home

That Was Obama Then . . .

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Legislation
Posted on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:34:18 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit
Obama campaign during the primaries:

To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.

This is Obama now:

My view on FISA has always been that the issue of the phone companies per se is not one that overrides the security interests of the American people."

Can you say "willing to say or do anything to win?" Or if you prefer, the "new" politics.

Speaking for me only

< Wednesday Afternoon Open Thread | In the Mail: Outlaw Journalist >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    That Was Obama Then . . . | 206 comments (206 topical)
    Really disgusting. Even if a pol is (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:36:15 PM EST
    a pol.  Will he get away with it?  Probably.

    Did I mention I have a daughter (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:38:33 PM EST
    living outside the U.S.?  

    [ Parent ]
    With Dems like these... (5.00 / 7) (#4)
    by mg7505 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:39:05 PM EST
    BTD, you've always called for holding pols' feet to the fire, but what leverage do we have now? Angry letters and phone calls? Gawsh I've done enough yelling/letter-writing/rallying against Repubs...now I have to call up Dems too?

    [ Parent ]
    You'd best follow Kos's advice: (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:41:49 PM EST
    berate those in the House of Representatives.  

    [ Parent ]
    Feh, (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:19:32 PM EST
    forgeaboutit. What good is that going to do? They've already voted.

    [ Parent ]
    i get tingles whenever obama (5.00 / 14) (#99)
    by sancho on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:26:10 PM EST
    says "my view has always been. . ." b/c it means he's going to tell me some new sweet lie. does kos plan to use this advice when obama is president and enables similar sell-outs? b/c that's why nancy chose him. they are a team and it is naive to think obama is against this in any meaningful way. a pol is a pol, yes, but just b/c a pol has been branded "democrat" does not mean he wants what "we" democrats want. i honestly dont understand why dem voters think he deserves their vote. (and i hate mccain too.)

    [ Parent ]
    You're right, he'll get away with it. (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by shannon on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:41:21 PM EST
    KO was already spinning for him the other night on this issue -- said something to the effect that Obama may be setting things up so that he could punish the telcos after he was president.

    [ Parent ]
    Heh the same way Bush was going to (5.00 / 7) (#10)
    by mg7505 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:42:43 PM EST
    punish Halliburton if we just gave him a second term. Oh wait we did.

    [ Parent ]
    lol...or when Schwartzenegger was going (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:49:19 PM EST
    to investigate himself, i.e., the groping girls allegations.

    [ Parent ]
    Or the way the Governator (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:53:58 PM EST
    promised he would balance the budget, but, instead, floated bonds; state's debt:  20 billion dollars!!!!

    [ Parent ]
    The SF Chronicle was so eager to endorse (5.00 / 4) (#105)
    by hairspray on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:27:08 PM EST
    Arnold, and then spent the next two years assailing his lame positions, like getting money out of politics and balancing the budget.  So do the SF people ever learn?  Nope they did the same with Obama.  The took every opportunity to twist Hillary's and Bill's words and endorse Obama.  Yesterday they did a big editorial slamming O for backing out of public funding. I expct the same scenario for Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    "We"? (3.50 / 2) (#33)
    by Tortmaster on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:57:50 PM EST
    I think you mean, "you" (or "me"). I didn't vote for Bush, did you?

    It is always great to keep Obama's feet to the fire, but to expect him to work miracles after a couple of weeks as the presumptive nominee?

    He'll get around to it.

    [ Parent ]

    Are you always so forgiving? (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:59:07 PM EST
    Doesn't seem to fit w/your user id.

    [ Parent ]
    Just another version (none / 0) (#230)
    by vigkat on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 09:49:28 PM EST
    of "you're likable enough Hillary."

    [ Parent ]
    HA! (5.00 / 6) (#126)
    by Shainzona on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:38:58 PM EST
    If you believe that, I have a bridge I'd like to speak to you about.

    [ Parent ]
    He'll get around to... (5.00 / 6) (#130)
    by santarita on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:43:16 PM EST
    what?   Sounds like he is as willing to suspend the rule of law and the Constitution as Bush is.  Sounds like another "Just elect me and trust me to do the right thing by you" kind of pol.

    [ Parent ]
    work MIRACLES? (5.00 / 10) (#142)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:50:33 PM EST
    are you saying it woud be a miracle to maintain a consistent position for more than a few days at a time?

    I wonder what Hillary's position on FISA is?  Will she have to mimick Obama so she doesn't cause him any trouble?

