Things I was wrong about: Remote control

So here it is - the second in my series of Things I Was Wrong About. By the way, if you missed the first and feel the need to catch up - and frankly, who could blame you - you'll find it here.

I'm kind of partial to this series more than some of the others I do (Guilty Pleasures, Don't Ask, Things I Don't Need To Know), because, as my wife, children, close friends, banker, work colleagues, doctor and complete strangers on the street keep reminding me, I'll never run out of topics to talk about.

The one I'm talking about today is an American cultural icon, companion of couch potatoes worldwide and best friend of the AA battery industry. The remote control.

I remember the first remote control TV my parents bought. It also happened to be the first color TV we owned. It was an RCA console television, and looked similar to this one, minus the statue collection of the mixed fox/bull terrier Nipper that was the RCA mascot for years (Impressive I know that, yes? My mind is a crowded place).

Besides being able to finally see the NBC "in living color" peacock in living color for the first time, now we didn't have to get up to change from one of the seven - count 'em seven - channels to the other (3 network, 4 local).

The remote controls then weren't the streamlined, digitally programed, colorful, button-laiden devices they are today. The were like little bricks, usually offering only four buttons: volume up and down, and channel up and down.

Still, not having to get up to change the channel was a revelation. It gave me the perfect excuse get even less physical activity than I was already getting. I know you wouldn't think it to look at me now, but I was a fat little kid (you know I can hear you laughing, right?). And this new, magical device wasn't going to help that.

As the years have gone by, we've been able to control more and more things by remote. Lights to drapes. Thermostats to DVRs. Cameras to ovens. Today, with the power we hold in our hands, there's virtually no reason to get off the couch to do anything. Except get the potato chips.

Even as I write this, it seems hard to believe there was a point in time where I thought, "How lazy do you have to be that you can't get your fat ass up and walk four or five feet to the TV and change the channel?" But that was before molded-to-your-hand grip remote controls. And Netflix.

So on the long, long list of things I was wrong about, let me add the modern day convenience I could now never live without. The remote control.

I think that just about wraps up this post. CLICK! Power off.

Snow job

This is not going to play well with many of my friends. But here goes: Edward Snowden is not a hero, despite how desperately he wants you to think he is.

It's easy to see how he might've been mistaken for one. After all, he single-handedly blew the lid off the government's PRISM program to spy on all our phone calls and internet communications.

Except that he didn't.

The not so clandestine anymore PRISM surveillance program has been operating since at least 2007 with the passage of the Protect America Act under George Bush. What Edward Snowden brought to light was the scope of the operation. But, contrary to his story, he didn't stumble onto it once he had the job at NSA. His motivation wasn't pure. His aim wasn't true.

Snowden at minimum is a vulgar opportunist. He intentionally set out to get his job and top-level clearance at the NSA specifically so he could steal - and steal is the correct word - the top-secret, classified information, which by the way is a federal offense. He also stole very specific information, most of it not dealing with our phone calls being monitored, but information that would be particularly useful to foreign governments. There was nothing random in his approach. It was a systematic search of the data. Opportunist may be the nicer name for him.

Not long ago I wrote a post that talked about the balancing act between the public's right to know and the governments need for secrecy in order to do the job we ask it to do. I'm really at a loss as to why it's so shocking to some that our government would do the things Snowden suggests. The only thing I can say is have you read the papers lately?

This is the world we live in. And it has been for a long time now.

If Snowden was in fact a patriotic whistleblower, he could've done many things differently. He could have collected the information then brought it to any members of Congress not on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee or Senate Intelligence Committee (both of which have known about the program, its capabilities and its targets since the beginning) for investigation. Instead what he chose to do was flee to first China then Russia, guaranteeing that they now have a treasure trove of information regarding our surveillance of their countries. Foreign surveillance that does not impact American liberties. Snowden has said that they have not seen any of the stolen data, but that simply doesn't stand up to reason. It's the only chip he has to play.

I don't know if that makes him a traitor. At the very least it makes him a coward.

Am I comfortable with the degree of latitude the NSA has? Of course not. It definitely needs to be investigated and changes need to be made in the program. But seriously, when the Norwegian government starts talking about nominating Snowden for a Nobel Prize, something is terribly wrong.

Only one person knows what Snowden's true motivations were. And despite everything he's saying, he's not talking.