home

Obama Explains His Support For FISA Capitulation

Link:

I want to take this opportunity to speak directly to those of you who oppose my decision to support the FISA compromise.

This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush's abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate. [MORE . . . ]

But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility.

The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.

The ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States is a vital counter-terrorism tool, and I'm persuaded that it is necessary to keep the American people safe -- particularly since certain electronic surveillance orders will begin to expire later this summer. Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I've chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention -- once Iím sworn in as President -- to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions. No tool has been more important in focusing peoples' attention on the abuses of executive power in this Administration than the active and sustained engagement of American citizens. That holds true -- not just on wiretapping, but on a range of issues where Washington has let the American people down.

I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago, that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I'm not exempt from that. I'm certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable too. I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country. That is why we have built the largest grassroots campaign in the history of presidential politics, and that is the kind of White House that I intend to run as President of the United States -- a White House that takes the Constitution seriously, conducts the peoples' business out in the open, welcomes and listens to dissenting views, and asks you to play your part in shaping our countryís destiny.

Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.

So I appreciate the feedback through my.barackobama.com, and I look forward to continuing the conversation in the months and years to come. Together, we have a lot of work to do.

By Big Tent Democrat

< DEA Turns 35 This Week | An Ethos >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Really, does he have to lie? (5.00 / 11) (#1)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:17:12 PM EST
    Because I'm pretty sure that this is a lie:

    As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility.

    Ugh.

    The first and foremost is the false premise that the current FISA does not have an exclusivity provision.

    The second is the omission of his flip flopping on his promise to filibuster any bill that contained retoractive immunity.

    the letter is an insult to your intelligence and makes me think worse of him.

    This letter may be a deal breaker for me.

    Parent

    It would have been better (5.00 / 5) (#3)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:21:44 PM EST
    if he'd just shut up about it.

    Parent
    Certainly better than this insult of a letter (5.00 / 9) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:22:40 PM EST
    It is the statement from a week ago (5.00 / 8) (#63)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:02:25 PM EST
    melded with some 'you grassroots guys are great - you almost got what you wanted!' malarkey.

    I dobut it will make anyone happy.

    Parent

    I had an interesting conversation (5.00 / 8) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:24:47 PM EST
    at lunch with a big time Obama supporter about this today.  
    after I explained what FISA was and why it was bad he seemed pretty unhappy.
    I think it might be a deal breaker for others as well.

    Parent
    btw (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:41:00 PM EST
    I did not intend to suggest by this comment that all or even most Obama supporters are so uninformed.
    but this one was and I suspect there are more than a few in the same hope and change boat.
    soon to be without a paddle.

    Parent
    From your keyboard to God's ears! (5.00 / 4) (#42)
    by Shainzona on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:51:29 PM EST
    There is STILL TIME to avoid the upcoming disaster!!!

    Parent
    Welcome to the pack, BTD! (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by Shainzona on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:26:38 PM EST
    If its any solace... (5.00 / 5) (#51)
    by Exeter on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:55:13 PM EST
    He doubt he wrote it or approved it.

    Parent
    Oh no! Another campaign aide (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by lmv on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:00:52 PM EST
    under the bus ...

    Like the one who cleverly filled out the DC handgun question in Obama's own handwriting ...

    Parent

    he is going to need (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:28:27 PM EST
    a bigger bus

    Parent
    LOL. Thanks for the laugh! (none / 0) (#52)
    by Shainzona on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:56:22 PM EST
    that (none / 0) (#53)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:56:37 PM EST
    makes me feel MUCH better

    Parent
    it's remarkably patronizing (5.00 / 5) (#132)
    by kempis on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:41:06 PM EST
    And what does this mean:

    But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country.

    Change it to what?

    The entire second half of the speech is an appeal to his audience that goes something like this: "I'm an activist and you're activists and aren't we great even when we disagree!"

    This is slick and smarmy and he avoids addressing that little matter of the telecom immunity at all.

    I guess we'll see how many people stop rocking the boat because Obama intertwined his activist biography with theirs. Maybe the flattery is enough for some. We'll see.

    Parent

    The patronizing tone is too typical (5.00 / 2) (#165)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:23:00 PM EST
    with him.  This is not the tone of a Constitutional law "prof" or even of a politician.

    This is the tone of a therapist -- or perhaps a group facilitator.  Ugh.

    Parent

    Obama represents more of an independent (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by hairspray on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:29:42 PM EST
    population that is more about transformation as in Adlai Stevenson that in material well being as in FDR. Read an excellent analysis by Anglachel on the fault lines in the Democratic party around these two visions of what the D party should be.
    anglachelg.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_


    Parent
    Whoa! (none / 0) (#134)
    by tek on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:41:44 PM EST
    What is the alternative? (none / 0) (#150)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:56:26 PM EST
    Viable alternative.

    Parent
    Doing nothing (none / 0) (#175)
    by Nadai on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:31:45 PM EST
    until a new President is sworn in works for me.

    Parent
    An independent watcher of the watchers (5.00 / 5) (#5)
    by scribe on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:22:44 PM EST
    is also known as a plaintiff with a suit, and an independent judge who requires issues - plaintiff's and defendant's to be proven pursuant to the Rules of Evidence.

    The blurb on his site also looks like it was written prior to the al-Haramin decision hitting the web this morning - even a cursory reading of the "Exclusivity" section of that opinion makes clear that the "new" "exclusivity" section of the New FISA bill is, well, a huge step backwards.

    Parent

    Don't understand (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by rilkefan on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:24:09 PM EST
    "losing important surveillance tools"

    What is he talking about?  "Certain electronic surveillance orders" - what's up with that?  How was the original FISA setup inadequate?

    Seems that Obama (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:12:31 PM EST
    likes (or, at least, doesn't dislike) the blanket warrants.

    That's what I glean from it.

    Parent

    rilkefan (none / 0) (#61)
    by cal1942 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:02:00 PM EST
    that's always been my question.  Original FISA was itself pretty loose even to the extent of granting retroactive warrants.

    Another question I have about those " ... important surveillance tools," is; doesn't the original FISA (1978) apply when the most recent act expires?

    Parent

    Sounds like a bunch (5.00 / 8) (#7)
    by mikeyleigh on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:24:22 PM EST
    of doublespeak.  Orwell would be quite proud of Obama.  I especially liked the part where he says he's willing to take his lumps.  When has he ever taken responsibility for anything he does unless, of course, he's the object of unadulterated praise.

    "Willing" is really the wrong word (5.00 / 6) (#9)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:25:25 PM EST
    WORM is that he's not afraid of the left, and more afraid of Karl Rove.

