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.
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 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.
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 country's 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. [my emphasis]
Here's my biggest problem with this statement. 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.
In other words, the IG report on politicization at DOJ found that Mike Elston and Esther McDonald had broken the law. But it admitted that DOJ was unable to hold them accountable for their actions--because too much time had elapsed, because they had both snuck off to sinecures in swank Republican law firms, and because the Inspector General really couldn't hold them accountable directly.
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.
Nah. I don't call that accountability either.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
I just was over at his site commenting on this statement.
I specifically mentioned basket warrants and lack of minimization as reasons to vote against it, along with that wonderful redefinition of WMDs.
(Yes, I’m in that really large group. I figure it’s added leverage.)
I expect better from him. He ought to be capable of understanding the ins and outs and implications of this piece-o-crap bill.
My biggest problem with this is all the talk about exclusivity. This isn’t needed. It’s already in FISA (according to everyone except Yoo). In fact, even suggesting that exclusivity is needed is a neat way to provide cover to the current admin since it suggests that it isn’t in there already.
My second problem is identical to EW’s. Given the complete lack of teeth in the mouths of IGs, who are not particularly independent to start with, the idea that we can rely on IGs to protect us is nonsense.
My biggest problem with all this is that the open-secret FourthBranch position is that FISA is unconstitutional; by caving, the Democrats ensure that FourthBranch and his lawyers don’t have to put that to the test. They’re paying the Danegeld.
my favorite question to one of the obama staffers a little while ago on the barack site:
Denis, can you be more specific as to what technological changes render FISA ‘78 inadequate or obsolete?
Did somebody, for instance, develop technology that enabled us to access a time that is sooner than “right now?”
I am also one of those signed up for the myObama FISA protest site. I, too, am disappointed with his response. But I console myself with this: It at least shows that he was listening, and paying some (but not enough) attention. We need to keep on pushing, and hopefully take down this embarrassing piece of legislation altogether.
Ultreya!
Si, se puede!
Bob in HI
I’ll be honest, I think there are portions of FISA that are unconstitutional too. That is not a valid excuse to exceed even those rules and goo completely off the edge of legality and blow up the Constitution in the process.
If this were the only disappointment from Obama, it would be easier to digest the rationale his is giving here. But, when that is coupled with the faith-based initiative crap, throwing Wes Clark under the bus and now today’s “rethinking” on an Iraq withdrawal timetable, it really looks to me like he is trying to throw the election. How can he expect people not to understand that he is being just as cynical and craven as McCain in abandoning everything he should stand for in a mad grab for the Oval Office?
Our country faces dark days, indeed.
Oh, and another thing, if Obama is going to be working so hard to “strip immunity”
Why did he forget to even be a fucking co-sponsor with Dodd-Feingold and Bingaman? What a huge crock of horse dung. This statement is insulting; worse than if the jerk had just shut up and said nothing.
i don’t like the direction obama has taken in the last couple of weeks in lots of areas (his economic advisors, nafta, his foreign policy advisors, his apaic speech…) — but there are two fundamental issues for me that are really hard to overlook. one is the issue of our constitutional protections and balance of powers. i want a to support someone who wants to be president - and not a king. obama blew that one with his support of h.r.6304.
the second issue for me is that i HATE being lied to, spun, manipulated and bullshit. when a president (or a presidential candidate) does that we are being told in no uncertain terms that they do not believe in an informed citizenry or in any kind of self government.
obama is now 0/2.
happy birthday america.
Well, gee - Arar gets exoneration and compensation from Canada for the DOJ/CIA torture renditions - but US case is tossed and Congress and those wonderful “Inspector Generals” (appointed by the President) do nothing
CIA torture rendition in Italy facing prosecutions - but IGs and Congress do nothing.
Now Sweden is acknowledging it’s role in a CIA torture rendition and paying compenstion
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/n.....onerat.php
- IGs and COngress do nothing
Obama calls the DOJ hiring illegal - but neglects to mention NO ONE IS BEING CHARGED (as EW points out, but I just had to as well - it’s so damn insulting that he thinks we are clueless!) As a matter of fact, Elston has been hired on as a partner at McGuireWoods and everyone has the nerve to list as his area of expertise: Government Investigations.
