To my letter to him. He told me to fuck off.
Statement of Senator Barack Obama on FISA Compromise
Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. There is also little doubt that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, has abused that authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders.
That is why last year I opposed the so-called Protect America Act, which expanded the surveillance powers of the government without sufficient independent oversight to protect the privacy and civil liberties of innocent Americans. I have also opposed the granting of retroactive immunity to those who were allegedly complicit in acts of illegal spying in the past.
After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act.
Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance – making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.
It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives – and the liberty – of the American people.
In case you couldn't parse the three bolded sentences yourself, here's my take on them.
- I will make a showy effort in the Senate on Monday to get them to take out immunity. I will lose that effort 32-65. But hey! I can say I tried!
- But don't worry, little boys and girls, Inspectors General are an adequate replacement for our third co-equal branch of government!
- Nice little bloggers! Aren't you cute! After you demanded accountability we gave you piggy lipstick and fig leaves and told you it was time to move on while we important Senators told you--in polite terms--to fuck off.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
oy
the MIC is dictating
and Leslie Blitzer is a tool
He doesn’t even call on others to join him.
So I’m trying to think ahead, and I am very unhappy. This is a really troubling dynamic.
Digby quotes the WaPo as saying:
I was told flat out by my (extremely blue, extremely against immunity) congressman’s staff that this was exactly why it was happening, and (again, just flat out told) it was (rough quote) “because the leadership thinks you, and people like you, learned a lesson from voting for Nader.” This is one of the congressmen on our side; one of the 30 who joined the Republicans to throw a wrench into the leadership’s PAA extension last year.
So, as I asked at Digby’s–Is this going to keep happening? Every time between now and November that the Republicans say “Boo”, will this be the response? Are we going to see the Blue Dogs pushing the Democratic leadership into capitulation on an Iran War Resolution?
How long does Obama plan to wait before fighting this dynamic? Or will we be treated to a firm pledge to conduct the Iran War with due oversight?
(lest I left any ambiguity, I didn’t vote for Nader, those were her words, and even those, meant only to convey what the leadership is thinking.)
And I am thinking Nader again.
Shrill.
Jackass party, indeed.
Coming from you, BT, I consider that a compliment.
Nicest thing that’s happened to me all day.
barak is already a disappointment
and already too late for us to do anything about it…what the frig is going on here, I was actually excited about this campaign and his presidency, now I don’t give a flying frig
Bob Barr, huh.
What can I say? Anyone who competed in Speech tournaments in the 70’s gave Obama’s speeches on a weekly basis. Most Democrats bought it. What else won’t he stand up to or are ‘cute bloggers’ the only focus of his resistance?
He told us all to fuck-off.
Piss on ‘im.
a big shout out to Joe-Bama, doing what he does best!
At least if he wins the Presidency, the Illinois senate seat will be open for one of your “better” Dems to run for in a primary, and hopefully maybe a brave, quixotic 3rd party or Independent run.
glad more people are finally seeing through the Audacity of the Hype©™
How do we get through to ‘Mr Next President’ that he’s about to lose a whole lot of potential votes?
(I haven’t sent him much money, but I’m inclined to ask for it back. I can use it. It’s two tanks of gas for my fuel-efficient car.)
Two words: Supreme Court
BTW, this is what I wrote at Mr Majority Leader Steny-the-fink’s place:
We learned after Nader? Nader would never have happened if the Dems had a spine.
It’s a good thing I didn’t eat luch today or I would have ralphed it up.
Not another dime. Dry up his money. and the next time some Obamabot gets all dreamy about how their demi-god is “transformative” I am going to vomit on that persons shoes. While their feet are in them.
He is a two bit Chicago politcal hack–and he has conned the democratic party with a nice suit and pretty speech.
He sure is good at talking the talk, but he is utterly incapable of walkingthe walk.
Somebody may owe Big Dawg an apology. He may have been right all along.
Yo! Edwards! Yeah you! Time to unsuspend that campaign of yours. The convention vote has not been cast yet
“because the leadership thinks you, and people like you, learned a lesson from voting for Nader.”
Oh! Well, let me see now, does this tear it for me? I think it does. Yep.
And, I didn’t even vote for Nader.
Its a good point, but my cynicism is deepening.