    Parent
    He has no reason to be afraid (5.00 / 6) (#90)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:15:28 PM EST
    of those on the left if he's assured of their votes, no matter his latest position statements.

    Without the threat of witholding our votes, there is no bargaining chip.

    Parent

    just keep saying this (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:16:25 PM EST
    ok?

    Parent
    You got that right (5.00 / 6) (#168)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:24:23 PM EST
    Any politician who won't listen to you when he needs your vote is definitely not going to listen to you after he obtains the office he is seeking. As long as you are willing to vote for him regardless of what he does, you have no power to change the agenda. He is going to be spending his time giving away your issues in order to try and capture the non Democratic person who is reluctant to vote for him.

    Parent
    Yawn! (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by Shainzona on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:25:25 PM EST
    Flip.  Flop.  WORM.

    Nothing new here!

    Yup, this is textbook WORM (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:37:14 PM EST
    The OFB will respond predictably.

    Parent
    It seems to me (5.00 / 8) (#41)
    by CHDmom on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:51:06 PM EST
    Whenever Obama says "As I've said many times" or things similar to that, it is usually something that is a new position for him.

    Parent
    Rather like when (5.00 / 7) (#65)
    by tree on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:02:30 PM EST
    we hear, "No one has done more for...." it means he's about to kick another group or issue in the knees.

    Parent
    Tree....I think he always aims a tad higher (5.00 / 7) (#68)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:03:32 PM EST
    than the knees... :)

    Parent
    Ha! (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by tree on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:05:59 PM EST
    I censored myself for the sake of Jeralyn's rules and chose the lower piece of anatomy.

    Parent
    Not always (5.00 / 5) (#106)
    by Faust on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:24:23 PM EST
    But he does say that phrase way way way way way way way way way too often. And yes sometimes he uses it in front of a brand new statement, and that makes it worse.

    Parent
    Soon we need to call a flip-flop/WORM (4.50 / 8) (#49)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:53:15 PM EST
    by it's real name....a LIE...The bad think about twisting the truth is that it gets harder and harder to remember what you said....I smell a big fat bamboozlement for some of obama's flock.

    Parent
    So true, Psstt.... (5.00 / 6) (#58)
    by Shainzona on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:58:46 PM EST
    The man lies.  

    We have to come to grips with that - and, yes, BTD, while all politicians lie and I'm stupid not to realize it...we have the chance to get rid of this particular liar before the Dem Party falls off the cliff and into the sea.


    Parent

    All politicians do lie (5.00 / 6) (#85)
    by RalphB on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:13:18 PM EST
    but all lies are not equal.  Most lies are harmless enhancers etc but lying about support for the Constitution and human rights is beyond the pale.


    Parent
    Shainzona....it is time we called a spade, (4.30 / 10) (#75)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:08:23 PM EST
    a spade....I don't see what he does as anything
    other than lying....O/T, saw these titles on my homepage and was struck at the differences in how McCain and Obama define patriotism...

    McCain: 'Patriotism is putting country first before all else'

    Obama: 'Patriotism means faith in one another as Americans'

    Patriotism, as I was taught it, seems to fall more in line with McCain than obama...or is it just me?

    Parent

    ohhhh man (5.00 / 8) (#99)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:21:09 PM EST
    His language drives me up the wall... I must just be fed up today, but give me a break...  'Patriotism means faith in one another as Americans'... Faith in what??  If I'm a true patriot, a true American, I will have faith in him?  cough, BS, cough, cough.....

    Parent
    Easy there Waldenpond....breathe.... (5.00 / 4) (#110)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:27:39 PM EST
    it is very easy to choke on b.s.

    Parent
    I have faith in politicians who honor (5.00 / 4) (#172)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:29:49 PM EST
    their oaths of office and protect the Constitution. I have absolutely no faith in any politician that is willing to sell out on that responsibility. IMO that signals to me that there is no principle that is not for sale.

    Parent
    PLEASE! Tell me he didn't really say that? (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Shainzona on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:30:36 PM EST
    Oh, please!

    Parent
    Yes....it is true shainzona... (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:50:51 PM EST
    Tben....thanks for the troll rating....you (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:24:05 PM EST
    never disappoint....

    Parent
    Oh - Tben is back. Ignore him/her... (5.00 / 3) (#118)
    by Shainzona on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:31:31 PM EST
    and hope s/he goes AWAY!!!!

    Parent
    change "think" to thing.....sorry (none / 0) (#50)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:55:13 PM EST
    Blah, blah, blah (5.00 / 18) (#12)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:27:27 PM EST
    "Allow me to expand at great length on why I actually agree with both sides in this debate."

    I'm so tired of this already.

    Like when he refused to filibuster (5.00 / 9) (#13)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:29:26 PM EST
    Oh, you said it first. (5.00 / 4) (#36)
    by pie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:45:10 PM EST
    Blah.

    What a boring candidate.

    Parent

    Well, I'm just struck (5.00 / 13) (#15)
    by frankly0 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:32:45 PM EST
    by this passage:

    Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change.

    Really, this is just to reiterate the same argument that Obama supporters have been throwing at Hillary supporters who don't want to vote for Obama: "No matter what I do, I've got better policies than McCain, right? In fact, all I have to do is be better than McCain to deserve your support. So get over it, buddy, you've got no place else to go if you care about policies. Cry me a river."

    Policies that are at best.... (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Maria Garcia on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:38:27 PM EST
    ...only marginally better in some very important areas. Oh well, did he just flip flop on Iraq too or can I believe the Dem spin that he's just saying what he's said all along?

    Parent
    Samantha Power spilled the beans on Iraq in March (5.00 / 9) (#48)
    by jfung79 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:52:53 PM EST
    I don't know if it's a flip-flop, but sadly, I'm not surprised by Obama's latest statements on Iraq.  Samantha Power already told the BBC a few months ago that Obama's plan was just for the campaign.  

    Of course, the Obama supporters didn't care that this meant he was promising them absolutely NOTHING on Iraq compared to Hillary's comprehensive plan to withdraw responsibly starting within 60 days endorsed by Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson.  Hillary hate apparently trumps all.

    Parent

    In other words: "Give me this one" (5.00 / 10) (#27)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:40:24 PM EST
    and I'll get back to you guys on the rest of that vast majority of issues, unspecified, when they come up, when I will undertake better actions, unspecified. . . .

    For only one problem with this statement, he -- the Constitutional law "prof" -- seems to put this issue on parity with lots of other issues, unspecified.

    Senator Obama, just what are your priorities?  Just what priority would you put on -- see that oath you swore -- upholding the Constitution?

    Parent

    constitutional "prof" (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by lmv on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:56:44 PM EST
    Compare Obama's doublespeak to Greenwald's clear-eyed explanations.  

    Constitutional law prof?  Not likely.

