Whether a country is actually free is determined not by how well-rewarded its convention-affirming media elites are and how ignored its passive citizens are but by how it treats its dissidents, those posing authentic challenges to what the government does.

Of all the views that are detached from reality, the most delusional is that Christians are persecuted in the U.S.

It's so much easier to debate people when you can pretend that they hold moronic position that they don't actually believe.

Transparency is for those who carry out public duties and exercise public power. Privacy is for everyone else.

No matter the specific techniques involved, historically mass surveillance has had several constant attributes. Initially, it is always the country’s dissidents and marginalized who bear the brunt of the surveillance, leading those who support the government or are merely apathetic to mistakenly believe they are immune. And history shows that the mere existence of a mass surveillance apparatus, regardless of how it is used, is in itself sufficient to stifle dissent. A citizenry that is aware of always being watched quickly becomes a compliant and fearful one.

They're called 'facts', and my role is to amplify those, not cheerlead. And I don't care at all what you think of my motives.

It is always unconscionable for the government to punish people for expressing an idea merely because government officials - or the majority of citizens - decide that those ideas are 'dangerous' or 'wrong.' That is a power nobody ought to possess.