[moens]

Unfortunately I believe @northernmonkey and all OP's are talking about the "average American" and maybe the "average human". After all, in the US anyway, aren't we-the-people the government? That would make the MSM a mouthpiece for... the average American. I believe that is more or less true as sad as it is.

Aware and concerned tech-heads are trying to protect a drunken fool (the public) from a hungry bear (whoever it is that actually runs the intelligence networks). Either one is dangerous enough on its own, trying to save one from the other is like trying to settle a domestic dispute... not sure it can happen.

I don't have an answer, just an analysis.

[rayiner]

> Aware and concerned tech-heads are trying to protect a drunken fool (the public) from a hungry bear (whoever it is that actually runs the intelligence networks).

What self-important, self-aggrandizing bullshit.

[sillysaurus]

Your comment leaves much to be desired.

[rayiner]

And an attitude of comparing the public to drunken fools doesn't?

[sillysaurus]

Not the point. Idiots will be idiots. It's better to hold yourself to a higher standard.

[rayiner]

There is something to be desired about an attitude that conflates people having different values and priorities with their being "idiots."

[sillysaurus]

Sorry, I miscommunicated. I was saying that the person you responded to was being an idiot by calling the general public drunken fools (true or not) and that it's a bad thing to lower to that level of discourse by retaliating in such a content-free manner because you won't change anybody's mind that way. I.e. your position is good, but it's only through expressing ourselves well that we can have an influence on others.

Of course if it was just to feel good about calling out idiocy then it's not necessary to put in much effort countering it.