And the push on illegal practices didn’t come from the IGs either, did it? Despite it being well known and widely acknowledged throughout DOJ (that someone had, for example, been “Monica’d”) it was going on and on with no recourse, but for the blogs getting involved and refusing to let go. The IG didn’t initiate ANYTHING! And does Obama mention the OPR review that was supposed to happen and got shut down and that the IG said, ‘uh, golly, I can’t do nuttin about no secret program stuff ceptin send it all on to OPR’
What a freaking insulting farce.
A quick drive-by here from Butte, Montana. I’ll be one of the 2,000 having an Independence Day picnic tomorrow with the Obama family. Don’t expect to have any personal words with him, but I know that he is still a better hope than McCain. This recent stuff is disappointing, yes, but he has always been more centrist than I w ould like. I’m putting my hopes on his health care plan, rather than McCain’s. I keep telling my daughter that the perfect is the enemy of the good (she’s quite the perfectionist). But there is no denying that this could be incredibly demoralizing, if I let it be. It makes one wonder if they “got ahold of him.”
Well, enjoy your picnic!
Yep, I second EW. It doesn’t make him a bad man, and it doesn’t mean he isn’t the best hope we have. He seems like a decent chap and he is the best hope we have at this point. He will therefore have every bit of my support. But, if for no other reason than SCOTUS, he would have anyway; he did not need to try to take us for cheap fools in the process. But, hey, what politician doesn’t? Have a great time there, it is a rare honor no matter what!
How about this as a compromise:
(1) The TelCo’s can have immunity, the Government is substituted as defendent.
(2) The Statute of Limitations is extended to 16 years from the date of the action.
Point 1 was under discussion last year. I’d like to see AT&T held responsible, but more than holding some corporate structure responsible, I want to know exactly what went on. Extend the SoL, and we find out, right?
BC
Note the timing here: the “new direction” correlates precisely with Hillary’s dropping out and Obama’s attempt to corral her supporters.
Is it Hillary’s supporters (i.e., voters) who are driving this, or is it her advisers that Barack is now listening to more often?
Bob in HI
It’s the constitution stupid.
Well, apparently he’s taken over the Bush crown of “guy you want to have over to the barbeque”
You know a really good compromise? The telecoms have immunity, their officers and directors who participated don’t. THAT would put some accountablity on the table.
bmaz, as someone who deals with horse dung every day - don’t insult it. What a huge crock of horse dung.
Thanks, ew. And a good Fourth to all of you too. This will be my first fourth in the US of A since 2004. Actually, my favorite Fourths were up in northern Alaska, complete with three legged races, egg races, fancy parkas, and Inupiat dances late into the sunny night.
All over this country, it will be great to reclaim this country’s birthday for a celebration of the values of citizen government.
Signing off now, Ad Astra (To the Stars, through difficulties)
I love the smell of triangulation in the morning.
Not to pat myself on the back or anything,
but I did warn, in a comment several months ago,
that any candidate that Andrew Sullivan had
such
a hardonenthusiasm forhad to have be seriously defective.
(See Thatcher, Margaret; Reagan, Ronald; Bush, George; and Blair, Tony.)
What she said.
The “perfect may be the enemy of the good”, but this isn’t even good. What more does Obama need to know that millions and MILLIONS of those who’ve written, called, e-mailed, FAXED, showed up at town hall meetings, etcetera, feel like he just slapped us in the face?
As others have said, if this was the only poor decision, I’d take it with a grain of salt. It’s a series of bad decisions, which continues on.
-S
I wonder whether it’s even possible to extend the statue of limitations on an offense that’s already past. Wouldn’t that amount to an ex post facto law?
Hmmmmm:
What in God’s name is this guy talking about?
here’s the answer to obama, the only answer;
“if you don’t like the bill, don’t pass it, if you want a better bill, draft it, if the president refuses to sign the better bill, tough crap”
Mary won’t let me use my normal nomenclature (see 17 above); but suffice it to say that Obama is blowing that substance out his rear.
Personally, I liked what Keith Olbermann said the other night during one of his Special Comments (on FISA and directed to Obama). He said Obama is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. Very true. The only immunity right now in the current bill is immunity from civil suits. Barack Obama, once he’s president, can go after George Bush, the telecoms, and others who helped in breaking the law criminally.
drive by …
Is that a discussion about when the gov is allowed to wiretap someone? And if they have to “wait” for a warrant?