    [ Parent ]

    Getting Around (5.00 / 4) (#145)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:51:51 PM EST
    Should be no problem for him. He's more flexible than Gumby!

    [ Parent ]
    ROTFLMAO! (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:00:14 PM EST
    And my teenager loved that show when he was younger! LOL!

    [ Parent ]
    Obama threw Feingold under the bus.... (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by Aqua Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:18:25 PM EST
    ...miracle???

    [ Parent ]
    Nobody asked for the miracle of transubstantiation (4.75 / 16) (#83)
    by RonK Seattle on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:21:46 PM EST
    Just the miracle of constancy.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh, right, Keith. (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by pie on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:43:07 PM EST
    What a moron.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama will already (5.00 / 8) (#14)
    by pie on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:45:21 PM EST
    be planning for his second term on January 21st, if he gets elected.

    [ Parent ]
    The drones will keep lapping it up. (5.00 / 11) (#87)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:22:41 PM EST
    Man, I can't believe I ever watched countdown.  What I'm seeing among his viewers, Kossacks, and on Air America reminds me of the birth of the dittoheads in the 90s.

    It will come back to nip this "realignment" in the bud.

    [ Parent ]

    re KO, That was a conversation with Markos (5.00 / 3) (#184)
    by DFLer on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:23:43 PM EST
    and it was very interesting, re Markos as well. Here's a snip from the transcript:
    MOULITSAS:
    ... I don`t want to hear him talk about leadership.  I don`t want to hear him talk about defending the Constitution; I want to see him do it.  And I think if he does, it will increase the intensity and level of support that he gets from base Democrats.  If he doesn`t, I think we may worry that he`s just another one of these spineless Democrats who are more afraid of controversy and doing the right thing, than they are of actually doing the right thing.
    OLBERMANN:  But to the point of the Constitution, John Dean made a fascinating point on this news hour on Friday.  He read this bill and he knows a little something about the Constitution, too.  He says it`s so sloppily written that nothing in there would rule out later criminal liabilities for the telecom companies.
    Could that be, actually, what Obama is counting on, just sort of cede this civil action stuff which is basically in lieu of sending these people to jail and just concentrate on, you know, closing up whatever perceived weakness there is of the Democrats being soft on counterterror and, in fact, just hold a bigger punch back until after the election?
    MOULITSAS:  Well, if that`s the strategy, he has said nothing to indicate that and this is not the sort of thing that I think you have to keep quiet and secretive.  I mean, if that`s his strategy, he can say, "This is a bill that`s flawed," but, really at the end of the day he has a chance to stand for the Constitution and to show that he will protect it against forces that seek to undermine it and he will show that he has, like I said before, that he is a leader and will take the mantle of leadership on this issue and take control of the Democratic Party.
    He`s been working to sort of consolidate his power in the party.  This is the perfect example, perfect chance for him to show that a Democratic Party, a Barack Obama Democratic Party is going to be one that stands for civil liberties and the Constitution.


    [ Parent ]
    Ah Markos (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by jb64 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:33:29 PM EST
    don't hold your breath

    [ Parent ]
    Maybe Markos is awakening (5.00 / 1) (#218)
    by derridog on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:52:45 PM EST
    from having eaten the magic mushroom.

    [ Parent ]
    But but but...he's a great politician and (5.00 / 5) (#42)
    by Shainzona on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:02:55 PM EST
    ...will make a terrific POTUS.

    Er, no!!

    [ Parent ]

    BO will 'support' a filibuster ... ? (4.55 / 9) (#186)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:24:00 PM EST
    But not lead one.

    But that's okay with fauxgressive hipsters as long as their Presumptive Head Poseur is being whack or mack or whatever:

    For the second time, Mr. Obama will grace the cover of Rolling Stone this week [...]

    When Mr. Wenner asked how Mr. Obama might respond to harsh attacks from Republicans, suggesting that Democrats have "cowered" in the past, Mr. Obama replied, "Yeah, I don't do cowering." (The Inner Obama by Julie Bosman, The Caucus (NY Times political blog), June 24, 2008)

    That's odd, all my lying eyes have seen from this slickster is cowering.

    [ Parent ]

    The new politics (5.00 / 9) (#2)
    by Lahdee on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:37:21 PM EST
    the same as the old.
    Can I trade in my unity pony now for an old nag?

    No. But you can trade it in (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by mg7505 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:41:21 PM EST
    for a workhorse.

    Note: I am not a PUMA.

    [ Parent ]

    Actually...worse (5.00 / 6) (#13)
    by Aqua Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:45:02 PM EST
    The Clintons did better.

