Update on FISA: Obama, Harry Reid, Calls to Hoyer
By John Amato Tuesday Jun 24, 2008 8:15pmHere's a quick update. There was a vote today on the floor in favor of cloture on the FISA bill 80-15, which means there will be 30 hours of debate on FISA. A lot is happening so please post about it in the comment section. Obama has fallen on the wrong side of the debate. It doesn't look good.
"The bill has changed. So I don't think the security threats have changed, I think the security threats are similar. 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."
Schumer has come out against FISA. Reid is obviously juggling a few bills at once and that is coming into play. This is from a rough transcript of a statement he gave on the Senate Floor yesterday announcing his opposition to the FISA bill:
Reid: I am not going to vote for the FISA bill. There are people, Mr. President, who have worked on this FISA matter for three months or more and again the Administration worked with them. Did they, on the FISA bill, move enough to make me vote for the bill? The answer is no.
Reid is joining Dodd and Feingold on their efforts to strip out immunity from the bill.
Blue America has placed some robo calls to Steny Hoyer's house on Telecom Immunity.
On Friday we told you about ads going up in the Washington Post that hold Steny Hoyer accountable for brokering this horrible bill, paid for by these donations. Today Color of Change and Blue America have robocalls going out to Hoyer's constituents, recorded by Reverend Lennox Yearwood who is from the district.
Emptywheel brings up some good points.
As you look at Reid's comments, remember that Reid is dealing with all three of these playing pieces, not just the one we're most focused on, FISA. And to the average American, the other two pieces are way more important than the FISA piece. As well-versed as I've become in FISA, frankly, I can't imagine telling my neighbors facing foreclosure that defeating immunity is more important than them keeping their house.
I'm just making an outtamyarse guess, but I'm guessing that Reid's delay comment last night may be tailored to get action on the housing bill, by holding the two things the Administration wants--FISA and the supplemental--hostage until a hold-out Republican and Bush agree to the housing compromise...read on
Login or Register to post comments.
Dammit, if I wanted to live in a nation where the government could spy on me, I'd move to Russia, or North Korea. This is the US! We. don't. spy. on. our. own. people.
We're not the Tsardom or the Kaiserreich, so we shouldn't try to repeat their mistakes.
I don't give a shit about the other bills - dammit! They get paid the big bucks to represent us. If we deal away the Bill of Rights, we are no longer the USA.
"Obama has fallen on the wrong side of the debate."
It's Nader time.
"Obama has fallen on the wrong side of the debate."
Obama has fallen- period.
Ralph Nader!
Here's to Reid, Dodd, Feingold, and Schumer.
And Obama and his 'Change' act is falling apart. Way too soon. By November, his biggest fans won't even recognize him.
At least nobody in the Bush Administration, Cheney included, has the stones to try what Ivan the Terrible did, no matter how much they want to turn America into Tsarist Muscovy, with the Corporations as the Boyars, and the rest of us as the Serfs.
"Obama On FISA: Security Trumps Suing Phone Companies."
OMG.
I've always been opposed to the FISA bill and am very disappointed in Obama for taking the position he has. That said, I'd like to know what all y'all think about the fact that everyone on the left who vigorously opposes this bill lauded Keith Olbermann for his rant against it some months back, yet he has not criticized Obama for his position. If you ask me, it smacks of hypocrisy. I have never been a big fan of O's brand of self-righteous indignation, even though I mostly agree with his positions but this takes the cake.
Do we have some reps who, for some hidden reason, are not doing the right thing because of skeletons in their closets. Skeletons that sunlight might open them to an exposure they might not be able to survive?
I am disappointed in Obama's position. And therefore I will withhold my planned $50 donation this month. In fact, if Dodd fillibusters, I will give the $50 to HIM!
Anyone go to Obama's civil rights section of his website? It's all Hate Crime this, Pay Inequality that, and NOTHING about the basic Bill of Rights. He's not going to support anything anti-FISA. He is for government surveillance.
What about the companies such as Qwest, and Google who knew this was illegal, and told Cheney to go fuck himself? Is Obama telling us that these other companies don't have legal departments to advise them?
Even worse, is that there's a large section of the nation that wants to become serfs, with the Corporate Boyars in "service" to the Washington Tsar. How stupid can 300 million people be?
"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." Sen. Obama
What ever happened to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", Mr. Obama?
Fascism. Pure and simple.
Johnny2Bad @ 14:
I think you need a white guy for real fascism. Unless the name of your nation is Uganda, and you're called Idi Amin Dada, or it's Zaire, and you're Joseph Desire Mobutu.
I'm so furious with Obama and will not vote for him (or McCain). For me the objection is not only or even primarily that I don't want to be spied on, but it's that the Congress and Obama is not respecting the separation of powers. The Congress here is acting like the judiciary in declaring the telcoms innocent or immune from prosecution. And Obama is compounding the problem by saying he'll fix it when elected President, since the Executive does not have Legislative branch power to rewrite the law no matter how many times Bush tacks on a "signing statement" before signing something into law. It's downright frightening to think Obama, a Constitutional lawyer, has no qualms taking this power to himself. What a sell-out, he stands for nothing but power.