    If I understand Greenwald correctly, there is no need for this new FISA law other than giving ammunity to telecom companies and cover to congress.

    There is no moral high ground in Obama's position.  

    Parent

    Yeah, (5.00 / 4) (#81)
    by cal1942 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:10:31 PM EST
    we're being told that we should ignore the fact that supporting normal feces in lieu of diarrhea is still supporting dreck.

    Parent
    I trust Greenwald, Turley and Feingold (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:35:35 PM EST
    on this issue and I believe there is no need for this law.

    IMO just another sell out by Obama.  

    Parent

    This is the line that bothered me (5.00 / 3) (#149)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:55:54 PM EST
    Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change.
    This is the standard argument from him and some of his supporters. It's like telling someone, "I know I'm bad but he's worse". That's a lame excuse at best.


    Parent
    The lesser-of-two-evils argument (5.00 / 2) (#154)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:02:53 PM EST
    acknowledges that both choices are evil.

    So it never has seemed a wise argument, to me.

    Parent

    ugh (none / 0) (#80)
    by Little Fish on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:10:22 PM EST
    I feel like my vote is being held hostage.  

    Parent
    you own your vote (5.00 / 8) (#91)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:15:37 PM EST
    it is hostage to no one and nothing.
    it is, in fact, all you have.

    Parent
    What did he just say? (5.00 / 4) (#16)
    by Xanthe on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:33:28 PM EST
    Oh God, I suppose if he wins the presidency we'll be reading and hearing lots of stuff like this.

    P.S.  No one in Chicago holds Dick Daley accountable, Senator.  or Todd Stroger for that matter.  Not when you were that organizer in Chicago's South Side and not now!

    BLAH BLAH BLAH... (5.00 / 7) (#18)
    by imhotep on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:35:24 PM EST
    His soaring rhetoric doesn't convince me that voting for an "imperfect"(!!!) bill is better than writing a bill that does not expand domestic surveillance and give immunity to the telecoms (and Bush).  
    His supporters have been duped on this and other issues.  At least with Hillary we knew what to expect. And I do not mean that in any pejorative sense.

    Isn't this exactly what HRC and JE (5.00 / 2) (#147)
    by NJDem on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:53:58 PM EST
    called Obama on in the debate for to a bill he supported re: capping credit card interest rates at 30%?  I can't remember the details (I'm sure one of you smart ppl will), but it was just like this.  IIRC.

    Parent
    Heh (4.85 / 7) (#152)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:58:37 PM EST
    What he said is that he voted against the 30% cap because he felt the cap ought to be lower.  Of course, voting against the cap meant that there was no cap at all.

    I honestly cannot remember a politician who has offered so many patently disingenuous explanations for bad votes.  Most of them don't even bother trying to BS you, I guess.  Have you heard the one about how he voted for Cheney's energy bill - the one almost every Republican voted for and all the major pro-environment Dems voted against - because somewhere in there it had money for alternative energy?

    Parent

    The credit card interest cap (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by tree on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:05:32 PM EST
    was a perfect example of an imperfect bill that was better than none at all. And Obama voted against it, nevertheless. I'm not buying any of his rationalizations about the current bill being "imperfect" but better than no bill at all.

    Parent
    I can't recall him ever "owning up" (5.00 / 2) (#182)
    by tlkextra on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:43:33 PM EST
    to a single thing. He has continually responded to any issue or criticism by diversion. His speeches are filled with "America needs..." and "He/She will do..." yet he rarely follows up with what he will actually do. I'm struck by the glimmers of egotism that have long ago turned me off - such as the comment about how he went ahead and voted for this flawed Bill, but WHEN he's President, he'll go back and remedy it - or this may be a deal breaker, but that's OKAY.  It's like when the Obama camp said after HRC dropped out that he didn't have any plans to WOO the Clinton Supporters.  At this point, I really don't know where he stands or what he believes and who he is trying to get to vote for him. Is he that confident that no matter what he does or says, it is a given that he's been Ordained to be President?

    Parent
    Awful (5.00 / 9) (#19)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:36:39 PM EST
    Really stupid to write such an obvious POS. It amounts to rubbing it in.

    Oh, did anyone say.... (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by desertswine on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:36:59 PM EST
    Blah, blah, blah yet?

    Because that's all I'm hearing (from Obama.

    I been there for a while (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:39:01 PM EST
    like in the peanuts cartoons when adults talk.

    Parent
    I liken him (5.00 / 0) (#38)
    by janarchy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:47:08 PM EST
    to Taz's father on Tazmania. Who was a Tasmanian Devil who sounded just like Bing Crosby.

    "Blah blah blah yackety schmackety".

    It's sad when all I hear is white noise coming out of his mouth (no racial comment intended).

    Parent

    You said it first. (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by pie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:43:48 PM EST
    Condescending, too, aren't we?

    Parent
    if I had any confidence (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:38:02 PM EST
    Obama would push the same "moderate" policies Bill did I would be so happy to vote for him.


    Happy as can be to vote for another Bill (5.00 / 4) (#35)
    by RalphB on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:44:36 PM EST
    but Obama gives me absolutely no warm fuzzies in that direction.


    Parent
    BTD I knew you always supported Hillary (5.00 / 5) (#23)
    by thereyougo on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:38:07 PM EST
    before you did Obama.

    For this reason some of us never waivered. We could see him for what he was.

    the CHANGE candidate keeps changing his tune.

    He's looking more like the Bait and Switch candidate.

    There still time to change the Super Delegates mind.

    You realize that most of the super delegates (none / 0) (#111)
    by Faust on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:27:41 PM EST
    also support the FISA capitulation. Indeed, some of them helped craft it.

    Parent
    What is the source for your comment? (none / 0) (#128)
    by imhotep on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:38:25 PM EST
    Just asking as many House Dems voted against it and I'm not in tune as to who in the Senate is supporting the Dodd-Feingold ammendment.

    Parent
    Second verse (5.00 / 4) (#28)
    by chrisvee on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:40:43 PM EST
    Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have.

    Lather, rinse, repeat. Besides, you have no place else to go.

    um, (4.00 / 3) (#30)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:42:09 PM EST
    surprise!
    we do actually.  I may finally vote for Nader.

    Parent
    My post (none / 0) (#44)
    by chrisvee on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:51:39 PM EST
    was snark.  In case it hasn't been obvious lo these many months, I'm not exactly an Obama supporter. :-)

    Parent
    I know (none / 0) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:57:17 PM EST
    but mine was not

    Parent
    Dealbreaker (4.87 / 8) (#78)
    by chrisvee on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:09:09 PM EST
    We keep talking about dealbreakers.  For some it's an issue, for some it's a VP choice, etc.  But what I'm waiting for is the dealmaker.  What will finally convince me that I should vote for Obama?  What will change between now and the GE?  When he releases statements like the one above, it makes me feel there's no compelling reason for me to vote for him.  He may be closer to my personal values than McCain but not close enough.  He's a mystery to me. I don't know what he stands for and where he'll draw the line and fight. I don't understand why the Dems had to push this FISA issue at all. I can only assume Obama wants the power as POTUS and that's scary.