    This is an awful beginning.

    [ Parent ]

    My friend, we haven't (5.00 / 15) (#17)
    by mg7505 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:47:36 PM EST
    even started yet. If he sells out on one issue per week (ie even SLOWER than he's gone this week), he'll be more conservative than McCain by the time he takes office.

    [ Parent ]
    Yep, he is already owned by (5.00 / 8) (#39)
    by Aqua Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:00:43 PM EST
    Corporate America.   Another scamming of the public.  

    [ Parent ]
    Scamming of the super-delegates (5.00 / 13) (#60)
    by Cream City on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:14:01 PM EST
    which would be other pols, so on to it and not a scam at all; many lined their pockets with telecom money.

    Don't blame the public, as a majority of voters did not vote for Obama.  Blame the super-delegates -- the pols.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama's theme song... (5.00 / 11) (#54)
    by dianem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:10:13 PM EST
    ...should be "Won't get fooled again".  Meet the new boss... same as the old boss. Why don't we ever learn?

    [ Parent ]
    Ouch....but I am sure there will be no price (5.00 / 13) (#5)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:40:26 PM EST
    for obama to pay once again.  And, people wonder why I won't vote for him.

    He's like Bush---he's not even remotely (5.00 / 14) (#9)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:41:49 PM EST
    slick about his flip-flops. He just reverses course completely and expects all of his followers to suck it up.

    Which they gladly do. (5.00 / 12) (#11)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:43:07 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    "they"? (2.00 / 4) (#48)
    by Tortmaster on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:05:25 PM EST
    Are you also going to go against the wishes of "your" candidate and support someone other than the Democrat?

    Perhaps some Obama supporters know that you have to work hard for some issues, that all the good things in life don't fall in your lap, and that, unfortunately, at this time, Democrats are going to have to get together and work harder on FISA.  

    [ Parent ]

    Some democrats---but not Obama. (5.00 / 6) (#49)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:06:30 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Is Obama your idea of a Democrat? (5.00 / 9) (#51)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:08:37 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Apparently, Obama is ... (1.55 / 9) (#107)
    by Tortmaster on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:27:38 PM EST
    ... Hillary Clinton's idea of a Democrat. What? Did you decide that now, only after the HRC Campaign is over, you can think for yourself. That is very convenient ... and coincidental, the timing that is.

    [ Parent ]
    We thought for ourselves all along. (5.00 / 9) (#135)
    by echinopsia on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:45:17 PM EST
    That's why we chose her.

    Hillary is doing what she has to do. I don't have to agree with it and I don't have to do what she says.

    [ Parent ]

    You forgot (5.00 / 3) (#114)
    by pie on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:31:31 PM EST
    the fake snark tag there, kiddo.

    [ Parent ]
    We tell our candidates how to vote (5.00 / 1) (#219)
    by Cream City on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:54:39 PM EST
    they don't tell us.  That's the difference here in grownup land.

    Of course, sometimes they don't do as we tell them.  But the good ones at least listen.

    [ Parent ]

    "Good things in life" . . . (5.00 / 1) (#222)
    by Palomino on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:57:49 PM EST
    presumably include the Fourth Amendment, which, as a part of the Constitution since long before I was born, didn't exactly fall into my lap. It was my American birthright. But, what the hell, I'm just a spoiled kid. Times are hard, after all, and here I am, pitching a fit because Dad plans to cut my allowance.

    As for getting the Democrats together, that's up to the Unity Possum now.

    Perhaps some Obama supporters know that you have to work hard for some issues, that all the good things in life don't fall in your lap, and that, unfortunately, at this time, Democrats are going to have to get together and work harder on FISA.


    [ Parent ]
    Just as I expected (5.00 / 16) (#15)
    by Dave B on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:46:35 PM EST
    Obama really is not a liberal.

    Now we have:
    public financing
    NAFTA
    Telecom Immunity

    What will Obama flip on next?

    Oh well, living in South Dakota, my vote for president doesn't count anyway.

    Per NPR, today he disagreed with the SCOTUS (5.00 / 14) (#21)
    by jawbone on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:49:41 PM EST
    death penalty decision--saw no grounds for not allowing the states to do what they want re: death penalty.

    I did not hear a full statement, so NPR may have not quite gotten his actual meaning.

    But, given that he wanted to vote for Roberts...c'mon, what does that tell us?

    Not a liberal? Is he even a Democrat?