The New Obama:
FISA's ok....NAFTA "Not so bad"
Suck-kers.
I will vote for a 3rd party candidate if Obama does not stop this bill.
I don't care if it helps McCain. If Obama cannot lead on this issue, what the hell is the difference between him and McCain anyway?
ER @ 16:
This is why Bush and Cheney must be impeached. Obama is already operating as a dictator, and Diebold hasn't even selected him yet.
Obama----- "Et tu, Brute?"
You're either carrying water for telecom big business or you're representing the people and their right to a day in court and defending the constitution. One or the other. Call, fight and donate!
ER @ 16:
So...who will you vote for? That nut, Barr? That greater nut that the Constitution Party nominated? The Socialist Party nominee, Moore? Or the guy who has an election addiction, Nader?
Johnny2Bad @ 17:
In NC, there was only a choice between Clinton and Obama. Mike Gravel was on the ballot, but he had already left the party.
Mary Ellen @ 8:
I stopped watching Olbermann, but please let me know when he gets around to his "special comment" regarding Sen Obama. Unlikely, I know.
Folks, he's still a better candidate to represent my interests than John McCain, but this ugly little reversal is the opening salvo in the war proving Obama as just another ordinary politician. Call, fight and donate!
"There was a vote today on the floor in favor of cloture on the FISA bill 80-15, which means there will be 30 hours of debate on FISA."
80-15. That's depressing. Not sure what can save us, now. Still, it isn't done until it's done.
Dear Senator Obama,
After the terrorist airplane and anthrax attacks of September and October of 2001, many of us experienced a renewed sense of patriotism. For a while, our patriotism was intermingled with the nationalism of the Bush administration and its supporters. However, our patriotism always differed from theirs. Just as people of faith hold themselves and others to a high standard based on their religion, we hold ourselves and political leaders to the constitutional standard of our democracy. Our patriotic fervor concerns protecting the rights that constitute our democracy. We do not blindly support candidates; rather we judge them by their votes and also by their success in protecting our democratic rights. Eventually the political consequences our movement became manifest in the congressional midterm elections of 2006. However, the new Democratic majorities did not honor their obligation to reverse the abuses of power and corruption of the Bush administration. Instead they made a political calculation, that they need not do anything, thinking we patriots would never choose the Republicans. This course of events once again had as consequence the renewed vigor of patriots across the country, who donated to opposition candidates based on issues of civil liberties. In the last several years we have been winning, and the establishment of both parties loosing. This political climate is related to your current success, but only to a point. Since the new progressive movement holds everyone to the same constitutional standard, our support for you will irrevocably evaporate should you vote for the new FISA legislation in the Senate. Your public statement that you will support the new anti-Fourth Amendment FISA law yet monitor the program closely once in office rings hollow. This appalling FISA revision, which gives the power to the President to supersede the Fourth Amendment, is the perfect example reversing the principle that the United States is a land of Laws, not Men. I urge you to reconsider your current support for these FISA changes. Please take the time to find a strategy for the fall election that will allow you to kill FISA now. If you do not, you will certainly loose our votes. Furthermore, money that could have gone to your campaign will instead go to oppose right wing Democrats in Congress.
Sincerly,
Citizen J
General_Rennenkampf @ 22:
So if the choices are Lucifer, Satan, Beelzebub, or the Devil...You're recommending actually voting?
Interesting.
guido @ 25:
Who was stupid enough to believe that "change" mantra anyhow? I live in Louisiana, there's more than enough promises of change going unfulfilled to have jaded me on
the Messiah-I mean Obama. Just look at the recent clusterfuck our governor, Jindal created when he didn't fulfill one of his promises. Expecting a national politician to be better is usually a GOP flaw, not a Dem one.moeglicherweise @ 27:
Dass mag sein, aber er hat schon ausreichend Geld.
Johnny2Bad @ 28:
You mean Ahriman, don't you? Satan is just a Judaized version of him that the Christians went hog-wild with, and the Muslims unfortunately picked up from us.
Johnny2Bad @ 28:
Sure... for Cthulhu! Why settle for a lesser Evil? ;)
Johnny2Bad @ 14:
Hey, Johnny2Bad, in the last 6 or 7 days you've been really good about following up on our conversations regarding FISA and Obama...Did you miss my reply @83 to you in yesterday's Hoyer/FISA thread? Because that would be very out of character for you. I was absolutely certain that you'd have a reply.
Johnny2Bad @ 14:
Not fascism, I think they want a monarchy, and a Saudi-style monarchy at that.
General_Rennenkampf @ 31:
"The much better candidate" or "Lesser of two evils" is this guy....not this one
Andy K Jong Il @ 33:
Missed it. Life, ya know?