Do that. Literally. Ask for it back. You may not get it back, but MONEY speaks the loudest in modern politics.
We have GOT to find a way to tell our “esteemed” Congressmembers and Senators, “no, FUCK you!” Phone calls, faxes, emails, ballot box are all fine…but is there nothing else short of blackmail that’ll work?
I suppose ads in the WaPo are a start, but it’s going to be a long, long time before the words “rule of law” actually mean something again.
Fuck off, Barry Ballless. Doesn’t make much difference to me tho, I won’t vote for him regardless. Send him to the shitpile, along with hoyer, pelosi, dean and more.
Not Happy.
However, I think the productive response to this news is more contributions to the Act Blue FISA project. Obama’s actions in this are very disappointing, but I don’t regret supporting him over Clinton. And this doesn’t even come close to justify voting 3rd party or sitting it out in November.
Join the club. If this is how Obama reacts before the election, why should we expect any change after? My fax to his campaign headquarters @ 10:00 pdst.
Obama for America June 20, 2008
233 N. Michigan Ave
Suite 1100
Chicago, Illinois 60601
RE: Barack Obama and the Constitution
Obama stated some time ago, I believe before he beat HC, he’s against Telecom immunity. Yet he has remained strangely silent since Bond/Hoyer resurrected a dead horse. He had to know what would happen in the House and said nothing. He knows he had the power, just by holding a news conference or an interview, to have House DINO’s face the consequences of their vote. He did nothing. I suspect he will not use his new powers to make Senate DINO’s vote down immunity. So much for the 4th amendment!
I may not vote for him after all.
Change we can believe in, and don’t get!
The next time he asks for a donation, he gets 0.01 with the polite suggestion that he can ask the telcos for the rest. If enought people do it, he might get a message that we are a bit pissed.
The next time you talk to your extremely blue, extremely against immunity congressman’s staff, mention these two words to them and see what they say:
Al Wynn.
If they don’t get it, ask them to walk down the hall and ask Donna Edwards to explain it to them.
Then tell them to politely take their Ralph Nader and stuff it. That’s old news.
This is really no surprise.
I am sure Obama and his team PUSHED for this to come up now rather than later.
He pisses off 10% (max) of the electorate who cares about this but who will vote for him anyway, and he takes it off the plate as a wedge issue.
This is triangulating, capitulating politics.
Right, Nader was the result of Gore’s pussy footing around and failing to campaign on any true issues of change, or even in a way consistent with his true positions, instead using wardrobe changes to court votes. We know he had some fire in his belly. Just look at his speeches condemning Bush. He was wrapped up in electoral politics and manipulation he lost himself.
I agree with you. A couple of the other things he’s said lately have given me whiplash, and I don’t trust him — globalization, NAFTA, now FISA; plus, I didn’t care for him lecturing people on Father’s Day. Maybe he’s a Puke hack.
What can we do? Like you say, the convention vote has not been cast yet. There could end up being an August surprise.
I am not happy.
there is indeed a chance obama lost the swing voters and those that were energized for something differant
he might indeed lose the election because of this, and I will no longer be able to say he might lose because of bigotry, now I will say he might lose because he has no spine, because he is a sellout, because he deserved to lose
he is a puppet, just like mccain is a puppet and I will never be excited with anything he does ever again
That’s not exactly the question for me. He’s pretty much got my vote at this point.
The question is, when I vote for him will I be holding my head up high, or holding my nose? Will I be work phones and driving people to the poles, or just stopping off to vote when I can fit it in my schedule?
And, ultimately, will I be taking my “Impeach” sticker off my car the day he’s sworn in, or deciding to leave it there?
That’s where were at, as far as I’m concerned.
– MarkusQ
I dream of the 60’s…
Was it my imagination or did the generation kick some arse.
The only problem is that some grew up, and lost their fucking way.
Is it Corona time, or can we indulge in a big fatty…
It’s the leadership that is having trouble getting it.
Obama sure loves Con Law…for the wealthy defendants.
No wonder he chose his buddy Eirc Holder to vet veeps: he’s looking for the Spiro Agnew demographic.
All of us are disappointed by BO’s stance. I have to disagree with EW and many other posters here on this one: I think BO is calculating on how to win and hold the white house, and govern. He made a pragmatic, arguably cynical decision.
