[antoko]

...who is rallying an increasingly unified Democratic caucus to his side, as well as 61 House Democrats who voted no on Wednesday but are now publicly signaling their discontent.

That's HUGE. Does anyone have any more details on this?

The tone of the whole article seems to indicate that change is inevitable. We need to stay vigilant and make sure the changes aren't just window-dressing.

[danso]

I'm surprised people find this hard to believe. It's less than 2 years after the defeat of SOPA, a bill that enjoyed incredible, nearly unprecedented bipartisan support and in the end, after the blackout, faced massive, unprecedented bipartisan opposition and retreat.

Politicians may be slow, but they'll respond to momentum.

[SCAQTony]

Respectfully, I don't believe the momentum angle; I believe in the tipping point premise whereas Snowden became the human face for this continuing failure of the republic.

It's my belief that skilled politicians equate the Edward Snowden revelations and the fears he has of losing his life to that of the "rape of Lucretia" in Ancient Rome. (The rape and suicide of Lucretia toppled the monarchy in Rome and brought in the Republic.)

60-minutes, Wired Magazine, the New York Times have been talking about Patriot Act abuses and even the signing of the NDAA which gave Obama the right to imprison anyone without a lawyer or the right to trial. It also gave him the right to drone-kill anyone if so desired.

All of this has gone over the public's head because a real life example wasn't involved - BUT - when Edward Snowden, a real person said, "I may be killed for telling you all of this" and then abandoned a sweet paycheck because he couldn't live with myself if he didn't that got people's attention much like the aforementioned rape and suicide of Lucretia in ancient Rome.

Just a thought.

[griffordson]

I've been watching the NSA story closely for years and I disagree. Snowden provided documentation. Until now all the whistle-blowers who were telling the same stories were easily dismissed because they couldn't provide solid evidence. And the administration was able to confuse and mislead Congress by assuring them that they were not doing anything more than a Grand Jury could do during an investigation. The members of Congress who knew better were either complicit or they were silenced by the rules covering classified briefings (a weak excuse in my opinion.)

Granted, Snowden is an important part of the story, and he will be remembered very favorably by history. But for people who are predisposed to buying the administration's fear mongering, he has been easily dismissed and used as a distraction in the short term.

[nitid_name]

I think Snowden's utility (in terms of historical significance) is in being relatively hydrophobic to the mud that's been slung at him. The only thing that's stuck (from what little I've seen of broadcast/print news reflected off the people I know who consume it) is his failure in formalized education.

He's a good looking heteronormative guy with no criminal record nor obvious sexual improprieties. He had nothing to gain from making the disclosure and apparently quite a bit to lose.

[griffordson]

The House Judiciary Committee was also lied to and they don't seem happy about that either. Most politicians also understand the potential for abuse inherent in these programs. That helps too.

It is hard to say if we'll see meaningful reform come from this, but it is encouraging see the reaction so far. The hearings in the House this week are going to make for very interesting TV too.

[danenania]

The executive branch/defense establishment blatantly lying to Congress without repercussion would amount to a coup of sorts in the precedent it sets.

I think most representatives could give two shits about the American people and their privacy, but threaten their turf and their power and it's game on.