Josh Marshall posted yesterday (http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/...) that "Like the OJ Simpson trial almost twenty years ago, there are some public events which not only divide people but divide you against people you didn’t expect to be divided against. As a Republican you may be used to disagreeing with Democrats and vice versa. But with these other kinds of public events you have the shock of realizing you had very different sets of assumptions or even values than people you were used to agreeing with."
I don't have a lot to say on the issue of the NSA's domestic spying. It seems to me to be hugely important, though, and how the nation deals with it will likely have far-reaching impacts on our daily lives.
Marshall's comment made me think, though. The question for many Americans is, How do I know who's right on this important question?
If history is any guide - especially recent history - then the liberals are right.
Bush's decision to invade Iraq is a great example. The liberals were right. The hippies who protested and argued against the war, and withstood the clamoring of the GOP and the Democrats who abetted them - the hippies were right.
Years down the road it's clear the nation and the world would've been better off if we'd listened to the liberals.
Howard Dean, Digby, Atrios, etc.
I think this NSA domestic spying case is the same kind of deal. It's complicated, it's tough to be sure - but years from now I think it'll be clear that the liberal position - Greenwald, Atrios, Digby - is the correct one.