That’s what leaders do. That’s what Lincoln did when he held off on emancipation - to the fury of our political ancestors, the abolitionists. That’s what FDR did when he bonded with the dixicrats - to the (justified) fury of Elenore.
We can and should hold BO to account on this one, but I hope that all of you will consider what it means to be president, and the constituencies - many very different than us, and many hostile to us - that any effective president has to serve.
Peace
This is stupid immunity for the telecoms just keeps them from testifying that Bush threatened them if they did not go along with his illegal scheme.
Hey - maybe he can negotiate the same cool deal with Bin Laden?
Let’s have the IG of terrorism, who will be appointed by Bin Laden, do a thorough investigation for a secret sharia court. Meanwhile, as long as bin laden gives the courts of this country a note from a mullah that they had declared the mass killings to be “legal” we’ll just let that one pass and walk away happy, knowing we can be confident of accountability going foreward.
Someone has to put the pee in yippee. Glad there was a volunteer.
Lincoln did it without lying or deception. When he spoke, he meant it. When he did something for pragmatic reasons, he said so.
You may think Obama is calculating on how to win and hold the white house; I think he is miscalculating.
Badly.
That’s a reasonable answer too all of this bill, EXCEPT the immunity provision. There is no dialing back immunity. Once it’s done, it’s done. And then we have a precedent that corporations will be protected any time our government asks them to assist them in breaking the law against its own people.
Here is a Kos diary from December essentially predicting this outcome:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....336/417645
Is this something that the ACLU will take on? If so, should we be sending them donations instead of candidates?
I will work as hard for Obama, as I did for Hillary. We simply cannot have McCodger in the White House. That said, Obama will govern to the right of Bill Clinton. This “running toward the middle” crap is “running for the right” IMO>
He is who we thought he was.
HRC would have triangulated in much the same fashion.
I thought it was the Clinton’s who were supposed to be the triangulators and so very calculating each vote and position?
I thought Obama was supposed to be something new and different?
Looks to me that Obama learned his lessons well from both Bush and Clinton.
Oddly, I agree with everything you said, and come to conclusion that’s exactly why we have to be as hard on Obama as we (credibly) can be.
Because there are so many constituencies and pulls, we have to push very hard, too, to get motion from him in the direction that we see is best for the country.
I’ll never vote for a Rethug because the GOP undermined our Republic. For the same reason, I’ve no reason to vote for the telcomms’ servant Obama.
I’m in CA - Obama will win here. So the Supremes don’t factor in my personal choice. I just can’t vote for those who swear - and are paid - to uphold the Constitution, and then use their power to destroy the Constitution and the Republic.
What has this community been wrong about since 2001? Yet the ‘cute little bloggers’ are treated with the same disdain as the fundementalists by the Reich.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Io-L2PEv7c4
I think we have to a) keep reminding him that the convention vote has not happened yet.
b) DRY UP HIS MONEY
The most important “polling data” is $$$$$$.
If his online contributions drop off dramtically between now and the FISA vote and WE KEEP YELLING ABOUT IT, he will get them message.
Of course tha’s just FISA. We stillhave the problem of what do do with him once he’s elected. Unless some super delagates reconsider.
42 - and not just corporations. Individuals who tortured and even tortured and killed detainees get to say, “hey, if the President tells me I can, it’s legal”
As would have Edwards, on many key issues.
Happy corporate sovereignty day.
Oh, well they’ve already got immunity thanks to Yoo and Mukasey.
Glenn:
ouch.
Didn’t old Ed Abbey always take beautiful river or canyon trips in early November?
He was a wise man.
I have tears in my eyes marcy
I am dumbfounded and feel helpless
I do not think the telecoms have anything to worry about if they were threatened or even if they thought they would be threatened by Bush. This FISA immunity prevents them us from getting them to testify about whether Bush did indeed threaten them.
This Bill should be called the Protect Bush from Squealers Bill. Can a bill be legal if its main purpose is to protect someone else from testimony about their illegal acts that they forced others to do?
Can a bill be legal if that person had a hand in creating a bill to protect himself from others testimony?
yep.
This would not have cost him votes. In fact, it would have gained him votes.
I said way back when there was still herd running inthe primary, that those who fell in love with his whole “messiah” were in danger of being turned off and disaffected and that he could end up backlashing
When worshipful followers find out thier god has feet of clay, they don’t turn out to vote.