Johnny2Bad @ 36:
So would you like me to link it again? I can do that. Because I'm sure you want to answer the questions I posed to you. I know I'm looking forward to your explanation.
Enter Objectivity
With all that I feel about the FISA legislation, I am split about Barack Obama's position on this issue. There is a lot at stake concerning this election. Barack has got to be a bit more patronizing then he probably would be because he has got to cover the views of so many.
It would not matter if Obama would choose to support charging the telecommunication companies with crimes, he would of been attacked by the Democrats and the Republicans. If you are looking at this from an objective hard numbers perspective, Obama is taking the side of the Democratic leaders. At least, he can appear to be united in the face of power base.
If I were a Republican, I would be happy Obama was faced with this issue. In fact, I would support every issue like it, so it can drive a natural wedge into his numbers. As we move into the complexities of this election year, we must adjust our own ability to see things in "end objective" terms. The man is trying to win an election; this takes plying the issues at some level. To play the issue does not mean Obama lacks commitment to stand up for what he believes.
When we have moments like this, I wonder if the Left gives the Right more talking points to use against us. You can bet they will exploit this current split to its fullest. We must be willing to support Obama in his dark times, for they come with difficulty and vulnerability.
Joseph
Like all other candidates, Obama is a politician first and foremost. Get over it people! OBAMA '08!! or.............McShame '08? You people want the whole cake in one sitting.
Yea, right, the day leftists vote for a 3rd party candidate, is the day I puke. Obama has to play it down the middle to woo in some moderates. Cut him some fricken slack, people!
Andy K Jong Il @ 37:
If I did I'd go back over there.
Heck, Johnny2Bad, I'll repost it in its entirety on this thread, if you'd like. It's the same topic, after all.
You know what I think? I think everyone posting here, including myself, is all too willing to believe that ranting against Obama, or whoever, actually accomplishes something when it accomplishes NOTHING. I'm a product of the 60s, and the most effective tool used in the 60s was protest in the streets. I'm talking peaceful, organized protests, people - and yet there is very little of that today. As much as I love the internet, it doesn't cut it in terms of protest and hasn't done a whole lot towards changing the status quo. I know I'm dreaming, but don't you think the sight of thousands of people staging a march might sway some pols to sit up and take notice?
JR @ 39:
but...but...he's going to do things 'differently'...Change and all...cut him slack for being just like his opponents? heh.
Johnny2Bad @ 40:
If?
Wow, the way you've had some type of retort to everything that I've posted on the topic, I'd think you'd lead that reply off with a when.
Aren't you just chomping at the bit? Nibbling, maybe?
Thanks for nothing Obama supporters.
Roll the dice .
Craps.
it's so frustrating reading the comments section to this website sometimes. It's like you people run hot and cold based on the weather. You get hung up on civil immunity for telecoms, ignoring completely the actual wrong was committed by the government. Worrying about a potential civil lawsuit against AT&T not happening (one that would be hella hard to win anyway) is a feint, and everyone fell for it. We should be going after Bush for violating FISA in the first place. Misdirection wins again. Instead of being mad at Obama, who couldn't stop this anyway, you should redirect your ire to the man who is always and should always be the main target of it: GWB. Stay on target.
"I am frustrated by the President's decision to play politics by threatening to veto any legislation not containing immunity. Why the President continues to try to hold this important legislation captive to that special interest provision defies explanation." -Sen. Obama, October '07
Yes. It certainly does "defy explaination", Senator. Indeed it does.
How the hell can this impeachable criminal action by the Bush Administration be turned completely around to giving Bush more powers to expand his Evil Fascist Dictatorship???
What is wrong with these people?
Maybe non stop wingnut Fox news, corrupt Republican propaganda, and endless neo-con 'lunatic fringe' talking heads has extensively and severely damaged our society.
there is no compromise period
when it comes to the Constitution.
NO WAY !!!!!!!
the housing problem is another matter
and one should not be used to get the other.
if congress guts the constitution, then it's
the constituents right to gut the senators and
representatives. you give away our civil rights
then we will take away your seat and right to
ever hold office again.
lex @ 48:
"The bill sunsets in December 2012, a mere one year earlier than the Senate bill and a presidential election year." Feingold Factsheet
So, it not only gives those powers to Bush, but to the next President, too.
Hmmm. Now who might that be?
quoted from MyLeftNutmeg.com
Obama fails the FISA test
Today Obama made clear that he will vote for FISA with telcom immunity intact.
The bill has changed. So I don't think the security threats have changed, I think the security threats are similar. 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.
Let's clear up what telcom immunity says.
It says that the President of the United States can declare that any action he takes as President is legal, even if such action is illegal, it is legal and anyone who acts for him is protected because he has said it was legal.
Or, for those of you who have the memory.
Obama agrees with Nixon. "Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal."