    He's taken over the Democratic Party--but for whom and what? Yowser.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama on DP (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:21:35 PM EST
    h/t to Steve... Obama disagreed with the decision.  Apparently they aren't conservative enough on this issue?

    Obama disagrees with high court on child rape case

    "I think that the rape of a small child, 6 or 8 years old, is a heinous crime and if a state makes a decision that under narrow, limited, well-defined circumstances the death penalty is at least potentially applicable that that does not violate our Constitution."

    One poster immidiately brought up the close 5-4 decision as to why Obama must be supported.  Obama's response negated that commenters argument.

    It has not been a good week for policy.

    [ Parent ]

    P is for Pander. (4.87 / 8) (#26)
    by Fabian on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:52:56 PM EST
    P is for Post Partisan - DemoLibertaRepublican.

    [ Parent ]
    Kumbaya.... (5.00 / 6) (#132)
    by Shainzona on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:44:43 PM EST
    Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya
    Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya
    Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya
    Oh lord, kumbaya

    Someone's laughing, lord, kumbaya
    Someone's laughing, lord, kumbaya
    Someone's laughing, lord, kumbaya
    Oh lord, kumbaya

    Someone's crying, lord, kumbaya
    Someone's crying, lord, kumbaya
    Someone's crying, lord, kumbaya
    Oh lord, kumbaya

    Someone's praying, lord, kumbaya
    Someone's praying, lord, kumbaya
    Someone's praying, lord, kumbaya
    Oh lord, kumbaya

    [ Parent ]

    U is for Unity Pony. (5.00 / 6) (#169)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:14:37 PM EST
    Unfortunately, we've got ourselves a Pander Bear.

    [ Parent ]
    Social Security, duh. (5.00 / 11) (#22)
    by MarkL on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:49:50 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    He's already gone on social security (5.00 / 9) (#61)
    by dianem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:14:55 PM EST
    He plans on taxing incomes over $250,000 to pay for any budget shortfalls. This turns Social Security from a government sponsored insurance system into  welfare, and will provide incentive for the rich to oppose it. Well, for everybody who doesn't want to be on a government welfare program to oppose it. Nobody in my family has ever been on welfare, and I'm really hoping not to be the first.

    [ Parent ]
    He will privitize everything he can... (5.00 / 2) (#189)
    by Aqua Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:24:37 PM EST
    thereby allowing more corporate greed.

    Not ALL the money has been wrung out of the middle class and working class...yet.

    [ Parent ]

    Don't forget Universal (5.00 / 5) (#23)
    by mg7505 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:50:46 PM EST
    Healthcare!

    P.S. thank you to folks in South Dakota for electing the right candidate in your primary. Too bad I can't say the same for my home (and your neighbor) Minnesota.

    [ Parent ]

    He's (5.00 / 8) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:18:43 PM EST
    not a liberal but what exactly is he? Is he a conservative? Is he a moderate? What?

    [ Parent ]
    He's A Centrist... (5.00 / 6) (#144)
    by santarita on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:51:02 PM EST
    because that's where the votes are.  He's not a leader because a leader leads people to the right choice.  Right now he's chasing the crowd.

    [ Parent ]
    Your question implies that Obama is about policies (5.00 / 4) (#148)
    by Nike on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:55:25 PM EST
    I think what we are seeing here (FISA, campaign finance, but fill the blank for any core issue you want that awaits decision up to and definitely including health and R v. Wade) is that Obama is only about positions, not policies. He's good on marketing and style points. Policies? You could be waiting a while for those.

    [ Parent ]
    I predict that despite his overtures to Elizabeth (5.00 / 12) (#102)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:26:25 PM EST
    Edwards we will not see him "flip" in the right direction to universal health care.

    [ Parent ]
    Of course not. Obama got what he wanted (5.00 / 14) (#108)
    by Cream City on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:28:02 PM EST
    already.  End of story, nothing more to see here. . . .

    [ Parent ]
    You missed two (5.00 / 3) (#146)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:54:17 PM EST
    No time kines for Iraq and no UHC

    [ Parent ]
    He also already flipped on the (5.00 / 0) (#203)
    by rjarnold on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:34:19 PM EST
    meeting with rogue leaders unconditionally.

    [ Parent ]
    And we haven't even gone a month! (none / 0) (#216)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:51:24 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    IRAQ. Remember, he was very ready (5.00 / 1) (#214)
    by Cream City on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:48:22 PM EST
    on Day One, the day after he "clinched the nomination," to suddenly sound exactly like Bush about Iraq -- backpedaling to indefinite withdrawal.