He could, not only cost us theh elction with cheap craven shit like this, he could cost us a geration of of people registered Democrat. Of course Pelosi et al have a great deal of blame to share for this as well
Senator Barack Obama@0:
Why? The U.S. intelligence service was aware that Bin Laden was going to strike prior to 9/11, it was the failure of government to act on that information that resulted in the attack’s succcess, NOT a failure of intelligence that would call for expanded legislation.
With all due respect, Law and Civil Liberties come FIRST, since they are what is being protected. Destroying civil liberties in the name of protecting them is absurd.
By what measures? Unless there are markedly fewer typographical and grammatical errors, I cannot see the difference.
You have not demonstrated that this tool was in jeopardy of NOT continuing. As a matter of fact, it was not in any such jeopardy, so what is this legislation for?
If the President has been conducting an illegal program of warrantless surveillance (your words, Senator), why is the President not being impeached for this high crime?
Excuse me for saying so, sir, but “trust me” is not a sufficient guarantee from ANY politician.
This is a lie. There is no hurry, existing laws and procedures already provide all the intelligence needed.
And if you DON’T become President, you just traded our civil rights to John McCain for nothing, while indemnifying the communications companies who (with the notable exception of Qwest) cooperated with illegal surveillance of everyone… including you and your family.
Like I said, Senator, “trust me” doesn’t cut it.
SUPREME COURT
Send the donations to the Stange Bedfellows program tha tis going to target Steny et al and put negative ads intehir districts.
AND DRY UP OBAMA”S FUNDRAISNG.
In a not-very-funny development, I have a fund-raising email from the Obama campaign in my inbox.
I think not.
Same We Can Believe In
I agree, LHP. It will cost him votes, and support. I don’t feel much like volunteering for him any longer.
maybe not
obviously not this supreme court but some in the future could easily find this law unconstitutional
Exactly!
100% right.
0% wrong.
Everybody that was calling into CSpan was against this.
Even the wingnuts.
There is no dialing back immunity.
What if the immunity was given not for the reason given but instead to prevent the immune person from testifying about acts that they were forced to do? Then wouldn’t that be witness tampering?
can the dem senators filbuster this bill?
can we make one last stand?
It is nice to know via Glenzilla that 23% Repugs approve of this congress and only 13% of democrats do. BO could screw this 1932(once in a lifetime) opportunity for signifigant progressive change. DAM!
I was going to be holding my nose anyway.
I voted for Edwards in my state’s primary.
I do think there’s a decent chance of that. But if I were a Con lawyer who believed this aspect of the bill was unconstitutional I migth say that, to help the Courts out on this issue. I think, given his opinion in Boumediene, Kennedy might agree. But it has to get there first.
“Then wouldn’t that be witness tampering?”
But now how do we find out? The pending lawsuits will be dropped, no?
I like Obama I have supported Obama I will vote for him and encourage others to because I despise McCain but I will not do that for a long while.
As far as Cash goes well I need to see something Obama has to make this up to me, National Healthcare would be nice.
Yes
Yes and if Obama held a press conference and put it on the line, the Senate would vote it down
Protect America, right, protect Bush is more like it.
55 - no they don’t. That’s the argument floated, but it’s not correct. Just like this legislation is attempting to do something that is just not legally valid - to have a court be required to rubber stamp the legally incorrect proposition that a permission slip from the President trumps the Constitution and cuts off judicial review of massive violations of the 4th amendment.
OTOH, by the time anyone ever gets to really seeing anything about ‘teh program’ history will have been rewritten or sanitized or destroying into it being an innocuous little thing, with no proof to the contrary available. This has all been an invitation for the telecoms to engage in massive document destruction - but hey, why not - no penalty for such a thing, because we’re only worrying about ‘the future’ Which Obama Democrats always make “a day away”
lhp - the money issue would probably work, but it will never happen. I had numerous contacts with congressional offices yesterday and got lots of emails yesterday and today. The problem was that all the emails had a contribute button and were about Obama not taking public financing. The message from Pelosi was that this was just about the MOST IMPORTANT thing she could think of to correspond about.