That is what telcom immunity in FISA is all about. It's all about the President deciding that his office is above the law and can violate the law at will and no one will be held responsible, until maybe the next election.
It's a reprehensible position.
Obama is wrong. Very wrong. National security is not a reason to throw out the Constitution and give the Office of the President and the Executive Branch dictatorial powers. No man, not person, is above the law. Obama's statement says that is no longer the case in his vision of America. In his vision it is better to give up a prime component of our foundations of liberty for a false sense of security. Obama clearly believes that the trade off of allowing the President to be above the law is well worth the cost.
So, if the President decides to assassinate political rivals (like Mugabe does) it's all okay because we have FISA as precedent that "Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal."
I'm with #38 Joseph 100 percent. I would jump in front of a truck to push Obama or Hill out of harms way. I basically like them. Sure they are creatures of their experience and context. This hyperventilation over a FISA debate that hasn't even resolved and won't amount to much is so wasteful when compared to the terrifying unraveling most Americans face and John Amato THANK YOU SO MUCH for adding Emptywheels admonition.
It proves you are a class act and aren't just pandering to left wingnut fisa hysteria. I will insist that the vast majority of the agitated are either comfortable conceptual lefties out of touch with the real disasters looming over the land and the catastrophic dislocations ahead or they are Ron Paul trolls trying to undermine the serenity we all deserve moving toward a stunning evisceration of the entire GOP/Corporate Oligarch model.
L Miller @ 46:
I see your point. How soon we forget who started all of this in the first place. We should be also addressing the issue of impeachment being off the table. Nancy Pelosi's move taking impeachment off the table has blended well with our ability to be apathetic. When you are left with an unresolved issue, you can displace that issue onto undeserving targets. I agree with your plea to stay on target.
Joseph
Johnny2Bad @ 47:
You're avoiding the conversation, aren't you?
The conversation about your
hypdouble standard, you know?About the fact that you supported Edwards (as did I), and even though he voted to give Stupor Mundi the authorization to go to war- unconstitutionally, I add, because it's up to Congress to declare war- you (likewise, I) forgave him that.
But you won't forgive Obama, in a very similar political situation, for not standing up to this FISA legislation? And need I point out that there are over 4000 dead Americans, and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, because Edwards didn't sacrifice himself politically?
Again, Johnny2Bad, I ask you to explain yourself.
[FIFY. Site Monitor]
Andy K Jong Il @ 54:
If Obama reverses himself on the FISA "compromise" and immunity (again), apologizes, admits he was wrong and pledges not to vote for it...I'd be glad to forgive him.
Next.
Johnny2Bad @ 55:
Yeah, but he hasn't even voted for it, yet, and you've done nothing but to pretend that he did.
And I searched back a little further, and when this issue was on the back burner, you weren't bringing it up, and you were still very anti-Obama. Virulently, almost. Would you like me to pull up what I've found?
You don't have some kind of agenda here, do you? One that pre-dates Hoyer's maneuvering on behalf of the legislation?
As a Canadian I have long been curious about something. After 9-11 the Canadian government pledged close co-operation with the US on matters of intelligence and especially signals intelligence. Here is my understanding of the situation and why I am both curious and concerned about this arrangement. I have no link on hand to back-up my understanding of this arrangement but it was covered in Canada both on television and in the newspapers shortly after 9-11 and should not be too hard to locate if it is worth further investigation.
If a phone call or internet packet originating in the US is routed through any switch or router in Canada, then is it open for intercept since it is suddenly an "International" connection and no longer strictly a domestic US-to-US connection? Follow me? If the packet is routed up to Canada as part of it's A-Z network connection route, then the communication has crossed an international border and at that point is no longer a "domestic" communication, it is international and falls under the warrant-less wiretap program. Ie: even if you are in NY and you are speaking to or emailing someone in LA, your signal has crossed a border and can be harvested/tapped since it has crossed a border and is no longer a "domestic communication" between two Americans.
Some of you will know what a "traceroute" is. I'd be curious to know how many people are finding that a traceroute over your email, http or other ports makes a very short hop up to Canada (and back) between you and your server/recipient.
Just curious. Nothing more to go on than a hunch and some knowledge of an obscure intelligence agreement in place between our countries.
Some needs to read the Oath of Office to Obama very slowly so it can finally sink in to him that it says "Constitution of the United States" NOT "Corporations of the Unitet States".
ignorance of the law is no excuse. no immunity for telecoms that broke the law!
Thorson Welles @ 57, I'm not sure if I know how to check for that but think I do. When Sweden passed their illegal wiretap bill last week I heard they were going to be doing that sort of thing too since there already was a lot of it normally between them and Finland and Norway.
L Miller @ 46:
Why do you think that Obama can't stop this? No one expects him to singlehandedly stop it, yet he is not siding with the defenders of the constitution. What would he have to lose? His supporters are his supporters, and they will still vote for him even if he tries to block this bill. Is he afraid of the media?