Looseheadprop knocked down that fallacy last year
http://firedoglake.com/2007/11.....time-bomb/
Well, Cindy has picked a really ugly dress for her trip. But Obama is getting headlines for even now “tweaking” his war position. He may be moving toward the center; he has certainly lost his gift for rhetoric. I am thinking Michelle needs to explain to him what is happening.
He also said Obama should go ahead and vote NO, because either way the republics would say he was soft on national security.
Here’s the link to KO’s Special Comment to Obama:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25463360/
It’s okay. I’ve got it covered. He’s talking smack. Right?
we DO NOT want the “protect america act’, it ATTACKS americans it does NOT protect them
we DO NOT want the “clean air” bill, it allows industry to dump their CRAP in our air
we DO NOT want “the patriot act”, it was plagerized from hitler’s enabling act and it is the FURTHEST thing from “patriotic”
we DO NOT want “the energy bill” which raises our fuel costs, depletes our reserves, uses MORE fuel, weakens the market and destroys the economy
we DO NOT want the “no child left behind act”, it underfunds, undermines and destroys our educational system
WE DO NOT WANT THE PROTECT AMERICA ACT, it is a TYPICAL “act” from this administration that does the OPOSISTE of what the title of the bill suggests
anyone else with some bills to drive the point home, please chime in
fisa is FINE without the “protect america act”
While everyone else is watching how Obama votes, I will be watching to see how Hillary & McTeleprompter votes.
we know how mctelecomprompter will vote, we will see how the hill tackles the hurdle
That’s it! It’s Hillary’s fault!
OMG, that’s brilliant! Why couldn’t I see it?
bmaz and emptywheel have done analyses during the past week or so on the plausibility of criminal prosecutions, taking into account pardons and statutes of limitations, etc. Bet on Satan starting for the NHL.
You ask me, and I’d say Mark Penn snuck into Obama’s inner circle, but you’d think at least the secret service would tell us if something that dangerous had happened…
It is complete gobbledygook BS. What the hell makes this “exclusivity” any more “exclusive” than the last “exclusivity” that Bush ignored? Obama is either lying, ignorant or both. It is that simple.
I was thinking maybe Bob Shrum, you know, someone who writes really good concession speeches.
all i’ve got to say is “oh horsehockey” ..
tell ya what .. i’m going to fly old glory upside down all weekend .. and just below it ..flappin’ in the breeze ..will be the gadsden [don’t tread on me] flag i’ve taken off the basement wall for the first time since 9.11.01 ..
i’ll still be supporting obama .. but ya know what .. this was the first election for me since ‘68 when i really thought i had a chance to not vote for “the lesser of two evils” .. i kinda hate to lose that .. but fate is what fate is ..
and this old banged up former harhead-flyboy wishes y’all all a very safe and prosperous and fulfilling fourth-o-july weekend ..
bmaz .. keep pluggin’ .. EW .. stay the course .. y’all are truly fine examples of the very best your generation has to offer ..
as i am slowly “drawn through the weirs of age” .. it’s comforting to know that it’s folks like y’all who will carry our flag forward .. there IS Hope .. but i lodge it folks like y’all ..
gawd bless ya .. and semper fi ..
He does, doesn’t he“
I see no point to cutting him any slack on this bullshit. This is very insulting behavior on his part.
Good gawd, I read that as “hackles the turdle”. LOL Did I give myself a subliminal message or was that a Freudian slip?
I know…. You’d think someone could come up with something a little more original. HRC has NOTHING to do with how BO votes. And she isn’t the presumptive candidate running to be the next POTUS.
ok, this is a BIG one because we will see the repercussions in just a few months;
we DO NOT want the “help america vote act”, IT FORCES US TO USE MACHINES WE KNOW FLIP VOTES FOR REPUBLICANS, THAT WE KNOW A CHILD CAN HACK, THAT WE KNOW IS PRODUCED BY THE REPUBLICANS AND THEIR PALS
man, we better do something about that before it’s too late, what is the brad blog saying about this state of sorry affairs?
Dooooood!