Yep. From Kagro X yesterday at the great orange satan:
I had a letter from Mr O’s campaign, wanting money. Instead I hit ‘unsubscribe’ - it’s in the fine print at the bottom - and told them exactly why I was unsubscribing. First word: FISA. Also said I wanted my donation back, and I’d be giving only via ActBlue.
BETTER Democrats, not just MORE Democrats.
First post here . . . be gentle.
In the end, what it means is that we can’t get discovery from the Telcos. Nobody was really hoping to sue them for billions anyway. I have no problem with this approach from Obama at all . . . IF he plans to pursue legal actions after he takes office. His administration should have access to all the information needed to pursue those actions after he takes power. If he actually tasks his AG (Fitz or Edwards I hope) to get to the bottom of things, it will be a much broader and deeper investigation than we would get now, and we all know there is no way there will be an impeachment of this President under this Congress.
This isn’t an approach that makes me happy now, but it might make me real happy later. I can only hope.
I got that email too and I now think that Obama timed that cmapign finance announcemnt to provide a bright shiney object that all the MSM (and even the bloggers) would cover instead of all FISA all the time.
Unsubscribe to his e-mails, and use the ‘tell us why’ box.
That’s what I did.
Welcome to the Lake. Hope you comment often.
I agree with you professor, and with EW and many others who responded to my post: the immunity provision is baffling, and painful - and we should and will hold BO’s feet to the fire. Unlike W., he needs us, and I believe fundamentally understands and even shares our views.
What I disagree with is the notion that, based on this one instance, BO is like Clinton, or Gore. The man spent years of his life as a community activist, and returned to that job after leading the law review at Harvard Law School - he walked away from multi-million dollar salaries to persue what we on this site believe in.
It’s my sense that we have no idea of the range of back-room pressures in play on a president or would be president.
Carter (whom I deeply admire) bucked the system - e.g. I cheered when he cancelled the B-1 bomber, and railed against the US arms industry.
It cost him. The Dems in Congress turned on him. Ed Kennedy ran to destroy him - ostensibly at the head of a “liberal” crusade - and helped bring on Reagan.
My position is this: I’m not ready to relinquish my trust in BO, or see him as hostile to our shared desire to see a restoration of the democratic process in the US.
Personally, I’m braced for an “october surprise” possibly in the form of a bloody terrorist attack. I’m no conspiracy theorist, but I have (like most of you) no illusions about how ruthless Cheney et. al are prepared to be.
BO’s campaign has put them in a desparate fix. They were all geared up for a run against Hillary. I think all the Dem leadership is worried about this - I certainly hope they are.
I’m not defending the FISA obscenity. I merely think BO needs our support - and our watchful dissent.
peterr at 29–
i mentioned donna edwards everywhere i called today, and yesterday…every single intern knows who she is–called maybe thirty offices or so in the last two days……..and told them about the actblue money to be used against dems who vote for this travesty…….that a whole lot of money was raised in a short period of time, that maybe more people care about this issue than they are aware….that they’d better become aware….gave them the web page so they could verify it and see the ’money thermometer’ go up as this went through the house…..
============posted this earlier today========
made more calls again today. to add the actblue info to the issue……
told them all about the money being raised on
http://www.actblue.com/page/fisa
and why. and about firedoglake, i always do that…….the interns really like the new info.
here’s some of them i called again today with the new info…
hoyer
space-who’s going to have tight race this fall. he can’t afford to step on a sidewalk crack at this point.
charlie wilson
leahey to thank him
kuchinich to thank him and gave actblue fisa fund address so he can tell the dems voting for it what’s going on in their honor and what is going to be happening to them if they back this bill, thought he would like giving them the news! intern said he probably would like doing that.
sen brown
sen rockefeller
sen obama and requested a written response on why he hasn’t spoken out about this-got machine.
pelosi’s office has been busy since this am, i ask for her office first, then the others….busy busy busy…hurrah.
oh and brought up donna edwards to each and every one of them and the fact that she is a blue america candidate….every single intern knew who she is and what state she’s going to be representing….think maybe they’re noticing a possible trend in the making?….lol……
The only way today could be more depressing is if Obama announces he’s chosen Sam Nunn as his running mate.
Yes they can what about Dodd? It would embarrass the Senate to beat back a filibuster on this issue.
It would embarrass the Democrats if they have to pull procedure games to close a filibuster or *cough* compromise more with the GOP to get the votes to beat a filibuster.
