Originally Posted by TonyR
See how that works? He has a position and he actually makes a specific case for it that makes sense, and doesn't have to use humor or sarcasm or personal attacks to do it.
It's more just a case of you being unable to connect other glaringly obvious points.
You've more or less already conceded that other abuses regularly occur in this government. And that the government is just to big and unwieldy for our elected officials to even really do or even know anything about it. (AKA the Axelrod Doctrine)
But now you leap to the "well it's probably just safe to assume nobody's abusing this incredibly powerful information gathering system"
And regardless, having a system in place does not make that system Constitutional. The Constitution was built under the premise that government could not be trusted by default.