    Parent
    I agree (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:12:47 PM EST
    anyone who says the know what his values are has a better crystal ball than me.
    all we have to go on is statements like this one.
    and the faith based one and etc etc.


    Parent
    I;ve asked Obama Supporters (5.00 / 6) (#155)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:04:19 PM EST
    On this site to show me the positives of an Obama administration and repeatedly the answer I get is" what a disaster a McCain presidency would be. I've finally came to the conclusion that his strength is he's not McCain. Not exactly a glowing recommendation.

    Parent
    Not exactly an Obama supporter (2.50 / 4) (#188)
    by rilkefan on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:50:00 PM EST
    but he's very smart, very capable, a Democrat, has a bunch of great wonky policies, inspires people, and will restore America's image in the world.

    If you don't like that stuff then ok, but you're not a Democrat.

    Parent

    Been there, seen that....... (5.00 / 2) (#197)
    by tlkextra on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 07:00:16 PM EST
    Great attempt to get my vote - by name calling

    Parent
    Or, It Is A Dishonest Question (none / 0) (#157)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:06:19 PM EST
    Unless you are a helpless individual.

    Parent
    Combine all the presidential powers that (5.00 / 2) (#185)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:45:26 PM EST
    Bush established along with all Democratic funds consolidated under Obama's umbrella and cutting off contributions to activist groups and that's really scary.

    Parent
    The media says HRC needs to convince (5.00 / 4) (#195)
    by tlkextra on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:57:24 PM EST
    her Supporters to back him -WRONG- it is up to Obama to earn my support. Instead, this last month has raised more and more concerns. For me, I chose to support HRC after Edwards dropped out because it came down to the fact I was familiar with her history of service and experience. I have never seen so much importance placed on being a Community Organizer. Obama brings it up in almost every speech. That and his anti-Iraq speech. I also was against the War before we invaded, but in no way do I think that alone should qualify me to be President. I need more from him.

    Parent
    Regarding the hope/change message.... (5.00 / 5) (#31)
    by Maria Garcia on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:42:42 PM EST
    ....all he was promising was that we would all get along and agree on most things. I always understood that he wasn't promising a liberal agenda because he's too smart to believe that he could get Republicans to roll over for that. Now some people did interpret hope/change to mean that he was promising a progressive utopia, but that was just wishful thinking on their part.

    I guess that was the key thing that people missed. (5.00 / 0) (#137)
    by Maria Garcia on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:44:01 PM EST
    He promised to change the politics, not the policies!

    Parent
    He is an independent. He is not an FDR (none / 0) (#183)
    by hairspray on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:44:48 PM EST
    Democrat, rather a Stevensonian Democrat. Or more of an independent who will decide which parts of the Democratic party and its voters he will support.  THAT is scary because HE gets to decide. It is all about a moral transformation rather than changing the material lives of ordinary working people.  Just look at who loves Obama and who loved Hillary.  The Democratic party is split down the middle and the fault lines are here to be seen.

    Parent
    This: (5.00 / 8) (#32)
    by pie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:42:53 PM EST
    I do so with the firm intention -- once I'm sworn in as President -- to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

    So you're allowing the continued abuse now, but will "review" it in the future.

    That South Side organizer crap was also irritating.

    The whole thing was irritating!  Blah, blah, blah...  


    Yes, the organizer stuff was just (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:06:27 PM EST
    pointless and irritating.

    Parent
    His responses sound canned. (none / 0) (#189)
    by hairspray on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:50:20 PM EST
    Not to mention the assumption he'll win... (none / 0) (#199)
    by Dawn Davenport on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 07:05:24 PM EST
    ...but what if it's McCain who becomes president, rather than himself? Is he still comfortable giving those kinds of powers to sidestep the 4th to others who may become president?

    Parent
    BTD, (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by samanthasmom on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:50:25 PM EST
    Here, kitty, kitty?

    My cats all ran in the other direction. (none / 0) (#64)
    by nycstray on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:02:30 PM EST
    oh oh, Obama is shaking his base (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by thereyougo on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:51:36 PM EST
    yikes!  bloggers bailing,one  issue at a time.

    Thats going to be veddyy interestiiiinggggggh!

    the grumbling is getting louder and louder.

    what a load of (5.00 / 4) (#46)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:52:25 PM EST
    garbage.  And what happens when it is used against alleged drug dealers?  Keeping us safe?  Just how many successful prosecutions do we have under the "patriot act" for terrorists?  Just another bs attempt by a paranoid gov't to populate our prison system. Another tool in the gov't toolbox that will ultimately be abused. The audacity of dopes under the guise of making us safer.  

    That's ok. (5.00 / 10) (#47)
    by Moishele on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:52:45 PM EST
    And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok.

    How magnanimous of Obama to say we can actually disagree with him.

    careful what he wishes for (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by thereyougo on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:00:18 PM EST
    LOL, that was nice of him. (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by vicndabx on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:14:22 PM EST
    You Got To Dance With Them What Brung You (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by john horse on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:56:47 PM EST
    Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions.

    I hope Obama remembers that a major reason that Democrats, including himself, are in a position to win this year is because of the "activism and passion" of those on the left.

    There is only so much disappointment that we can take from Obama and the spineless Democrats that control our Congress.

    As the late great Molly Ivins once wrote "you got to dance with them what brung you."

    "For The Truth Is.." (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by MsExPat on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:24:17 PM EST
    "that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason.."

    ..in fact the ONLY reason that I, Barack Obama, am standing here now as the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

    But that was then, and this is now. Get over it.

    Parent

    I said this a few days ago (none / 0) (#57)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:58:42 PM EST
    but I always knew that Hillary would follow that maxim. Obama. . .who knows?

    Parent
    she said she didn't agree with the current FISA (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by thereyougo on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:03:27 PM EST
    capitulation.

    she stood her ground before and after. Obama just flipped after he got the P.Nom.

    I'm just amazed how he is self destructing and doesn't even know it.

    it is going to be a loooong hot summer for him, certainly not boring.

    Parent

    Have Not Seen That (none / 0) (#86)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:13:56 PM EST
    Got a link?

    Parent
    You Must Be Kidding (3.00 / 2) (#62)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:02:19 PM EST
    She is a Pol just like the rest of em. I imagine that she would be in the same place Obama is right now regarding FISA.