    [ Parent ]
    Well, don't forget health care. He (none / 0) (#220)
    by derridog on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:54:59 PM EST
    was for universal one-payer health care (when running for the Senate) before he was against it.

    [ Parent ]
    Wow! Obama seems ot have no sense of his own (5.00 / 9) (#16)
    by jawbone on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:47:01 PM EST
    statements, of what he has said and "stood" for.

    Cognitive dissidence--but I don't think he feels or realizes that. We do.

    I'm sorry, but he really does remind me of BushBoy. Caught in a lie? Just keep on talking--since no one is calling him on these things, no one that counts.

    I think lots of lib/progressive/leftish Dems are going to be extremely disappointed--if they aren't already.

    Just...Wow!

    [checking with his advisors] (5.00 / 7) (#24)
    by Fabian on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:50:48 PM EST
    "Okay, what's my position today?  ...and why?  Okay.  Good.  Got the podcast for me?  Thanks.  See you tomorrow folks."

    [ Parent ]
    Didn't you get the memo? (5.00 / 13) (#46)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:05:02 PM EST
    It doesn't matter what Obama or the Democrats do that might be against your interests or your principles. You Have No Where Else To Go.

    [ Parent ]
    Because (5.00 / 8) (#92)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:24:17 PM EST
    they are going to hold your uterus hostage! LOL!

    [ Parent ]
    At my age, that really is LOL (5.00 / 9) (#133)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:44:43 PM EST
    What is also laughable is for anyone to think that I trust Obama enough on SCOTUS appointments for it to effect my vote.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Me too. (5.00 / 10) (#156)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:03:19 PM EST
    It's funny because before the primaries were over we were just a bunch of old hags. Now somehow we've become young chicks who should be concerned about roe. LOL!

    [ Parent ]
    Righ there with ya.... (none / 0) (#193)
    by Aqua Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:28:37 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    ROFL! (4.33 / 6) (#138)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:46:47 PM EST
    I cannot tell you the number of times I hear or read that lame excuse from the Obamans. And I don't even have a uterus.

    It's either that, or "Make sure you stock up on wire hangers for wife, sister and daughters."

    Not only are they deranged, they are seriously sick in the head. What would Obama have to say about that if he heard that his supporters were going around town saying that?

    [ Parent ]

    He wouldn't care. n/t (5.00 / 3) (#143)
    by echinopsia on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:51:00 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    He admits that (5.00 / 7) (#64)
    by dianem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:17:01 PM EST
    He has disagreed twice with his own position statements, saying that he hadn't written them himself - an aide had, and had gotten them wrong, and he hadn't reviewed them. Of course, one had his writing on it, but that is his story and he's sticking to it.

    [ Parent ]
    What really gets to me is his (5.00 / 17) (#18)
    by FemB4dem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:48:38 PM EST
    phraseology -- "My view on FISA has always been ..."  No, it hasn't "always been" that, not even close.  This is just another variation on "no one has been more supportive of [fill in the blank] than Barack Obama."  Right.  

    There's the Bush parallel (5.00 / 7) (#104)
    by RonK Seattle on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:26:55 PM EST
    ... in the Fleischer Era, where every change of position was accompanied by a statement for the record that "this does not reflect any change in the President's position".

    [ Parent ]
    Today I saw "Julius Caesar" at the (5.00 / 8) (#27)
    by camellia on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:53:50 PM EST
    Shakespeare Theatre here.  In an early scene, Casca is reporting on the crowd's adoration of Caesar:

        "When he {Caesar} came to himself  again, he said, if he had done or said anything wrong, he desired their worships to think that it was his infirmity. Three or four wenches where I stood cried, "Alas, good soul!" and forgave him with all their hearts. But you can't pay any attention to them. If Caesar had stabbed their mothers, they would have done the same thing."

    Still seems to apply to the crowd's darling.

    I watched a rerun of "South Park"... (2.00 / 6) (#62)
    by Tortmaster on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:16:06 PM EST
    ... the other night, and it was the one with Eric Cartman as the preacher. He was cruel and abusive -- like McCain would be as President -- but w/o the funny.

    I think the fact that a lot of young people have gotten excited about politics in general, and about Obama in particular, really has the Republicans running scared, don't you?    

    [ Parent ]

    They don't seem particularly scared to me. (5.00 / 6) (#75)
    by samanthasmom on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:19:42 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Are you relating that from ... (1.00 / 4) (#85)
    by Tortmaster on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:22:04 PM EST
    ... first-person experience? A poll? Tarot cards?  