It's not about stopping GW any more. The Dems have stopped us at every turn on that, and pretty much ensured the completion of his term. It's about preserving the constitution. My loyalty is to that document over any presidential candidate.
Johnny2Bad @ 50:
Johnny2Bad @ 50:
I'm afraid if the criminal GOP and Diebold voting machines have their way, the evil Fascist 'Lord McCain' might be our next King.
"Was the 2004 Election Stolen?
Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted -- enough to have put John Kerry in the White House. "
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_st...
.
Johnny2Bad, as long as you promise not to be so disingenuous, I won't screw with you anymore. Just admit that you're concern-trolling the hell out of this to subtract from Obama. It's that simple.
But irk me again.....
"Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."
I promise.
Bingo again Joseph. Who dreamed this preposterous contraption up? George W Bush. I think impeachment is overrated and was wrecked by the Gingrich congress attack on Clinton. To the simple minded it is a nice thing to scream for but it betrays a lack of confidence in the horror events will visit upon George W Bush between now and his last day.
An equivalent to the Great Depression is rapidly unfolding with each passing day.
Global warming induced weather volatility will surely destroy much of the Mississippi valley and the corn and soy crop by election day.Just watch the NOAA satellite data every morning assuming you can learn how to interpret those scary Colorado sized red splotches of extremely violent storms.
Foreclosure rates are going crazy in every major urban area but if you are a conceptual lefty in your mom's basement this may not sink in.
When I see your feverish anxious semi hysterical posts on this thing I can't help but wonder what world do you live in? Do you have trust funds or cheap apartments? Do you actually know and reach out to regular American meatheads and inquire about their worries or care about them as people? I genuinely like them and we hang out and I'm telling you right now, the FISA donnybrook is not on the struggling American radar screen and Obama knows this as well as I do. You all are canary farts in a raging national sawmill of a much broader discontent and this amounts to a kind of chest beating one upmanship navel gazing.
Andy K Jong Il @ 44:
Dammit Andy,
I'm all pissed at Obama and then you say "chomping at the bit".
It is CHAMPING, got it... champing at the bit. No one ever chomps on the bit.
Andy K Jong Il @ 56:
Yeah but you cant pretend that Obama didnt vote for the re-authorization of the patriot act.
Once a constitutional violator ...always a constitutional violator.
Obama is not here to help us.
Anyone on here who says "Nader!"
I have a personal message for you; I WILL STRANGLE YOU WITH MY BARE HANDS UNTIL BLOOD SHOOTS FROM YOUR EYES
Productconsumer @ 67:
Take a hike commie!
We us here Americans can vote for whomever we want.
and it ain't your turncoat... 'oh well at least he isn't bush', puppet.
I want Dennis and I still want Dennis, today even more!
P.S. Your dude sux. Starting now.
nanderson @ 65:
Thank you. I could claim a typo, but I'd be lying. Learn something new every day.
BTW, I'd watch out whose spelling you correct, because Johnny2Bad really dislikes it when people do that. Isn't that right, Johnny2Bad? Do you want to link that bit of conversation from Sunday night?
Productconsumer @ 67:
Nader Nader Nader. ...com-n-get me...I choke back.
Terrible @ 60:
I am very serious about comment 57. I follow a fair amount of intelligent discussion on this subject by others far more informed than I am but I have not heard this fairly obvious twist mentioned anywhere else. I remember that immediately after 9-11 the US deliberately routed communications through Canada so they could get around the "domestic" issue and have unfettered access to wiretapping domestic communications, or at least that was the gist of a TV report I saw at the time. At the time it seemed like the thing to do "under the circumstances" and no one paid much attention. Our current government is "Bush Light" and would certainly go along with this type of arrangement on a longer term basis and keep it on the hush-hush. It may be nothing more than a misguided hunch on my part but I thought it was worth bringing up since it is the type of thing that I can see the current admin doing on an ongoing basis, to circumvent the intent if not the letter of the law. Wish I could help with traceroute instructions but Google can show you how to do it if you are curious. Don't forget trying different ports since they may have different packet routes. Bell, Aliant, Telus, Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, etc.... If more than a few people notice routing outside of the US then it is certainly worth looking into before this law is passed.
General_Rennenkampf @ 22:
It would be great to see "none of the above" get 10% of the vote. Bring Down A Dictator.
For Obama, 60% of the population, the ACLU and MoveOn are DFH's. He's swallowed the beltway bubble cocktail party kool-aid.
Obummer 08.
I've been behind Obama since Edwards dropped out, but I would back Hillary now if I knew this was what he'd do. I've tried calling the Obama campaign number and keep getting a call-back-later message. I've left word at this office in DC how I felt, but didn't get the impression the guy who answered cared what I thought. This is a bit distressing - how do we get Obama to keep his word? Any ideas?
milquetoast @ 66:
No, no one is here to help us, are they? Russ Feingold, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Bernie Sanders all failed to pull a Guy Fawkes today, like we've all been....expecting? Praying for?