    Parent
    Hard to say (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by nycstray on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:05:13 PM EST
    She doesn't "owe" Pelosi and friends the time of day, afaik. And Schumer spoke up,  which for some reason I found interesting . . .

    Parent
    I wasn't surprised (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by MsExPat on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:52:01 PM EST
    that Schumer spoke up. Pretty much the whole New York metro area congressional delegation is on the list of reps who voted against the FISA legislation. Schumer is a real pol and he knows where his votes are.

    Parent
    Voted Against? (none / 0) (#151)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:57:48 PM EST
    The vote we are concerned with is coming up on July 8. Has Schumer promised to vote against the new FISA?

    Parent
    That's what I'm referring to. (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by nycstray on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:23:43 PM EST
    He has (none / 0) (#169)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:26:24 PM EST
    according to Think Progress.

    Parent
    Good For Him (none / 0) (#170)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:29:38 PM EST
    Now time to call Hillary, my other senator.

    Parent
    Dem theater before yet another mass cave (none / 0) (#204)
    by Ellie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 07:21:51 PM EST
    I've smelled this smell before: it happens on every major issue before yet another needless mass cave.

    It's the powerful smell of fear and mendacity, the stench of standard @ss-covering Dems in Spelunking mode.

    Obama should be leading on this, firmly, unequivocally, and without mush'mouthing. He shouldn't be "supporting" the concept of a notion of an idea of a filibuster with a statement on his web page.

    He should be rallying, not running wayyyy to the extra-constitutional, extra-judicial hard fascist right on this.

    I wish there were more precedent to assume Schumer's display was more than pre-emptively spreading around the pre Cave-in "bravery" so Dems can avoid the post Spelunking needless, multiple cave-in blame.

    Like last time?
    Like on Roberts and Alito?
    Like every time?

    I thought we had a brave leader this time, not this charlatan.

    Parent

    I don't know why it stood out for me (none / 0) (#173)
    by nycstray on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:30:05 PM EST
    Maybe because so much focus was on what she would say while she has to play the Unity BS game. Her opinion was on the quiet side and his wasn't.

    And yup, my Rep voted the 'right' way  :)

    Parent

    Mine Too (none / 0) (#181)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:42:24 PM EST
    Although I am also a bit surprised that Shumer has committed to vote nay. He often disappoints when it comes to National Security, as does Hillary.


    Parent
    In this particular case (5.00 / 3) (#71)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:05:59 PM EST
    I think a better pol would recognize the obvious strength of sticking to his or her original commitment.

    Parent
    Unfortunately That Better Pol (none / 0) (#93)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:16:11 PM EST
    Would be unelectable. And I do not mean Hillary.

    Parent
    In any case (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:18:52 PM EST
    Obama is the nominee, and he's done what he's doing, much to my sharp annoyance.

    Parent
    Most Are Unwilling (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:23:04 PM EST
    To take the risk of going through the summer with no FISA bill. A  load of sh*t if you ask me, and a testament to the power of GOP initiated and now bipartisan fearmongering aka the WOT.

    Parent
    What are we electing? (5.00 / 0) (#98)
    by lentinel on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:19:42 PM EST
    If, as you say, a "better pol" is unelectable, why are we bothering with this guy?

    Parent
    I don't know if (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by pie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:24:07 PM EST
    he means Kucinich, but his stance on the issues, no matter how much one agrees with him, doesn't mean he's be a good president.

    I think he's probably just where he needs to be and as far as he's going to go.  I don't think he could even win if he ran for senator.

    Parent

    Because The Other (none / 0) (#107)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:24:25 PM EST
    Option is much, much worse. Not an ideal world by any stretch of the imagination.

    Parent
    how can you know that? (none / 0) (#112)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:27:47 PM EST
    I am not trying to be snarky.  I seriously wonder why some people seem so sure of this?
    on what do you base that?

    Parent
    Are You Joking? (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:30:41 PM EST
    I know that you hate Obama but he is far from any GOPer. It is not even close. But you may be into the basic GOP platform, not me I am sick of it.

    Parent
    McCain is not into most of it either (5.00 / 3) (#122)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:35:06 PM EST
    look, I am not pushing McCain.  I will not vote for him.  if I vote at all it will likely be for Nader but I would love to hear someone explain this unshakable confidence I see in some people that he would be one bit better, less neocon, more gay friendly, more friendly to choice, less receptive to the ideas of the christian right . . . .
    I could go on but you get the idea.


    Parent
    It has been explained here repeatedly (none / 0) (#142)
    by rilkefan on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:48:22 PM EST
    You haven't heard because you haven't listened.

    Parent
    Nobody "hates" Obama (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by lentinel on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:12:22 PM EST
    What I read is that people are concerned that as the days go on, the differences between Obama and McCain - and Bush - become less and less clear.

    An example - and one that really hits home for me - is today's statement by Obama that he is "refining" his position on withdrawing our troops from Iraq. His refined position is identical with George Bush's.

    You can read it in todays NYTimes.

    What I read is not hatred. It is a growing indifference to Obama's candidacy.

    Parent

    New To TL? (none / 0) (#161)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:16:00 PM EST
    Must be because by far most here are not part of the demographic characterized by  

    a growing indifference to Obama's candidacy.

    Most here have hated the guy since day one.

    Parent

    You couldn't be more wrong (5.00 / 4) (#162)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:17:59 PM EST
    Virtually no one on the Democratic side hated Obama on day one.

    Parent
    I Am Referring To TL (none / 0) (#163)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:18:51 PM EST
    Not the democratic side. Sorry for being unclear.

    Parent
    Still not true re day one n/t (none / 0) (#191)
    by rilkefan on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:52:03 PM EST
    OK (none / 0) (#196)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:59:21 PM EST
    Day two or three, ever since the refugee crisis.

    Parent
    Unworthy (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by lentinel on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:35:08 PM EST
    I read only humorous and serious criticism of Obama here.

    There are two refuges that Obama supporters have.
    The first is that the opposition is much worse. First it was Clinton, now it's McCain.
    The second is that people not taken in by the Obama tornado are people who hate.

    We have a problem here.

    On the one hand we have McCain.
    Oh the other hand, we have Obama.
    You see a vast difference between the two.
    Others do not.

    Parent

    I felt it was clear (5.00 / 8) (#77)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:08:57 PM EST
    during the primary that every one of Hillary's positions was taken with one eye on the GE.  She understood (even though she was wrong!) that she'd have to defend these positions later.  If she was of a mind to say whatever it took to win the primary and then reinvent herself later, I think it would have been a much different campaign.

    I suppose it ended up costing her.  Oh well.