    [ Parent ]
    No, it's based on (5.00 / 2) (#181)
    by samanthasmom on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:21:37 PM EST
    the ads that the Republicans are running.  They are featuring Obama and his own words. No hyperbole needed. They are getting out their message. John McCain is successfully raising money. I haven't heard that they're canceling convention events. No tarot cards needed. What would make you think that they are afraid of running against Obama except wishful thinking?

    [ Parent ]
    sheesh tortmaster (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by DFLer on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:30:13 PM EST
    I think the fact that a lot of young people have gotten excited about politics in general, and about Obama in particular, really has the Republicans running scared, don't you?

     Are you relating that from first-person experience? A poll? Tarot cards?  

    [ Parent ]

    No. (5.00 / 9) (#79)
    by pie on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:20:39 PM EST
    Not when he's lost other more reliable voters.

    [ Parent ]
    That (5.00 / 4) (#97)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:25:42 PM EST
    sounds more like Rev. Wright than anybody else from your description.

    [ Parent ]
    If I didn't know you were ... (1.57 / 7) (#113)
    by Tortmaster on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:30:33 PM EST
    ... a good Democrat, through and through, I'd think you were under the spell of that Sith Lord, Darth McCain. Such words coming from a Democrat. My, my.

    Remember, bring your picnic baskets to "Unity Friday!"

    [ Parent ]

    Are (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:55:43 PM EST
    you actually defending Rev. Wright? I've seen many Obama supporters do this so I wouldn't be surprised if you thought he was A-OK.

    [ Parent ]
    Your obsession with McCain seems (5.00 / 4) (#159)
    by Joan in VA on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:03:45 PM EST
    unhealthy. Look how many times you have mentioned him just in this thread. Troubling....

    [ Parent ]
    For Tortmaster . . . (none / 0) (#207)
    by Palomino on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:39:20 PM EST
    2 is the new 1 (serial not-quite-troll rater).

    [ Parent ]
    The disgust that I have felt for Republicans (5.00 / 9) (#29)
    by Aqua Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:54:06 PM EST
    over the years...I now feel for Obama.  Maybe even more ...now I have been betrayed.

    And, as for Howard Dean.   All the admiration that I once felt for him is now distain.  I am mad as h@ll that this primary was rigged.

    And Peloi!!! I felt such pride when she became Spaker.   Now, I can't even look at her or hear her voice.

    Betrayal....all around.

    I am no lawyer but... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by independent thinker on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:54:49 PM EST
    let's play devil's advocate for a minute. Picture this: you are driving down the road and come across a cop directing trafic away from an accident. The cop tells you to cross over to the opposite side of the road to bypass the accident...in effect causing you to break the law. Somewhere up ahead another cop stops you arrests you for driving on the wrong side of the road. In this scenario you would have a rock solid defence because a person in authority instructed you to, in essence, violate the law and you simply obeyed.

    Isn't the telco situation kind of the same thing? People from the government came to the telcos and essentially directed them to cross to the other side of the road.

    (1) Qwest; and (2) (5.00 / 7) (#32)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:57:40 PM EST
    telecomm companies have always required a warrant before doing a wiretap.  Fourth Amendment.  

    [ Parent ]
    Qwest (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by pie on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:58:23 PM EST
    stayed on the right side of the road.

    [ Parent ]
    It is to a degree, but.... (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by Dadler on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:04:30 PM EST
    ...no one had a gun on their hip or was threatening them with anything.  They simply goose-stepped along.  The bigger problem, to me, is that holding telecoms criminally responsible is not half as important as HOLDING THOSE RESPONSIBLE IN THE GOVERNMENT accountable and prosecuting them.  But, sadly, we all KNOW that will not happen.  Why?  Because the now stacked Justice Department would have to prosecute in a manner a non-stacked Justice Department would.  In other words, the Bush Justice Dept. would have to be something other than the tainted body it is.  Will the next admin's Justice go after them?  With Obama at the helm, and seemingly willing to forgive and forget some very serious thing, I seriously doubt it.  

    [ Parent ]
    You're absolutely right. (5.00 / 5) (#81)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:21:16 PM EST
    You ARE no lawyer.

    Ignorance of the law and obsequity in the face of an abusive authority figure are certainly not the excuses I'D want to take into a courtroom as a defendant.

