecting the data with no controlling Congressional approval or oversight. However, it is NOT the domestic spying leaks that he speaks of when he speaks of Snowden having harmed the country. It is the release of INTERNATIONAL documents - sometimes not even on US actions - where the releases almost seemed timed to embarrass him or Obama when they had international trips scheduled. Not to mention, Kerry went as far as he could as SoS in saying that somethings needed to change -- and that Obama agreed. ( http://www.cnet.com/news/us-surveillance-went-too-far-admits-john-kerry/ ) That does not absolve Snowden.
To me, your descriptions in this post are neither progressive or liberal -- they are libertarian. Is my Senator, Bernie Sanders, reactionary as well because he says that Snowden should not get a pardon?
As I said, it would be better to form grassroots organizations to push Congress to change the policy -- thus the law -- on these issues.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)And I am genuinely glad to have seen it.
I don't expect someone who has a strongly positive view of Kerry to abandon that because I express my distaste for him. That's exactly as it should be. I'm interested in adding perspective, not dictat.
A diversity of opinion fueling a discussion of the pros and cons of an issue is the keystone of liberal discourse. I abhor the hive-mind uniformity - and the vicious snark - that greet the independent-minded posters here on DU. [I'll emphasize that you didn't show me any of that.]
The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.
- Bertrand Russell. Unpopular Essays, "Philosophy and Politics" (1950).
Kerry no longer gets my highest admiration because of actions, words, and attitudes that are clearly (to me) incongruent with what it means to be a liberal (with a small l). I respect that you've reached a different conclusion.
There seem to be a lot of archly-held ideas here about what "progressives" should think and say. As with Christianity, the ideology has fractured over time into many subgroups and sects, each convinced that they alone are the true keepers of the flame. The religious impulse to condemn and harass the heretics can be found in way too many threads here.
It's pathetic to be enslaved to someone else's ideology, and I'd sooner put a gun in my mouth than be such a slave.
I don't see how it advances the discussion to try labeling my opinions as libertarian, whatever that means. I am a registered Democrat. The Party gets all of my political donations and most of my votes. (I won't vote for a corrupt pol, even if he/she is a D.)
The only label my opinions can rightly wear is "mine." I subscribe to no -isms. I avoid belief in ideologies. I am guided instead by an instinct that we should think for ourselves, and a conviction that we are free people who should not be spied upon by our government. I am backed by the Constitution in asserting that freedom. I see attempts to mislabel and disparage the demand for human dignity and freedom from criminal surveillance as a way to avoid speaking to the arguments.
Snowden, like all humans, has his failings. That a person has failings does not diminish those moments when he or she demonstrates the courage to speak truth to power with certain knowledge that it will have dire consequences. If anything, it ennobles him or her, for it shows that with all our shortcomings, some of us still find a way to rise up out of the mud. Snowden spoke truth to power on a scale that's rarely if ever seen. And like those who've done it before him, he's been relentlessly attacked by the status quo, which abhors having light shone upon it.
Let's just say I'm glad not to be aligned with James Clapper when it comes to assessing Snowden.
Another real liberal and courageous man, Daniel Ellsberg, showed he had the stuff of greatness 40 years ago. History proved him right. Ellsberg considers Snowden a true patriot and hero. I expect history to be equally as kind to Snowden as it has been to Ellsberg, long after Kerry has faded away. Time will tell.
Splinter Cell
(703 posts)Snowden is a coward and a piece of shit. If he really thought he was doing something noble, he wouldn't have run. He could have stayed and faced the music, to show he believed what he was doing was right. He's a traitor.
olddad56
(5,732 posts)Kerry sold out long ago.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)You only followed MSM who relayed nothing of his counterattacks! INFORM YOURSELF!!!!
sendero
(28,552 posts)I don't watch the MSM now or then, I get my news from the internet and I saw just about nothing from him.
In fact, of every YouTube clip of various origins I have ever seen of Kerry, the only time I have EVER seen Kerry get worked up about ANYTHING is was his desire to bomb Syria.
Kerry can fuck a duck. He's another dead-to-me ass-hat oligarch-controlled politician. I no longer trust a single word from his mouth, and marvel that anyone else could.
BigDemVoter
(4,149 posts)So he can spend the rest of his life in prison?