I've been mostly quiet about the NSA/Snowden story. Early on, I expressed skepticism about efforts to downplay the revelations, but then when Edward Snowden revealed himself (and his whereabouts in Hong Kong) I started to have some skepticism about that earlier skepticism. See this and this for some reasons to doubt the accuracy of what Glenn Greenwald reported. Now, of course, it's entirely possible that Snowden and Greenwald are inaccurate and reckless (or driven by a malign motive) without any of this meaning that the NSA's data collection practices are justified or wise (or legal, though as far as I can tell, no clear evidence of illegality has been revealed). So on this issue (and not only on this issue) put me down as in the middle, trying to figure out whose claims match reality, or come close.
UPDATE 3:03PM: Rand Paul erupts with gibberish.