    [ Parent ]

    Oh, well said! (none / 0) (#209)
    by Palomino on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:40:24 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I actually agree (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by dianem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:24:25 PM EST
    I don't think that we should hold people responsible for accommodating what probably seemed like a reasonable request from a person who should have known better than to make that request. The fault here lies with the government, which violated the law and incited others to unknowingly violate the law. Yes, the companies could have done things differently - but they were in a tough bind - the Justice Department told them this was legal. They didn't hold a gun to their heads, they held the law to their heads. The government officials, who should have known better, should be held responsible for this.

    [ Parent ]
    Telcos have buckets and buckets (5.00 / 3) (#195)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:29:14 PM EST
    of lawyers of their own.  Lawyers who in your scenario would be riding in the back seat and perfectly capable of hopping out of the car and arguing with the first police officer about the legality of the wrong-side order.  Lawyers who knew enough to tell you "you don't have to do what this guy is telling you."

    They could have said no.  Qwest did.  

    Your example just isn't on point.  Traffic laws aren't the Constitution.  The Executive Branch doesn't get to interpret the law, the Judicial Branch does.  Grammar school kids know that.

    There's no reason to give the telcos immunity.  They can go to court and argue they were acting under the direction of the government.  A judge or jury can sort out whether that's true and whether they should be held liable for their actions.

    If, because of the scope of their wrongdoing, it would genuinely have a catastrophic effect on the US economy, say, then Congress can limit liability, or only grant immunity from prosecution but not discovery.  There are all sorts of ways they could address this aside from a complete get out of jail free card for both the telcos and the Bush gang.

    [ Parent ]

    Is there any other way to get the information (none / 0) (#205)
    by Newt on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:36:06 PM EST
    that discovery would have provided?

    [ Parent ]
    Heh (5.00 / 9) (#36)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 06:59:28 PM EST
    How about this reaction diary, which I'd like to call Please, Barack, Throw Me Under the Bus Too!

    lol (5.00 / 6) (#117)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:34:00 PM EST
    that diary was a piece of work. It seems his supporters are just as spineless as he is going by their posts. There was one who got it though--the one who said if he caves on an issue like this that isn't really that big on the political radar then just wait until the bigger issues come up.

    [ Parent ]
    Best laugh of the day (5.00 / 4) (#123)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:38:18 PM EST
    that pathetic post and also some of the comments... I haven't been to that site since they did their purge so I appreciate there was no advance notice that it was MYDD or I would have missed the best pretzelification I have yet seen.

    ..'overall strategy, Obama will be left of center'..... 'Obama can frame this debate as he has gads more money than his opponent'..... har!

    [ Parent ]

    Holy cow! (5.00 / 6) (#147)
    by kempis on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:55:17 PM EST
    We have to win.  Winning involves sacrifices, and some of them will be very painful.

    Yes it's painful to have to strip yourself of all your principles in order to win. But, hey, you get to win! ...And once you've won, then what?

    There's the rub.... If you no longer stand for the principles you just HAD to win for, then what's the point of winning? What is accomplished really?

    [ Parent ]

    I wish I could say that I am surprised (5.00 / 5) (#163)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:07:55 PM EST
    with that diary and the comments. Ah, for the good old days when I thought that only Bush supporters were capable of rationalizing all unacceptable actions.

    [ Parent ]
    wow (5.00 / 2) (#211)
    by DFLer on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:42:04 PM EST
    the comments..not only pathetic, as pointed out, but in many cases, uninformed and erroneous about the core issues....like what FISA actually is, was..etc...like one person saying that the current bill passed the House by a majority of Dems. Yikes

    [ Parent ]
    I have met Pragmatists, suh, ... (5.00 / 2) (#213)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:45:12 PM EST
    He seems positively Burkean in his pragmatism and I respect that.  Therein lies the problem

    And that man, suh, is no pragmatist.

    Postitively Burkean? I love the Creative Class. [/give me a large f*cking break]

    [ Parent ]

    No. NSA lacked authority, no accident. (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by wurman on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:00:31 PM EST
    The analogy is more as if the NSA came to your house without a warrant & got your permission & cooperation to set up optics & listening devices to monitor your neighbors, for whom they didn't have a warrant either.

    Then you took a relief shift on the equipment every so often.

    Then you hand NSA old home movies of your neighbors at picnics & barbecues around your place.

    Then you pointed out other neighbors who would also be glad to rat out the subjects of the surveillance.

    . . . etcetera.

    And don't forget that ... (none / 0) (#155)
    by santarita on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:00:44 PM EST
    you knew that the Government should have a warrant because this isn't the first time the Government has asked for your permission and cooperation.

