QOTD: Conor Friedersdorf
Here, in this great article about this latest example of the "shaming of the shrill":
I am mystified by the "privacy moderate" who yearns for a debate about the surveillance state without anyone being so transgressive as to leak the information without which there would be no debate.
This makes no sense to me either. How can you have a debate about secret programs if nobody reveals the secret? It's daft.
I do think Friedersdorf misses something obvious in his analysis, however. Many of the elites take this position simply because there are lots of personal/professional reasons for not wanting to be associated with the shrill. It was ever thus.
BTW: I still think Chris Hayes explains the phenomenon as well as anyone.