*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Wednesday, June 26th, 2013 10:19am PDT - promote requested by original submitter not_blankfist.

Pretty much sums up law in general as concerned with the current ruling factors in the US government right now.
*Quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Sagemind.

Yes America, go on and discuss Snowdens status and not the things he uncovered. Forget the message and talk about shooting or not shooting the messenger.

Hold his accusers up to the same criteria and watch the cocka-roaches scatter!

Unfortunately, O'Donnell's credibility here was flushed down the toilet as soon as he complained that Boehner "has called Ed Snowden a traitor". According to common use of the word traitor, as well as the dictionary, you don't need to be guilty of treason to be a traitor. M-W defines traitor as "1: one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty, 2: one who commits treason" How could anyone deny that Snowden has betrayed another's trust? Of course, WHOSE trust he betrayed and WHY is of critical importance (but not mentioned here).

So yeah, O'Donnell is correct when he points out that anyone who says Snowden is guilty of treason is not paying attention to the facts. But how is he himself any better when he applies this criticism equally to "treason" and "traitor"?

In case it wasn't clear, I'm not defending Boehner or the government. To the contrary - I wish O'Donnell and others like him would make more solid arguments. This one feels unnecessarily desperate/reaching and may serve to undermine his cause more than it helps it. (Could that have been his intent?)

Yeah, but we know what they mean and they know what they mean.

You're comparing logic to semantics.

Also being wrong on one point doesn't automatically make you wrong on all others, unless they are built upon that point as an axiom. In this case, none of them were.

I never claimed he was wrong on all of his other points. I only claimed that his credibility was ruined by making much the same kind of error as the one he's ranting against. Attempting to prove his point about the meaning of "treason" by twisting the meaning of "traitor" to suit his argument does not bode well for his credibility. It calls into question the integrity of his entire message.

But honestly, who cares what the US Constitution says..?

/grin

Screw your chicken nuggets, McDontbuythereeversowhywouldibuynow.

If a german soldier had stood against the system in WW2, we'd have called that soldier a hero.

Today, we call people like that "traitors" by media (read: government) appointment.

Everything with power in the world these days is utterly corrupt. We need a people power revolution.

You really don't have to go back that far. Try the late 80's.
Can you imagine what the StaSi of East Germany could have done with the kind of access the NSA has? They couldn't even dream of that shit.
George Orwell must feel pretty stupid now.

Snowden isn't a hero but he certainly deserves some applause. He did exactly the right thing, he did what I'd expect from somebody who fights for freedom. You know, like the people living in the land of the free.

And regarding O'Donnell's point, he's absolutely right. Somebody in a position like Boehner should know his language better and choose it more appropiately. Unfortunately, Boehner would wipe his butt with the constitution if you'd give him enough Super PAC money.