This has been a done deal since last week. I don't think anyone on the Democratic side did this to Obama on purpose, or actively, anyway, they just didn't give a fuck that they were painting him into a corner.
It's an ugly thing, politics, no matter who's in what office. Some days it seems beautiful, but there's always someone on the other side with a completely different perspective. Abraham Lincoln was assassinated, for chrissakes...Saved the Union, freed the slaves...and got a bullet behind the ear.
Kimberly @ 75:
Change you tried to believe in.
robert @ 18:
Unfortunately a Supreme Court stacked with neocon dillweeds.
Andy K Jong Il @ 56:
Ok...Let's talk after the vote. And yes (I'll save you some cut and paste time) I'm "virulently" anti-Obama.
Andy K Jong Il @ 76:
Sorry, let me complete the thought.
There was nothing unconstitutional about secession. Slavery was most definitely constitutional. And Lincoln suspended habeas corpus.
Sic semper tyrannis, eh?
Andy K Jong Il @ 69:
I love it when they get all obsessive about me.
I'm honestly not surprised by Obama. Apologists would say it's about the election, but I say if you want to change things you have to stand up even if it may not be political expedient. This sort of "flip flopping" damages his "brand" even more than tired narrative about democrats being soft on national security. What I have noticed about Obama is that he can be flexible, which is good. I'd like to see Olberman do a special comment about this though
Productconsumer @ 67:
Nader!
(Ducks)
Andy K Jong Il @ 63:
Got my own stalker. Eeuuuuu. Creepy.
Andy K Jong Il @ 80:
Actually, the president CAN suspend habeas corpus - in times of insurrection, i.e. the south declaring war on the United States. (They DID attack the United States in Charleston, SC, if you recall.)
</strong
And the argument whether secession is or is not constitutional was settled - when the Union WON the war. That ended the argument.
But you are correct on slavery - it was constitutional. Sadly. Yet the beauty of the Constitution is the framers' foresight in giving us the means to change it as we see fit. Thus, mistakes/omissions such as slavery and secession can be rectified.
Wow, I've never seen a 'code' show up in a post before (re: "</strong" above which was the closure of bold and italic emphasis.)
throwthembows @ 82:
FISA: No change
NAFTA: No change
Public campaign finance: No change
Death Penalty: No change
Tort reform: No change
We can all ways hope.
Obama, YOU LOST MY VOTE!!!
Good job man and nice timing too, right after you became the presumptive nominee.
SCHMUCK!!!
Either a electable 3rd party is needed bad or we purge the Democratic Party of the turncoats, F'em!!!
The FISA voteing will be a good place to start.
Those that voted yea-GONE!!!
Those who voted nae-STAY!!!
I used to support you Obama, FUCK YOU!
Kucinich/Edwards '08 : )
solid @ 83:
OK, time for a movie geek trivia question. Who said (and in what movie), "Blucher!"
JW @ 10:
I'm going back to donating to the ACLU. They have a track record in fighting for the Constitution. Obama and the DNC have bilked me for the last time, and I am re-registering as an independent. I will still vote for him in November because I am not like the die-hard Clinton voters who would vote for McCain and cut off their noses to spite their faces. Yes, as someone said above, hope and change have come to a sudden end, haven't they?
naschkatze Hussein @ 90:
Xoites defends Constitution, a frequent poster, came up with a great idea: if this passes and Obama votes for it, he suggests a massive, coordinated re-registration of Democrats to Independent status as a protest. I believe his new website is fightfisa.com (.org?)
Mary Ellen @ 42:
So, Let's organize a protest.
Just be prepared for violence from the police. They have a nasty habit of tasering people these days for just speaking their mind. However, we can use that to our advantage to show what thugs they are.
A protest sounds good to me. It's time we got off our asses.
No doubt, I'm on a watch list now.
wheeee_from_Illinois_whose_Senatard_is_a_turncoat_prick @ 88:
Kucinich and Edwards are the better candidates. I was really hoping that Edwards would have gotten the nomination (and I'm black).
Obama was a step down, and Clinton was three steps down. Still, anything was better than Dubya.
I'm going to have to think long and hard over the next few weeks.
i quess obama won't be pursuing any prosecution of bush ever.
Nice Job, All you Obama Supporters. You picked a real WEEENER! You wouldn't listen, now we're all stuck with him! OMG!
Anyone on this site, who wanted Obama and ranted and raved how bad Edwards would have been should shut the F up, and not bitch and moan. You Obama supporters would not listen to anyone about how he was right of center. Well great job, now we're stuck with someone who is going to be right of Bill Clinton. You only have yourselves to blame for this.
Conversation in 2009 :
Oh, did you hear ? The democrats decided to help McCain win the presidency so that they would not be perceived as weak on NATIONAL SECURITY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
McCain will BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OR BUSH SIMPLY WON'T LEAVE OFFICE !! THE DEMOCRATS WILL SURELY ALLOW IT. Isn't that obvious to everyone by now??
