Morning Rant -- The MSM and Snowden

Good morning All,

My morning routine usually has me enjoying a cup of coffee and eating some breakfast while reviewing several preferred online news outlets. However today, as what happens from time to time, I put on one of the MSM outlets on the T.V.

ABC news was the news channel selected at random and thus the reason for the birth of this thread today.

As i was waiting for my coffee to brew, I stood watching a report about Snowden and how he has not yet left the Russian airport, which then lead into a brief but very significant report on the state of privacy in the US.

The report now claims that more than half of the US population, which is apparently up 10 points, no longer see Snowden as legitimate whistleblower and more of a criminal. The piece goes on to further claim that the privacy concerns revolving around data collection, call monitoring etc is accepted by the majority of the population in efforts to combat terrorism, in light of the recent review of NSA policy by congress.

I was shocked as ABC news tried to claim that almost 70% of the population is willing to accept Orwellian type surveillance...

Now, they did not mentioned how large the sample was for the above figures, but somehow i think it was a number I could count to using both hands.

I see a report like this and think to my self; "My god, how many people will buy this hook, line and sinker."

Now, for all I know this could be true, but i still doubt the veracity of the data.

Opinions?

Well they only managed to defeat the Amash amendment by 12 votes with 12 members of the house not voting. Sounds like at least in the house, theres a good number of folks on the right side of the issue. Then there is the speech made by Senator Ron Wyden the day before yesterday on the surveillance of Americans. Great speech. Google it pls. I would link to it but using my phone right now.

Another bright light last night were the remarks made in favor of defunding the NSA collection of call data during the debate over the Amash amendment. Pretty strong language by those in favor and idiotic/naive comments by those opposed.

Alan Grayson is another guy to watch. He has been flying under the radar since he managed to get back in. He missed a term because he was defeated but he is back. This time around he has been more focused on trapping votes for issues you would support rather than being in the oppositions face. He has been successful too in getting things stuffed into bills that by themselves would never get passed.

Chin up. The battle has only just begun.

(Excuse typos. Using iphone)

Forgot to add, F the pollsters. I dont trust any of them even if they are in favor of my views.

That would be the machinations of the techno-oligarchy. I've seen them do it previously to great effect. Say something often enough and you forget it's a lie. They did it with the Iraq War and they did it successfully with Occupy. I'm not sure if they are going to be quite as successful this time around as, whereas the Iraq war was foreign soil and Occupy had its own negative associations (unrest? threat? nuisance?), this time it's a subject matter that hits everybody at home. whether people would speak out about it or not is truly questionable as the awareness of surveillance or the possibility of surveillance would have a chilling effect on speech--especially on the subject of surveillance. Outside of that, I wouldn't be surprised if a good chunk of the nation had a "oh god" moment when they heard that all the data was being collected because so many people tend to vent out, air or feed their dirty little secrets on the net or phone these days.

I'd be really surprised if the older generations, especially, were "okay" with this. Baby boomers would not be. Millenials are kind of blase about it. If they were polling just millenials, then you'd probably see that 70%. Baby boomers--really doubtful. They grew up in the McCarthy era after all. I know that my neighbors were pretty angry about it just a couple weeks ago.

Having been a "pollster" of sorts, I firmly agree that they should NOT be trusted - it's just too easy to select a sample group that's representative of a predetermined desired outcome. Case in point: during the post Sandy Hook gun control debacle the NY Times put out a poll saying a large majority of Americans favored more gun control - looking under the covers it was a little over a thousand people polled by telephone - what do you want to bet that they polled NY Times subscribers....

As far as the missing outrage from large segments of the population regarding the NSA Surveillance: the "metadata" misdirection still has most of the country bamboozled about what is being captured. If the public was effectively informed that it's not "just metadata" and that ALL of their communications content was also being captured, it is certain the public sentiment against such intrusions would be much greater. As it is, most people still believe only metadata is being captured and understand so little about the implications that they simply don't care. It seems that another major supplemental misdirection is that only "foreign" communications are captured - which is of course erroneous, but has a soothing effect on the masses that don't communicate internationally - as well as the rest of our nation's propaganda consumers.

ganjoa

I swear those morning news-like shows are aimed at someone in need of an opinion due to lack of information. They are painful to stomach. So transparent and harmful.

70%? Really? Says who? I recently conducted a poll which showed 80% of Americans think morning news show hosts are blabbering imbeciles incapable of a coherent thought, willing to prostitute their dignity at the drop of a hat. The other 20% was my dog and she had no opinion.

I really believe the longer this country heads in its current direction, the less and less of a population will exist willing to soak this garbage up. As times get leaner, the more obvious the charade will become even to the most obtuse. No poll will change that.