Well, you guys can be cynical about it if you want to. Nancy Pelosi didn’t have to bring it to the fucking floor for a vote, so if you’re gonna be fucking pissed at anyone, you should start there! But hey, there are some who are just more comfortable being cynical than rational.
Having now taken the time to read Obama’s statement,
I can confidently say that, on the basis of the deep understanding
that it conveys of the issues involved,
the statement was written by Joe Klein.
Or Joe Lieberman.
OT. On a brighter note: EW has finally caught the notice of the lunatic fringe:
Accounta-in-ability
hello kay, will you be celebrating thr 4th in main this year?
Are we going to blame Barack for 9/11, the anthrax attacks, Cheney’s secret energy policies, and for Nancy Pelosi’s stupid dumbass moves too?
*tapping chin* What else could we blame Barack on?
don’t know but guess that obama tried to carve out a position just barely to the left of clinton during the primary. now that is not necessary since there is no one to challenge him from that direction… he has freedom to move where he wants.
Hi Perris. I plan to. Why? Is “someone” coming over to hurt me now? LOL Just kidding. Actually, I’m working in the morning and then joining friends in the afternoon for a lobstah bake (lobstahs, steamahs, and cown).
ANY statement saying he thinks the bill is acceptable at ALL gives any democrats license to vote for it, and it gives telecoms license to deal for the democrats votes
nothing short of saying the bill is flawed and should not even come to the floor is acceptable, that statement will give a new filibuster legs
Can’t you see how it all fits? Bill and Hill deliberately battered Obama in the primary and stayed in long after everyone could see it was over. Then they snuck their own operatives into his campaign to force him to the right so he would lose his base and therefore lose the election. Then the table would be set for Hill in 2012.
You’re a genius, Bob in HI! You will be the next Pumpkinhead!
depends on what you mean by “hurt”, I love when my girlfriend comes over to “hurt” me
*g*
I, personally, would never insult horse dung. It seems to do wonders for my raspberries. And i think it keeps the deer away! (My neighbors bushes have been pinched, but not mine!)
Cheers…
i agree with ya kalyn .. pelosi didn’t have to take the bill to the floor .. neither did harry reid .. all this would have been sooo mcuh better if they put a patch on the authority to continue the “specific surveillance” that’s so damn important to continue .. whatever the hell it might be ..
but take some advice .. never invest much personal faith in politicians .. save it for the constitution ..
Sweet, an excuse to replay one of my favorite blog posts evah:
Welcome to My Personal Half of the Lefty Blogosphere
l
FISA doesn’t expire. It’s been the law since 1978. If certain electronic surveillance orders are due to expire, just go to the FISA court and get a warrant. So what important surveillance tool are we losing?
His oh so thoughtful response to his people is either ignorant, or it’s bullshit. And Obama’s not ignorant.
Well, according to some here, Barack wrote the original FISA 1973 bill, he’s the one who fucked it up in 2001 by forcing George Bush to bypass what he had set up, and then just recently forced Nancy Pelosi to bring the bill back to the floor in the House, because he wanted immunity for everyone involved, because he hates America, loves George Bush, and is hoping his children marry Bush or Cheney kids in the future. Oh yeah, and when he votes against FISA on July 8th, everyone will hate his guts…and if he votes for it, everyone will hate his guts. He’ll end up with a FISA sign shoved up his butt by July 9th!
Right?
Good God. At #35 I was not being cynical at all. I was referring to the liklihood of criminal prosecutions (assuming our numbers are the same, which they aren’t always) and was relying on bmaz’s analysis. But that okay, I’ve been very cynical, and will be again soon. So your rebuke is not inappropriate.
Nanacy Pelosi is a worthless bitch, if she wouldn’t have taken impeachment off the table the country might be a tad better for it. Don’t take for granted I for one am not pissed as hell at her.
That is absolutely right; and i have utter contempt for those two. However, the Presidential nominee of the Democratic party is the titular head; if Obama had wanted this bill stopped by those two, it would have been stopped. End. Of. Story. So yes, Kay in Maine, right now I am laying this at the doorstep of Mr. Obama. And one other thing, if he was on third the “Constitutional scholar” he holds himself out to be, he would not be making the ignorant *** statements and phrasings he has. I, for one, will not be riding on the tail of Obama’s Comet Hale-Bopp.