After all Obama is the head of the Democratic Party now he can stop this if he wants to a filibuster from his own party would embarrass him.
Now if Hilary wants to give Obama a shiv cause she knows that she is NOT going to be VP now would be the time to filibuster and prove us Obama people that we wrong about her.
I fight for issues not people!
for instance, how could congress tell me that the telecoms are allowed to keep property they stole from me?
that denies me due process, I am certain as we all are this retroactive immunity can not stand without an amendment
however that challenge really would have to come when alito and roperts are off the bench
Obama relied, the Rule of Law died.
I think we need to charge dodd with one more stand for this land and her constitution
we must make a last stand and though we have asked too much of dodd we must ask once more
Obama is so clearly off on this issue. As are all the politicians supporting immunity.
Even the basis for immunity is flawed. The absence of immunity can in no way make telecoms “unwilling” to surveil communications running through their wires. If the government says “we need you to spy on XYZ, and here’s a document certifiying this is legal,” they HAVE to DO it. They don’t have a choice.
The fact that Obama surely understands this, yet is willing to ensure that the law only applies to poor people–not wealthy, not corporations–is appalling.
On the plus side, this is saving me a small bundle–I already stopped contributing to the DNC because of FISA. Now Obama doesn’t get a dime either.
Spelling correctly would help:
Obama replied, the Rule of Law died.
I wonder if they dug up the Dodd Mortgage issue now to immobilize him on FISA.
As in no ethics investigation if you back off on FISA. Betcha we get a strongly worded speech but no Filibuster from Dodd.
Despicable. Demented. Craven. Sell Out. The Bush Dogs just added another public official from the State of Illinois.
Exactly what dirt has Karl accumulated over the past seven years that it elicits this response from the next President of the United States? Or is this mere hubris, the Democrats are so fat and happy, convinced progressives have no other option, that they are already telling us to Go Cheney ourselves?
WTF are they not telling us? And if we don’t know, why is it not fair to consider this sabotaging the Constitution and representative democracy.
if obama needs us then we can legitimately pressure him and he will respond.
if he calculates that he doesn’t need us then we can sit on our hands - no blogosphere push back against mcsame, no money, no volunteering and no votes from those of us who care about this issue - and he will still win.
i say pressure, hold his feet to the fire. let him calculate if he needs us or not.
Thank you. THAT is how you send a message that he can hear
sent a reply to Sestak’s campaign that asked for money a few days ago:
After today’s vote to shred the 4th amendment of the Constitution, not another dime.
And you may not get my vote either.
Got a reply back saying she would pass it along to Sestak. He knows me and thinks I’m his friend. Well not any more.
Joe-Bama and the other (D)’s were already setting themselves up for a fall in November by going along with all of Cheney’s neo-con talking points about the non-existent ‘threat’ from Iran.
Cheney orders an attack on Iran during the height of the election campaign, with or without a staged provocation, the media goes red-white & blue 24-7 and runs dozens of pentagon provided generals who all say McCain is the man you want, not someone whose middle name is Hussein >snicker
The way to prepare for this would have been for Obama to use his vaunted eloquence to make a case that a further attack based on lies against a country that poses no threat to the USA would be a bad idea, to say the least.
Instead he made the very same case as Cheney, Clinton, McSame before AIPAC recently.
The powers of the dictatorial executive that Bush seized, and the (D) Congress is now legitimizing in ‘Law’ (sic) kind of make the Supreme Court Justice nominations coming up in the next few years moot, anyway.
This point is disputable, of course, but if it falls then there goes the Least-Worsters last feeble reason why anyone should guilt-trip themselves into an obligation to vote (D).
So I’m supposed to support (as in give money I worked my ass off to get) to someone who at the first opportunity spits on the constitution? Fuck that.
Triangulation can be a two way street, ya know.
Welcome. I hope, but don’t expect, that you are right. It would be a fucking miracle, and I could really use a miracle
AKASamurai@82:
Welcome. You said, “If he actually tasks his AG (Fitz or Edwards I hope) to get to the bottom of things, it will be a much broader and deeper investigation than we would get now,”
I’d love to see Fitz or Edwards as AG. I am afraid that Obama will choose to ‘move forward’ rather than calling for investigations of Bushco. I hope I am wrong. It has become, under this congress, an empty phrase,