    Parent

    Well, almost 20 million of us (5.00 / 7) (#88)
    by pie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:14:42 PM EST
    listened to her reasoning and backed her anyway, pretty confident that what we saw was what we were going to get.  She's been playing the game for a long time.  She must feel pretty good even though she (barely) missed the brass ring, because she did it her way this time and didn't play games.  I think that shows in her appreciation of and continued loyalty to her supporters.  We got it.    

    "sigh"

    Parent

    Exactly. She ran for president (5.00 / 9) (#123)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:35:52 PM EST
    but what we got was the guy who ran for the primary nod . . . so that he could turn into this other guy now.

    Parent
    she said she didn't agree with the current FISA (none / 0) (#69)
    by thereyougo on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:03:58 PM EST
    capitulation.

    she stood her ground before and after. Obama just flipped after he got the P.Nom.

    I'm just amazed how he is self destructing and doesn't even know it.

    it is going to be a loooong hot summer for him, certainly not boring.

    Parent

    how us the them that brings Clinton different (none / 0) (#102)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:24:00 PM EST
    than the them that brings obama.

    If there is no difference, then no matter.

    Parent

    He can explain it till he's 70. (5.00 / 7) (#66)
    by Marco21 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:02:34 PM EST
    Voting for this bill is just wrong and the only reason he's doing it is to toughen his image.

    Wrong is still wrong in 2008.  

    obama can look as tough as he likes, (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:12:02 PM EST
    back home in Chicago after November.  BTW, is he giving up his senate seat now that he thinks he is the nominee?

    Parent
    He doesn't (none / 0) (#120)
    by cal1942 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:31:53 PM EST
    have to give up his Senate seat unless he is elected.  It was the same with Kerry in 2004.

    Parent
    He's Saruman (5.00 / 9) (#89)
    by Valhalla on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:15:24 PM EST
    and FISA may be the defeat of his army at Helm's Deep.

    Really, I can't even make it all the way through the excerpts, he's so mushy and shifting -- almost as if he's got a political buzzword generator and then just fills in with some random words around them --

    demand accountability...telecoms may have violated ...far better...[i]n a dangerous world...free society...prevent abuses...vital counter-terrorism tool...keep the American people safe...firm intention...preserve civil liberties... ad nauseum.

    Throw in some butt-kissing ("For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion...") some self-aggrandizement ("I learned long ago") and the big flip-off (you have nowhere else to go now, ha ha), and you have the full collection of his greatest hits.

    It's not going get any better.

    You know, thinking about the whole employment analogy, if an applicant sat in front of you and said 'I haven't actually accomplished anything that would suit me for this position, but I promise, if hired, to seriously study on accomplishing something' would you buy it?

    exactly! (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by ccpup on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:52:42 PM EST
    last week I interviewed someone -- the daughter of a friend of mine -- to be an assistant for me when I'm in Paris and, although she's been out of school for several years and has worked, her resume was still sketchy.

    So I asked her what she brought to the table as far as the duties involved and she responded "I imagine I'll kind of learn as I go along and figure it all out.  It'll be fun!"

    No, she didn't get the job.

    But that's exactly how I see Obama now.  Elect me President and I'll figure it out when I get in the Oval Office after my long post-election vacation.

    I just keep thinking that McCain will win based solely on the fact that -- whether one agrees with him or not -- people believe they know what he stands for.  

    Obama is so busy twisting himself into a pretzel to please everybody but his Base that voters are going to end up wondering 'who the heck IS this guy?' and pull the lever for the Devil they know rather than the Devil they don't.

    Parent

    that made me laugh (none / 0) (#100)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:21:26 PM EST
    but if he is Saruman who is Sauron?

    Parent
    GWB of course (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Valhalla on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:45:34 PM EST
    ...the only difference is that Sauron wasn't term-limited.

    Parent
    Everything is about Obama all the time ever (5.00 / 11) (#92)
    by Ellie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:15:58 PM EST
    This was not an easy call for me.

    Indeed, I can't possibly be alone in having that as my first concern upon learning that the government and corporations colluded in years of untrammeled warrantless spying on individuals, and were now granting each other immunity from discovery, recourse and redress.

    I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect.

    Yes, because when someone shreds the fourth @($& amendment of the Constitution, some of us pests will complain that the fascism isn't f*cking perfect.

    Why is anyone still taking this clown seriously?

    If this were a negotiation, my "side" would abruptly pack up and walk away from the table at this young point in the speechifying.

    But Ellie (5.00 / 10) (#108)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:25:50 PM EST
    He says he's "willing to take [his] lumps". Don't you feel better now, sweetie?

    Let's all have another round. I'll need more tonic with my gin this time.

    Parent

    Need I mention (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:26:29 PM EST
    that was ...snark.

    Parent
    GWB: (5.00 / 5) (#143)
    by tek on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:48:28 PM EST
    It's hard, it's hard work.

    "Iraq has been harder on George than on anyone."  Laura

    Parent

    It's so sweet that Obama ... (5.00 / 7) (#114)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:30:19 PM EST
    sends letters to all the people he really cares about.

    And it's also nice that the postman still delivers to our new address under the bus.

    Bog standard Senator, Obama has decided (5.00 / 7) (#121)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:35:04 PM EST
    to send his activists a form letter that doesn't even attempt to address their substantive concerns and tends to mislead the casual reader. Marvelous, isn't it?

    Parent
    Mr. "teh awesome" has become ... (5.00 / 4) (#126)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:37:27 PM EST
    "teh lame."

    Parent
    I've thought so for some time. (5.00 / 2) (#131)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:39:53 PM EST
    Heh, (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by tek on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:46:35 PM EST
    those of us from IL have had this experience with Mr. Obama many times over.  A letter (or e-mail) addressing your main concerns?  Not Obama's style.  All I ever got from him after maybe six months was condescending message that had nothing whatsoever to do with my original concern.

    Parent
    Lip Service (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by citizen53 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:30:56 PM EST
    My comment at DKos if you dare go there.

    Otherwise, see this critique of Obama at Black Agenda Report.

    Another worthy comment in that thread (5.00 / 11) (#136)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:43:34 PM EST
    'I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns...'

    Yes, I am sure President Obama will 'listen to my concerns' - because he will be doing the phone tapping.

    It doesn't make me feel more secure to know that a 'good president' has these powers anymore than a 'bad president.'



    Parent
    Great post citizen53 (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by lentinel on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:55:19 PM EST
    I followed your links to your comment on DKos and the article at Black Agenda Report.

    Margaret Kimberley really sums up my feelings:

    "It is easy to berate Obama and the rest of the Democratic leadership for their craven behavior, but it [is] time for Obama supporters to also be called to account for their complicity in the charade. "

    The article also predicts that Obama will do an about face on the issue of the war in Iraq.

