General Discussion

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

41. You're

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 05:29 PM

Jun 2013

Juvenile way to respond.

Your whole approach to this topic, and to other people, is a juvenile lashing out. You're not even thinking before you comment now. First, of course I know what you post, you made six or seven posts in this thread alone, before mine! Second, "comments like yours projecting their hypocrisy"? Lol, whut? Do you just have a set of go-to accusations and pull one out without bothering to see if it fits the context?

Do you know how you look to someone just reading through these threads?

...posting condescending nonsense and have the nerve to call someon "juvenile"?

I know how "you look" trying to hijack this thread with your silly accusations.

I've posted many threads, but here you are in this one launching personal attacks.

"With today's lawsuit, the ACLU is now attacking Section 215 on three legal fronts"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022997462

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

86 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

For some, the goal is to portray the program as a crime [View all] ProSense Jun 2013 OP

And for some, the goal is to whitewash everything the administration does LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #1

So you're OK with people spinning this as a "crime"? n/t ProSense Jun 2013 #2

It is a crime, people. Why hate on our freedoms? grahamhgreen Jun 2013 #8

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #44

crime is a real word veganlush Jun 2013 #51

Sorry, it's not the intent of any law to give the government records of all telephone calls. grahamhgreen Jun 2013 #64

it's call LOGS veganlush Jun 2013 #65

Right, like what a police state would do. Not the intent of any law. Violates 4th amendment. Illegal grahamhgreen Jun 2013 #67

you,re not saying veganlush Jun 2013 #76

crime would mean it's iilegal. veganlush Jun 2013 #66

Right, like what a police state would do. Not the intent of any law. Violates 4th amendment. Illegal grahamhgreen Jun 2013 #68

then you havent read veganlush Jun 2013 #74

Interesting thread.. given you just posted a flimsy Business Insider article avaistheone1 Jun 2013 #31

+1 ...and very consitant about it. For some the POTUS is the perfect g0d. L0oniX Jun 2013 #10

+1, done-- right out of the gate. Marr Jun 2013 #18

You mean the job is to whitewash... Matariki Jun 2013 #27

LOL, that deserves an award for best 1st response! reformist2 Jun 2013 #80

I've come for my reward LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #84

It's being received as "That black man is breaking into my home" EC Jun 2013 #3

right. one couldn't possibly be against the massive expansion of surveillance unless one cali Jun 2013 #5

When did this sudden "massive expansion" happen? JoePhilly Jun 2013 #54

Only counts when it's Bush. allin99 Jun 2013 #78

WTF L0oniX Jun 2013 #11

We know...any criticism of the actions of the Administration is racist LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #19

Oh, GROTESQUE. sibelian Jun 2013 #48

the fig leaf of legality. Again. cali Jun 2013 #4

May I ProSense Jun 2013 #7

Always moving the bar Matariki Jun 2013 #28

Maybe not criminal, in the legal sense, but certainly unjustifiable, in the moral sense. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #6

once again the "it's legal" excuse is raised - following orders is no excuse nt msongs Jun 2013 #9

Following laws is what makes it legal. There isn't another definition. n/t ProSense Jun 2013 #12

The Nuremberg Laws were legal. Supporting them was immoral and heinous. cali Jun 2013 #13

Are you trying to talk sense? L0oniX Jun 2013 #15

Jim Crow Was Legal, Dred Scott Was A Legal Ruling, Slavery Was Legal... WillyT Jun 2013 #17

Please ProSense Jun 2013 #20

We don't think our rights are fodder for you or the President's debate TheKentuckian Jun 2013 #39

"We can have an informed debate about the wisdom of this law only if we know what our courts..." ProSense Jun 2013 #55

It makes it legal Life Long Dem Jun 2013 #34

Total BS, simple Authoritarian argument. "It's the Law, so it must be ok...!" Katashi_itto Jun 2013 #85

The usual authoritarian response "it's legal" ...should have sleeping pills dispensed with it. L0oniX Jun 2013 #14

The usual obfuscation about the legality of the program is a straw man. n/t ProSense Jun 2013 #22

It's odd. Fox 'news' calls Snowden a hero; Boehner says he is a traitor. McConnell says he should be AlinPA Jun 2013 #16

This anxiety over protecting the President's image is tiresome. mick063 Jun 2013 #21

Are you saying ProSense Jun 2013 #23

"Maybe it's just that I think it's wrong and smacks of an agenda. " LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #25

That's your problem. You accuse people of motives they don't necessarily have. Demit Jun 2013 #32

You know what, ProSense Jun 2013 #36

Juvenile way to respond. Demit Jun 2013 #37

You're ProSense Jun 2013 #41

What a bizarre accusation. I didn't even post in the thread you link to. Demit Jun 2013 #42

lol - no she's just doing her job TBF Jun 2013 #43

What are you doing? ProSense Jun 2013 #47

I wasn't the one who called you "nuts" - TBF Jun 2013 #50

It appears ProSense Jun 2013 #58

I think it might be an autobot that needs rebooting. Demit Jun 2013 #52

Did you say something about being "juvenile"? n/t ProSense Jun 2013 #60

There was never any logic there to begin with - TBF Jun 2013 #69

"You're nuts." ProSense Jun 2013 #46

I will defend him when people lie and say that he killed social security with "chained CPI" tridim Jun 2013 #29

Yup, cause they want to, cause they can get away with, cause it brings power, cause it is profitable TheKentuckian Jun 2013 #38

+1 Well stated. SlimJimmy Jun 2013 #63

So you think the president is a failure? Andy823 Jun 2013 #40

lol - sure every damned progressive on this board lost their mind and voted for Romney. TBF Jun 2013 #45

Not sure why you are replying Andy823 Jun 2013 #61

True Life Long Dem Jun 2013 #24

Yes, Snowden used the term criminal, what an incredible flamingdem Jun 2013 #26

havent seen that. whether or not it's legal is irrelevent. bowens43 Jun 2013 #30

Should we be arguing legality? Or should we be arguing WHY and HOW we annabanana Jun 2013 #33

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it's a duck" avaistheone1 Jun 2013 #35

Ah, the *appearances* of things, again, Prosense. sibelian Jun 2013 #49

The shift to the term SPYING is an attempt to avoid discussing details. JoePhilly Jun 2013 #53

nice try, squealer nt markiv Jun 2013 #56

The goal should be to stop any ongoing unconstitutional practices. Period. KurtNYC Jun 2013 #57

No, the sadder thing is if all this IS legal. dkf Jun 2013 #59

Kick nt Not water May 2015 #86

It is up to us to put pressure on them to recall the law that makes it legal. liberal_at_heart Jun 2013 #62

Yep. We can hate it as much as we want but it's not illegal Number23 Jun 2013 #70

Yup, and here's the thing ProSense Jun 2013 #71

People on this web site call it illegal even when told POINT BLANK that it's not Number23 Jun 2013 #73

It is a crime against the Constitution. 99Forever Jun 2013 #72

Can you ProSense Jun 2013 #75

Read it. 99Forever Jun 2013 #77

We don't have to wait for some court to tell us this is unconstitutional! reformist2 Jun 2013 #81

No, ProSense Jun 2013 #83

Good post. Harmony Blue Jun 2013 #82

"Some" includes a FISA court who looked at the practices KurtNYC Jun 2013 #79