Obama is the FISA King he can do anything!
SIDEBAR NOTE: Any Senator (male, female, black, white, orange, or smelling like a neocon) who votes for the FISA bill and it passes will not be held liable by those in the left blogosphere. We’re blaming Barack Obama only for it. Thank you for your time in reading this sidebar note. Not a long one, but it’s a good one.
the real problem with pelosi is she exposed her hand, if impeachment WAS on the table the president would have had more pressure against breaking our law
well, obama has given all other democrats licesne, he is the party lead after all
Mitch McConnell will not be blamed. He’s been innocent for years and that goes for Senator Doctor Bill Frist too. Innocent all the way. It’s Obama’s fault damn it!
Right?
Wait a minute now. You mean Marxists don’t wear any of them fancy dan orange sandals??? Aw jeez, you mean this hobo has been freeloading on the wrong train all this time? Oh my….
Its a kind of “preemptive” immunity, no?
* August 5, 2007: The Protect America Act (PAA) is signed into law.
* February 17, 2008: The PAA expires
* August 5, 2008: The first of the year-long unconstitutional surveillance programs authorized under the PAA start to expire.
* February 17, 2009: All of the year-long unconsitutional surveillance programs authorized under the PAA start to expire.
Which unconstutional program does Obama refer to? Probably the TSP (i.e., the Terrorist Surveillance Program), but I have no idea what all it entails. But Obama implicitly admits that it would not be legal under FISA but it was under the PAA and would be again under H.R. 6304. Recall that this is the man who said of H.R. 6304 when the House passed it that it “restores FISA.” That lying sack of shit!
They’d being going after Hillary too if she was in his position. Democrats hate Democrats, but some Democrats will never blame a republican for the crap the republican(s) does. See? I’m tired of this attitude. Even if Barack during the first week of his presidency forces the Democratically controlled House & Senate to bring a new FISA bill to the floor without immunity for anyone (including all Universes outside our solar system) or he has his CIA track down & capture George Bush & Dick Cheney to face charges, they would still be pissed off at him.
I always thought that a true Marxist with a burning faith in technological opulence was easily distinguishable,fashionably speaking, from you average Luddite DFH. I am telling you, I am categorically challenged in a very profound way.
Good Evening Emptywheel and Emptywheelers,
bmaz - yep, yep, and yep.
I did see Commissar Kos explaining it as ongoing fear of Republics attack ads, as if that dog will hunt
Complicity We Can Believe In
OT. This is an interesting little progressive note. Someone in the area may be watching…
“Waiting for an act of racial justice in North Carolina
posted by Desiree Evans
In North Carolina last week more than 300 clergy members signed onto a letter
sent to lawmakers urging the passage of the North Carolina Racial Justice Act,
a bill giving capital murder defendants the right to challenge prosecutions on
grounds of racial bias. The bill passed in the North Carolina House in 2007
and now is pending in the state Senate. Supporters of the bill hope the NC
Senate will pass the bill in the next two to three weeks.
Facts about the North Carolina Racial Justice Act:
* It would allow a person accused of a capital crime the opportunity of a
court review of whether race played a part in the prosecutor’s decision to
seek the death penalty.
* The bill would apply retroactively, so inmates currently on death row
could make such arguments. If a defendant has already been sentenced to death,
he may present evidence, if available, that his death sentence was improperly
obtained on the basis of race.
* As in housing and employment discrimination cases, the Racial Justice
Act will allow defendants to use statistical proof of racial bias or other
evidence to support such a claim. For instance, a defendant could cite
statistical racial disparities in how the death penalty is used.
* If a defendant succeeded in establishing his claim that race was a basis
for his death sentence, the court could impose a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. ……”
“your” even…I am getting uptight again and my rolling dyslexia is kicking in…
Note to self: stay out of Kay’s way when she’s pissed off.
ew — you say your “biggest problem” is with Obama’s suggestion that the IG report provision leads to accountability (when the history wrt to the prior reports indicates otherwise), but does that mean you think the rest of the statement is okay? Or just not as bad/naive?
Second, is the IG approach inherently flawed because of the limits on IGs per se, or is it flawed because the example from the current Administration was toothless?