    It has already happened.
    See today's NYTImes article, "Obama might 'refine' withdrawal timetable". Obama is now adopting Bush's position as his own.

    All that Obama has right now is that McCain is the evil one.
    His supporters are relying on this apparent distinction as well.
    But as the days go by, the difference between these two blurs.
    And if Obama loses, as he deserves to, whom are we going to blame? Nader?

    I am not saying that McCain deserves to win, but I do feel that Obama deserves to lose.

    Parent

    Obama press availability (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by RalphB on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 07:06:38 PM EST
    to "clarify" his earlier clarifying remarks on Iraq in the original press conference.  Sounds to me like he's still digging a deeper hole ...

    link

    Parent

    I heard multiple dropped "hints" (none / 0) (#202)
    by tlkextra on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 07:14:03 PM EST
    during the Primary that he would change any "promises" about Iraq that he had made.  The Media, DNC, and his Supporters were too busy swooning and anointing him to hear it. I am not surprised at all.

    Parent
    done is strike anyone else (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:31:37 PM EST
    as strange for this to be happening on the eve of independence day?
    (btw happy fourth all.  I going to be away. YAAAA)


    Yes... (5.00 / 6) (#127)
    by Jackson Hunter on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:38:25 PM EST
    It is so creepily Orwellian of him.  I can't wait until he has those powers, he'd never abuse them at all.  In fact, as someone mentioned above, no one has done more for the Constitution than him.  Madison was just a piker compared to our "Saviour from Oak Park".

    If i don't laugh about it I'll cry.  He really is "New Coke."

    Jackson

    Parent

    If you think FISA is bad - wait - there's more... (5.00 / 7) (#125)
    by lentinel on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:36:39 PM EST
    In today's NYTimes, Obama just made the following statement:

    "I've always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed," he said. "And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies."

    This is what the Times is calling Obama "refining" his previously announced plan for withdrawal of our troops from Iraq.

    If there is any difference between Obama's current "refined" posture, and the long-standing one enunciated by our current commander-in-chief, perhaps someone could point it out to me.

    soooooo much better than McCain (5.00 / 3) (#129)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:38:35 PM EST
    no comparison.  day and night. etc etc.

    Parent
    Yup, first capitulate on FISA ... (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:38:51 PM EST
    then Iraq.

    What next?  Social Security?

    Parent

    Ohh! 'kay, as long as he's artful and couth on it (none / 0) (#158)
    by Ellie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:07:16 PM EST
    This is what the Times is calling Obama "refining" his previously announced plan for withdrawal of our troops from Iraq.

    It's lying. He lied then, he's lying now. He'll lie in his bed tonight while asleep. He'll wake up refreshed tomorrow for a new day of lying.  

    The "refinement" weaseling is similar to that whole "in/artful" dodge that simulates taking responsibility, but focused on cosmetic semantics rather than the act.

    SAP:

    Trapped D0uchebag: Okay, so the words weren't ARTFUL enough for some. Next time the words will be more pretty for you complainers, okay? Gahhh, now that I/we copped to that unprettiness could we get onto important stuff???

    Ordinary schmoe: But, but, we caught you engaging in the untrammeled pillaging of our sacred institutions ...

    Trapped D0uchebag: Whaddaya want a Hallmark card too now?

    And. So. It. Goes.

    Parent

    like my FISA comment above (none / 0) (#205)
    by CHDmom on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 08:57:58 PM EST
    "I've always said" is another Obama phrase that is usually followed by something he never said.
    Really are the SDs paying any attention to this?

    Parent
    I have to say (5.00 / 3) (#135)
    by tek on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:43:17 PM EST
    when he came out in favor or Republican "tort reform," that was THE deal breaker for my torts professor husband and me.

    The Power Of Inspector General (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:48:14 PM EST
    He (or she) will protect us and uphold the law:

    From emptywheel:

    Obama says the IG report on politicization is a great example of accountability. Well, here's what that report said about accountability:

    However, because both McDonald and Elston have resigned from the Department, they are no longer subject to discipline by the Department for their actions. Nevertheless, we recommend that the Department consider the findings in this report should either McDonald or Elston apply in the future for another position with the Department.

    And the obvious prognostication:

    So next year, when we get this vaunted IG report on the illegal wiretapping, it'll include a passage that says:

    However, because the five year statute of limitations has passed and because former President Bush, former White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, former Chief of Staff Andy Card, and former Vice President Cheney are no longer in office, the culprits are no longer subject to legal consequences for their actions. Nevertheless, we recommend the American people consider the findings in this report should George Bush ever try to run for President again.

    Also, emptywheel has a handy dandy guide to what will happen on July 8 (vote)

    Call your senators.

    Oh Pulleeeeez (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by pluege on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:14:02 PM EST
    The FISA court is already an abomination: 2 out of 3 old farts rubber stamping in secret every secret request to violate American's privacy without accountability or anyway of even knowing that its happening or what is going on. And this is a safe guard... come on.

    Obama is right, its a dangerous world out there, but like so many, he's all mucked up on where the clear and present danger is.

    Oh yea, right (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by pluege on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:21:24 PM EST
    The recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.

    and how many of the bush monsters have gone to jail or are even remotely close to being prosecuted for their abuse of power and abuse of the trust of the American people.

    Zero...thought so.

    SHORTER OBAMA: (5.00 / 5) (#186)
    by pluege on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:45:50 PM EST
    'you have no choice but to vote for me so screw you and your Constitution too.'

    Shocked? Not really. (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by santarita on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 07:02:04 PM EST
    I'm only shocked that he didn't wait until after the convention to show that he was not the progressive that many people thought he was. And that he so obviously went against his previous statement about filibustering.

    It's becoming clearer and clearer to me that his goal and the goal of the Dem party leadership is to win in November using whatever tricks they can find.  And Obama wants not only the Presidency but also a good solid majority in both houses of Congress.  To do that he has to convince the voters that Dems are not weak on national security.  The House Dems caved on immunity after Obama won the nomination because they knew that as bad as that move was the majority of Dems would not vote for McCain even if they were disappointed in Obama.  Now Obama thinks he has neutralized one McCain argument about Dems being soft on national security.  I wonder if some other Dem, like a Gen. Clark or a Sen. Biden, had won the nomination they would not have to establish their credibility on national security by caving to the Republicans on FISA.

    'work with Dodd, Bingaman and others' (5.00 / 2) (#203)
    by Ben Masel on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 07:16:41 PM EST
    We can take Feingold off the VP speculation list.

    S'okay, I think I can make it until 2013 before I really need that top 'o the line Senate health care plan.

    Inappropriate but (4.50 / 6) (#14)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:29:52 PM EST
    he makes me incredibly nauseous.