Productconsumer @ 67:
Site monitor, isn't this a bit much? I'm all for free expression, but isn't violence frowned upon here at C&L?
That's it. Obama has just lost my vote. I've always sided with those who say he's all presence, not much substance but I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. His caving in on this most important of issues is disgusting. This bill is a litmus taste , a very stark measure of all our so called "leaders". Feingold and Dodd are on the right side of this. Obama clearly is not. Screw him. I'm sitting Nov. '08 out.
Disregard my last post... I failed to recognize the joke. :)
Joseph @ 38:
You're making excuses for him. Obama is in a position to be a LEADER on this issue. Instead he is FOLLOWING what the other politicians are doing, even against what he claimed were his convictions, at the expense of our Constitutional rights. What you call him "playing" the issue is really him getting played. There's no reason at all to believe that doing the right thing in this case would hurt him in the election (if anything it would help, being one less "flip-flop"), and to say we should "support Obama" in his moments of spinelessness is absurd!
Hillary should step up now!!!
She can play the role of hero to the constitution.
State her case to the super delegates that she defended the constitution
whereas Obama DIDN'T.
He has failed his oath to defend the constitution and
she was it's champion.
Or she could run as an Indie.
Old Man McCain is unelectable and Obama just burned us.
The voters should hold him to account!
What can be done to send a message to these pols to quit fucking around with our constitution.
You pols like talking about protecting Freedom, Liberty, and America.
Our constitution IS Freedom, Liberty, and America.
For Cristfuckingsakes how much more American can you get than our Constitution?
So start doing you job already and fulfill your oaths of office!!!
An Edwards/Kucinich or Kucinich/Edwards ticket would be a godsend!
gwen @ 102:
I agree with you. Obama needs to get the message that he can't just abandon the American people.
McCain would be the worse choice. We all know that. If anyone has any ideas regarding what to do at this point, I'm all ears (eyes actually).
What are we doing to do now? We can't back McCain. That would be utter insanity.
I feel like I'm between a rock and a pool of ravenous sharks.
wheeee @ 94:
It's not about left, right, D(d)em, R(r)ep, Obama, McCain, Clinton, or Nader. It's not about personalities or politics. It's a question of basic fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. I expect anyone running for the highest executive office to uphold the law, not make a mockery of it. The Fourth Amendment isn't some random bill that can be used as a pawn in exchange for housing relief, however necessary said relief is. My own mother is facing foreclosure and I'm still calling my Senators and the Obama campaign to defeat this lousy FISA bill. If we Americans lose our basic civil liberties, we won't be able to take comfort in our dwellings.
We could either back Hillary depending on how she votes.
I'd be happy with Edwards/Kucinich.
It would suck if McCain won but it would send a very clear message to the Dems.
We'll sacrifice ya if you fuck us!
I meant to say we could back Hillary as an Independant.
I'm not a Hillary fan, but if she came out against this
I would vote for her if she ran.
When the Senate caves, as it no doubt will, into the Bush crime family and the telecom companies, isn't there still the House/Senate conference committee in play before the bill gets sent to Bush's desk to rubber-stamp the cover-up of his criminal activity?
If Sen. Reid is serious, then he'll pack the Senate side of the Senate/House conference committee with Russ Feingold and all the other patriotic U.S. senators, who have my permission to strip out of this odious bill the retroactive immunity provision...just like Republicans did while they controlled Congress, before sending it on to Bush.
Not sure if this will fit on a shirt, but:
"Don't blame me, I voted for
Ron PaulBarack ObamaBob Barr"^whoops... didn't mean to cross out Barr too. Heh...
obama better explain himself, or he is gonna lose tons of support
this is absolute bs
this has nothing to do with national security, and everything to do with illegal search and seizure
the demos will fold like a deck of cards.
got to love the alpha dog repubs
you want spineless vote demo
you want alpha dog and unending wars vote repub
third party anyone?
wheeee @ 107:
Unfortunately, that would be cutting off our nose to spite our face. Throwing your vote away to a third party candidate won't help. We tried that with Nader in 2000 and all we got was a Democratic party more willing to kiss GOP ass than ever.
wheeee @ 108:
Hillary voted for the Patriot act twice...go green, independent, libertarian or constitutional. ...there are other parties.
I am not happy with his stance on this, but I do understand he needs to get into the WH before he can make big time changes. I do also understand that he does not want to give the shit-throwers ammo to accuse him of being soft on national security, which he isn't. I am not going to vote for Barr, and definitely not doing a Limbaugh and voting for McCranky. I think we need to see how this plays out in the next few weeks.
Obama needs to stay on the side of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Habeas Corpus and all doctrine that has made America what it is. This is his basic platform . . . this is his "Vote for Change" . . . this is his "Hope". He needs to be extremely open and vocal on these issues or he will lose his following.