Let’s hate Obama so Johnny McTeleprompter can win in November! What a great attitude! Even the “liberal” guy on my local newsradio channel this morning live on the air (he’s a diehard Hillary Clinton fan and will be voting for McCain) left the Democratic party and became an Unaffiliated. Oh yes, he’s taking this all the way to the bank. He even agreed with all the right wing talking points spewing out of the right winger’s fork-tongued mouth too. He’s in! He’s a neocon now because Hillary isn’t on the ticket.
How many more are out there?
No matter how Obama votes, McCain is going to win anyways because the OLD DEMOCRATS WITH THE OLD-WAY-OF-THINKING ATTITUDE IS STILL IN CHARGE!
Everything, absolutely everything HRC did was pointed out by almost everyone on this blog. The crimes committed by bushco are discussed daily. If not for a complicit Dem leadership and a complicit congress the republics would NOT have gotten away with the half of it. See?
Point taken - whether or not he decides to use his influence to fight, he’s still only one vote in the senate. We’ve got to keep hounding the other bed-wetting Democrats.
No, no. Don’t be like that. I am pissed but I am trying to make a valid point. I’ve been kicked off liberal blogs (I’m a liberal by the way) because I stood up for the Democrats, was too hard on the republicans, and because I didn’t tow everyone’s line. See? Just ignore me. LOL
I agree with your point Kay, Hillary would be doing the same thing, I think however we would be even harder on her and we would have said Obama would never have accepted the bill.
as far as reintroducing liability, that can’t happen unless it’s through a scotus ruling, once you are immune you are in essence innocent and can’t be brought to trial if the law changes after you committed the act
Exactly my point. Thank you. *crawling on my knees towards you with my arms stretched out*
well, he’s more then one vote, he can direct a democratic position since he is now the democratic lead
i think it’s fair to lay it on obama - for what has happened since he effectively won the nomination.
before then is another story and imo pelosi and reid are very responsible for bad legislation (except for the march bill from the house) and for repeatedly lying to us about what they were doing.
Oh, I’ll vote for the self serving political hack, because he truly is better than the other self serving political hack (and, trust me, I know from John McCain); I just recoil from the blindered soft sell that is foisted upon me that Obama is anything different than a self serving political hack.
Congratulations to everyone who has been working tirelessly to defeat the FISA bill. This statement by Obama tells me that we are making an impact or he wouldn’t have made it.
I also want to point out these words from his statement:
While we haven’t yet changed Obama’s mind on FISA he has at least taken away one of the arguments the people opposed to our protests have repeatedly tried to use. These people have consistently argued that by challenging Obama we are somehow hurting him. Well Obama not only does not agree with them he tells us he EXPECTS US TO HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE and hold him accountable we will. We will also hold the rest of the Senators accountable.
Not true, because we would have Obama’s vote at our disposal after the vote was taken.
new post up over at the mothership.
I’m with Digby on this:
O great….commenter of trade just said McOld’s rhetoric is simplistic & “old fashioned..” (PBS) What a lovely old fasioned word.
This happens to me everytime I join the discussion. DRAT!
Obama is trying to pre-empt attacks. It’s all about winning Ohio. He thinks taking these positions helps. Beats me if he’s right.
I hear you Kay, I’m not ignoring you. I love it when people give a damn. Sometimes anger is the appropriate response.
Peace.
Barack Obama can undo FISA once he’s president. George Bush & Dick Cheney in 2001 did that (they even had Democrats helping them roll back some of what Clinton did over the eight years).
We just need to stop panicking over every little thing Barack does. That’s what the media is doing right now. Barack can’t even deny a kid a signature on the back of his hand without being called a “fist bump denier”. WTF!!!!!!
I’m not going to feed into the right wing media frenzy while Johnny McTeleprompter is still getting away with campaign finance fraud.
Bullshit. Nancy Pelosi was on the House Committee in early 2001 when the FISA crap came up. She’s protecting herself.
Oh, I agree with that 100%; but this whole Hoyer play, with let’s be honest Pelosi’s under the table blessing, has all occurred after he won the nomination. The status quo equilibrium before that was do nothing, let it expire and wait until the next administration. At a barebones minimum, it was keep freaking immunity out and make Bush veto the damn thing. No, this is at the feet of Obama.