    This was not an easy call for me.  It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating ....  The ability to monitor and track individuals ...and I'm persuaded that it is necessary to keep the American people safe --  I've chosen to support the current compromise...In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people....Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere.... I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago... I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue....Democracy cannot exist without strong differences... And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. Supreme Court...John McCain...my.barackobama.com

    Oh, and did I say... blah, blah, blah

    OT... when is the PG 2.0 and how can I tune in?

    good question on PB 2.0 (none / 0) (#26)
    by RalphB on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:39:58 PM EST
    wish I knew, any answers?

    Parent
    OT still but.... (none / 0) (#34)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:43:54 PM EST
    Corrente stated that BTD was going to live blog at 5:00pm EST.... so I was OT asking BTD.

    Parent
    I can't figure out Corrente (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:46:27 PM EST
    I've tried to get a commenting account for months, and have never been able to. Never got a response from the comment form either. The technology seems to be that if you aren't signed in, the posts lag.

    Parent
    I've had the same problem (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by tree on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:48:47 PM EST
    re getting an account. Every couple of weeks I try again with no response.

    Parent
    As I recall (none / 0) (#74)
    by cal1942 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:07:08 PM EST
    it took me nearly two months to get an account on Corrente.

    Parent
    Lucky! heh. (none / 0) (#76)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:08:52 PM EST
    I got one a while back (5.00 / 3) (#79)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:09:30 PM EST
    and now I can't remember what name I used, password etc.  After hearing about how hard it is now, I will have to look harder for it, because I'll probably never get another.

    Parent
    I'm in the same... (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by Jackson Hunter on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:16:44 PM EST
    boat as you and others Andgarden.  Well, it's only been a month for me.  He really needs to expedite the process IMHO.  It seems like it will be a great place to participate, if I ever get in.

    Jackson

    Parent

    I have been trying for (4.00 / 3) (#45)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:52:23 PM EST
    months... never heard back.  Used their e-mail again today.  You can see live blogs here at Talkleft.. so I was expecting to see Corrente's...

    well lookie there... BTD's up.....

    Parent

    Ongoing (none / 0) (#95)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:16:42 PM EST
    It can be lonesome (4.50 / 2) (#138)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:45:13 PM EST
    And I will once again take my very lonely solo stand that telecom immunity in this case isn't the big issue. My issue is who in government broke the law? Those in government that told the telecoms they should do it and it was legal are the ones I am interested in seeing prosecuted. AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile and the like weren't spying. The Federal Government was spying. It's those individuals I want to see taken down.

    You aren't alone, CG (none / 0) (#179)
    by flyerhawk on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:35:54 PM EST
    I completely and utterly agree with you.

    I would vigorously support any bill that sought to do that.

    Suing big companies is grandstanding.

    Parent

    Attempts to justify the unjustifiable. (4.50 / 2) (#206)
    by magnetics on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 10:42:15 PM EST
    I am not surprised.  I have finally reached the point of starting to believe there is no difference between the major parties.

    Speaking for myself only, a formerly loyal yellow dog Democrat, who has voted Dem in every presidential election since McGovern.

    Hate to say it; Obama is the only Dem candidate of my lifetime who inspires in me visceral dislike.  It's not about race; we are a mixed race family (black and white.)  It's about stuff like this; also, going back further, it's about winning his first election to state senate by mounting legal challenges to disqualify all the other candidates, so he could run unopposed.  Don't tell me about Chicago politics; I lived there 6 years, and my spouse is from there.

    Hey all you clever anti-Obama folks (3.00 / 3) (#180)
    by MyLeftMind on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:42:19 PM EST
    (and others), how about if you use some of that ingenuity to come up with something more useful than putting down Obama and the Democrats.

    Here's an idea - how about this group write an amendment to FISA that actually limits it's non-terroristic abuse?  Then we can send if off to Sens. Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold to implement it.  

    Basically, the worst dangers of government spying is that they'll use information they glean for their own purposes.  For instance, Repubs getting dirt on the Dems, or someone making money selling business secrets that were "gleaned" from the database.

    We could write something that would have harsh penalties for any misappropriation of the collected information, including serious fines and even jail time.  

    What do you say?  Care to put some of your dazzling lawyerly skills to good use?  How about it Jeralyn, can we start a new topic on what an amendment should say that at least somewhat lessons the abuse of spying on Americans?

    Heh (5.00 / 4) (#190)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:51:18 PM EST
    What Feingold and Dodd are lacking are votes, not people capable of legislative drafting.

    Good laws get passed through political pressure, not lawyers mailing proposed amendments to their senator.

    Parent

    How about you do a little research... (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by pluege on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:55:50 PM EST
    maybe start with the ACLU so you would know that countless suggestions for improvements have been put forward going back to the origination of the so-called Protect America Act.  

    Parent
    oops, I meant lessens, not lessons (none / 0) (#187)
    by MyLeftMind on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:47:37 PM EST
    Any takers on this idea?

    Parent
    Do it yourself, love (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by kmblue on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:52:56 PM EST
    You are an Obama supporter so getting cracking on that proposal.

    Me, I'll continue enjoying the tormented spinning
    of some shell shocked folk about the Internets.

    Parent

    Can Anyone Comment on This: (none / 0) (#144)
    by WakeLtd on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 05:50:33 PM EST
    >>The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.<<

    This paragraph concerns me. Is it a reliable description of a process that we can expect will provide "thorough" accountability or not. I really don't know - but, this seems to be the linch-pin of accepting the compromise: that an IG report will right all the wrongs that have occurred and can reasonably be anticipated to continue, considering the recent past history.

    I wonder what the super Ds are thinking? (none / 0) (#166)
    by nellre on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:23:36 PM EST
    Or do they still have $$ in their eyes?

    Headlines somewhere today (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by pluege on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:35:39 PM EST
    'Obama Returning to Focusing on Fundraising'

    Parent
    The super Ds (5.00 / 4) (#184)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:45:00 PM EST
    are pretty much all pro-capitulation on FISA, or we wouldn't be in this mess!

    Parent
    franklyO writes: (none / 0) (#207)
    by weltec2 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 03:28:19 AM EST
    "Really, this is [...] the same argument that Obama supporters have been throwing at Hillary supporters [...]: "No matter what I do, I've got better policies than McCain, right? In fact, all I have to do is be better than McCain to deserve your support. So get over it, buddy, you've got no place else to go if you care about policies."

    This is really the heart of it and it makes me feel helpless to do anything about it and making me feel helpless makes me angry. I does not make me want to vote for Obama. I makes me want to write in Hillary's name even if it is a meaningless gesture.

    McSame's policies are wrong for America. I can see that. But Obama is making me feel trapped and I don't like feeling trapped.