The Constitution and the rule of law trump all other issues. Obama seems not to understand that. He has lost my vote. Senator Webb, who I supported and voted for, appears to be headed in the wrong direction, too. He has lost my vote. Senator Warner is, off course, a fascist, and never had my vote.
The entire premise behind the need to "modernize" is defective and bogus. National security has absolutely nothing to do with it. It is just a device to provide cover for inflcting further harm on the Constitution. It's looking more and more like the thing to do this November is vote with my feet.
Why the two party system doesn't work. Obama isn't even our official candidate yet and he is already giving away our constitutional rights. "What are you going to do about it, punk? Vote for McCain?"
Joseph @ 38:
Joseph, you got the bottom line right there!! Let's get this guy into office, set up a truly informed, effective government, again, and see how really smart people can find creative solutions!!!
We have no where else to go, except to be blown further, and further into the dark ages if mccain gets his foot in the door.
Just remember this: We hold the power of CHOICE in all things. If this FISA thing isn't restructured within a reasonable time after Obama is elected, we enforce by CHOICE.
I have no problem, what so ever, totally walking away from it all. CLOSE IT ALL DOWN; STOP DOING BUSINESS WITH THEM.......I MEAN EVERYONE, UNTIL WE, THE PEOPLE GET a fair shake. How long would it take if we SHUT OUR WALLETS?? JUST UNPLUG FROM THE SYSTEM............AGAIN, how long would it take to show them how each paying customer really does have a say on this matter.
Millions just closing their accounts over night...........one solid voice. HOW LONG before the tide would turn? United we stand, united we are the change agents, united we can have a voice.
I can understand Obama's backtracking on campaign financing but I see no reason whatsoever for his waffling on basic American rights. Obama had better consider who got him this nomination over Clinton, the progressives and independents, before stabbing us in the back before election day.
I have never voted for an independent candidate and have criticized others for doing so, calling it a wasted vote, but if Obama scurries towards the right and away from those of us who helped him win the nomination, he'd be best not to take it for granted that we'll still support him in November. The Ralph Nader option is still on the table and looking a lot better every day. My Democratic Congressman has already switched and voted in support for FISA. He WON'T be getting my vote in November. If he wants to act like a Republican while in Congress, he can go to the Republicans for campaign contributions and votes.
This is one of his first major opportunities since becoming to presumptive Democrat presidential nominee and he is blowing it big time. NOTHING...is more important than protecting the Constitution and the civil liberties of the American citizen. The fact that Obama has so cavalierly flushed it down the toilet with a dismissive brush-off gesture says a lot about his complete lack of character. I was going to vote for him because I think McCain spells utter desolation for this country, but I am fast rethinking tendering a vote for Obama now as well if this his idea of what it means to lead the United States. A complete and total outrage on more levels than one can count.
Vorple @ 3:
Amen brother!! After the Democrats screwed over Dennis Kucinich by excluding him from the debates, I had sworn I was voting for Nader. However, I later switched to Obama, believing he was different. Obviously, I was wrong!!
Reading these comments---- is like going back in time --- bad things are being said --- and they are not about Hillary Clinton -- in a word -- WOW. Are you really waking up and smelling obama? or are you just teazing me? I want to BELIEVE -- really I do. But the obama fan club has been singing in such harmony --- but now discord....There is hope afterall. So thanks -- and nail him, 'cause he is just a politician who can smell the oval office and is tacking this way and that to get there. Axelrod is driving this bus, and that noise ya hear is all those folk under it. I know it may not last, but this is a good day for me at CROOKS&LIARS.
Or course the issue of telecom immunity is separate from National Defense, which is why it shouldn't even be in the same bill. (That's of course why it is, so Dems will have to vote for it, like Obama.) Politics 101
If Obama, or any of the rest of them truly believed what they say about one thing not trumping the other, then they'd kill the bill as it is and wait for separate bills that deal with the two different issues on their own...as it should be.
wheeee_from_Illinois_whose_Senatard_is_a_turncoat_prick @ 88:
Obama will do whats right,dont worry.
Whenever I use the email account I have with my provider in Japan and receive personal email (not corporate) I receive two copies of every email. When I use my gmail account, this doesn't happen. Pretty annoying so I stopped using the provider account. The reason why I receive the two copies became obvious after learning about the spying equipment that AT&T and other telecommunications companies use for that purpose.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/11/att-whistle-blo.html
http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2008/03/06
The politicians that will do something about this are a minority group. There are other ways to fight this but will take some organization to make it effective. On the other hand, too many people believe that they cannot live without having telephone and Internet connectivity in their homes and many cannot because it is necessary for their livelihood.
This is not a fight that will be won through political processes. It is personal at the deepest level.
Phantom(God of Hellfire) @ 128:
It's too late for that. He failed.
Login or Register to post comments.