    [ Parent ]
    BTD, what would it take for you (5.00 / 8) (#38)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:00:32 PM EST
    to turn away from Obama and urge Clinton to resume her candidacy?

    Oh yeah, I had another thing to say (5.00 / 5) (#43)
    by blogtopus on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:03:21 PM EST
    He's truly unifying America in the same way Bush unified America... and that is NOT GOOD.

    The similarities are piling up. Roberts, FISA, Death Penalty, Church and State, Inexperience, Words not Actions, close association with rampant Cronyism, etc.

    Getting. Out. Of. Hand.

    Your Obama Word of the Day: Invertebrate (5.00 / 8) (#57)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:12:17 PM EST
    If Obama isn't willing to stand up for constitutional principle, then what good is he as a public official? Oh, that's right, he's a change agent. Pardon me. My bad.

    Now, can I please get back to paying attention to the MA teenaged pregnancy pact story? Not that such a story amounts to a hill of beans, but at least I'm amused, and don't have to feel nauseous like I do whenever I'm watching Democrats kowtow to a clown with a 23% approval rating.

    Yes, go ahead. Your hopey-changey (5.00 / 7) (#72)
    by Cream City on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:19:16 PM EST
    moment of anticipating "New Politics" is over.

    And look over there!  A bride was drowned on her honeymoon!  And any moment now, there will be a car chase in California!  

    [ Parent ]

    Well, actually ... (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:22:34 PM EST
    ... I'm watching the NCAA College World Series championship game: 7th Inning - Fresno State 6, Georgia 0.

    Baseball is my escape hatch from life's toil and drudgery.

    [ Parent ]

    It goes deeper than that (5.00 / 9) (#63)
    by Saul on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:16:26 PM EST
    To say  
    "willing to say or do anything to win?" Or if you prefer, the "new" politics.
    is not adequate.  My main concern with Obama is that he deliberately duped the voters on who he really is.  The longer he campaigns the more we find out who he really is.  Say or do anything to win and being a fake are two different things.   I think many who could vote over again in the nomination process would not vote for him today.  That is not true with Hilary.

    Of course, he did. It's the rope-a-dope (5.00 / 7) (#84)
    by Cream City on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:21:48 PM EST
    which is at the core of Chicago politics.

    I b'leeve it has been several weeks since I pointed out that I have been pointing out since January that it felt like a third party taking over the Dem Party.  But it was not until February that I realized that it really was a good ol' urban machine taking over the Dem Party.  Both of those insights have made everything since then make sense.

    [ Parent ]

    He duped the voters? (5.00 / 3) (#96)
    by standingup on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:25:25 PM EST
    He is a politician.  Please, if the voters can't figure out that it requires a little additional work beyond listening to what a politician says, to know where they stand, they deserve what they get with their vote.  It wasn't very difficult to find out who Obama really is beyond the rhetoric either.  

    [ Parent ]
    The problem (5.00 / 10) (#109)
    by Democratic Cat on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:28:34 PM EST
    is that it is not just the people who voted for him who "deserve what they get." I'm stuck with him too.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes. That's another way in which he (5.00 / 3) (#225)
    by derridog on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 09:02:59 PM EST
    is just like Bush.  Those of us who didn't vote for him get him anyway.

    [ Parent ]
    Flabbergasted. (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:40:06 PM EST
    We, the voters, are the chumps for listening to what Obama says and not doing the work to realize that he is not really saying what he is saying. We should do the work necessary not to judge his actions as being indicative of his core beliefs.

    [ Parent ]
    True (4.50 / 4) (#118)
    by Saul on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 07:35:29 PM EST
    but the average Joe did not get it at the time.  He or she was overwhelmed by the beautiful rhetoric.  Yes we who are more political junkies could see through the rhetorics but for many they thought he was the messiah and were brain washed and he took advantage of that.   Today if those average Joe is   following the daily news on him they just might have a different opinion of him. They see a different Obama now.

    [ Parent ]
    the average Joe (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:05:18 PM EST
    isn't following plitics right now.  IT's summer.  The 4th of July is coming up.  They won't be paying attention until AFTER the convention.

    Besides, the "average Joe" voted for Hillary anyway

    [ Parent ]

    The average Joe? (5.00 / 1) (#212)
    by Palomino on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:45:05 PM EST
    More like the average Dirk or Trey or Ethan.

    [ Parent ]
    LOL. On my class lists, though (5.00 / 0) (#217)
    by Cream City on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 08:52:43 PM EST
    the predilection for a decade now has been