Obama can not snap his fingers and magically change the minds of hundreds of Democrats elected by people other than Barack Obama, and because of it, he does not deserve the votes of the netroots.
Also, compromise means getting everything you want, not just shifting the debate and working to remove portions of a bill that you find objectionable. Compromise to the netroots is much like George Bush’s definition of compromise. Who would have thunk it.
Additionally, Obama apparently hates the Constitution.
The last thing I learned today is that the ideal candidate goes down with the ship. It does not matter if that candidate was right on the issue all along, did everything he could to win the fight, but that he must go down with the ship. It does not matter if the fight is already over and the battle lost, real candidates try to maximize the loss by inflicting political pain on themselves.
You all make me cranky. Enjoy President McCain, whiners.
Jay B.
Relax John. Some of us are really pissed about FISA though. I’m most angry at Hoyer. The House vote was the key and he let it go through. And Reid is useless.
I’m already over Obama’s weakness here. Dodd and Feingold are the ones who said they’d filibuster. Hopefully, they mean it.
NR
That’s just it, John. I see no evidence that Obama did everything he could to stop this. At best, he chose not to spend any political capital on this, and at worst…. Well, Gleen Greenwald thinks that Hoyer would never have brought this bill up for a vote if he hadn’t okayed it with Obama first.
That said, I’m going to reserve judgment until I see what happens in the Senate. I strongly doubt it, but maybe somebody there can pull off a miracle.
Just Some Fuckhead
Fuck the “netroots”. Ninety percent of ’em supported Edwards fake populist rhetoric anyway and have spent most of the campaign sniping at Obama like jealous teenaged girls. Fuck ’em all and the kos they rode in on.
myiq2xu
Leaders lead.
Obama has a great seal
Cols714
I don’t know, I think that the “netroots” had it at least partially correct. That is, Obama could have come out strongly against the bill when rumors started surfacing of the compromise. That he didn’t is kind of a downer. But, I don’t think that it’s going to cause someone to suddenly vote for McCain.
And for what it’s worth, a majority of Democrats in the House voted against the bill. It’s the leadership that’s the big problem.
What I don’t quite understand, is why the Republicans are so gung ho about this bill? Since when is spying on Americans and giving corporations a pass on breaking the law a conservative position? They voted almost unanimously for this bill (1 Republican voted no) and I don’t know why.
Is it just because it was opposed by liberals?
Michael D.
To repeat: Relax, John. Obama’s gonna win. That said, we need to run as thought we’re 20 points behind.
Cols714
Just how was Edwards’s populism fake?
johnosahon
TELL THEM john, TELL THEM.
maybe that thing the black republican strategist said on CNN was true, you know, that they want Obama to be the “PERFECT BLACK FRIEND” that must agree 100% with your beliefs.
em, sorry it does NOT work that way. apparently, they want to turn into the so called “clinton supporters” that are not voting for him because he has a snake between his legs.
Thom
I don’t get how speaking strongly about and voting against this FISA loss is “going down with the ship.” Not how making a stink about it is advocating the same.
Chris Johnson
What I’m interested in is, what’s the threat behind this stuff that’s intimidated the Dems so badly, and how come this isn’t a battle Obama’s picking? Is this all just stuff he plans to dismantle when he wins, so he doesn’t mind it sitting around stinking up the place while he’s running for office?
Why fix something now when you can beat up McCain with it? Maybe this is a tactical move.
Thom
Correction to my first comment: “Nor” how, not “Not” how
Grumpy Code Monkey
Because the last “conservative” Republican was Eisenhower.
I’ve said it a couple of other times, but I will keep repeating it; the current batch of House Democrats need to be sent home along with the fucking Goopers.
JC
Well, it’s happy fun time here in the intertubes!
The thing is, the legislation – IF I’m reading it correctly – does two things that are egregious.
a. Applies retroactive immunity – but Obama HAS come out against this – we’ll see if that makes a difference. And this really does CYA Bush and all his cronies.
b. Looks like – from what I’ve read – leaves all the power to “AG and DNI” certifying things, with little oversight from the FISA court. Mainly, the supposed oversight is window dressing.
Yes, I grant your point – I shouldn’t expect Obama to be superman on this.
But hell man, what the f*ck are we electing democrats for, if not to fight this creeping shredding of individual rights, this creeping authoritarianism? This DEMOCRATIC House, has passed a law that doesn’t even get the support of most Democrats, and all the Republicans.
If that’s what we can expect, more of, what’s the point?
NR
Unless Obama publicly admits to raping children, I will vote for him over McCain in November.
What’s up in the air is whether or not I volunteer for him and/or send him any more money. And I suspect I’m not alone in that.
paradox
Kiss my tight white ass, John Cole.
Leadership could change minds, could even force averting disaster.
All this time you’ve been chearleading a pussy.
Don’t call me a whiner, Cole.
Thepanzer
This is how you lose a great nation. Triangulated votes for short term gain that erode the country’s long term standing. Sorry John I left the Republican party to GET AWAY from the idea that you have to blindly follow your party when they are obviously fucking up.
If this bill passes the senate its no different than if Mcsame had pushed it through. The end result is the same. I’ve been supporting Obama since Edwards dropped out but this is a punch to the face. I’ll still hold my nose and pull the lever but my hopes that the Dems can pull it together and do anything more than enable republicans isn’t so high right now.
For TZ and the we only fight when we have the votes crowd, get ready to get rolled after the ’08 election and Republicans point to “bipartisan support” on this issue if Obama has the spine to try and fight it then. But then I expect to hear “well its old news and we need to let it go to fight new battles.” Lets just put nice big shiny wheels on the goalposts and get our excuse-o-rama booklets together to apologize for all the reason why we won’t fight for any fucking issue.
Cols714
I don’t think it’s a tactical move by Obama, I just don’t think he’s that worried about it. I’m wondering if there is something in this that implicates the Democratic leadership just as much as it does Bush and they don’t want it coming out.
Or is that too tinfoily?
Dreggas
I just had a thought. Perhaps the telco immunity, at this point, would not be bad. Now before anyone screams at me hear me out. There is a little over 6 months until we have a new administration. Under that administration (hopefully an Obama administration) they go after the real culprits of the illegal wiretaps, aka former members of the bush admin. Who will testify against the admin? The telco’s. What will they want in return? Immunity from prosecution. It’s the way it goes in a lot of criminal cases, I can see it playing out the same way here. Maybe, Maybe not. However I don’t see this getting through the senate with immunity in it. I just don’t see it happening.
please!
I agree with John. A voice of reason!
You win some, you lose some. Man up! Isn’t that what everyone was losing patience with Hillary about–admit defeat and fight another day!
Colleen
I’m with Grumpy Code Monkey. It’s going to take a while but more and better Dems is the answer. My Rep. voted the right way today and phone calls are the best way to let them know what you think and what you plan to do about their votes.
HumboldtBlue
I read it three times and I still have no clue what you’re saying in your final paragraph.
Isn’t what all the fundraising is for? Isn’t that what ActBlue or whatever the fuck it’s called is for?
All this “blue” this and “blue” that bullshit, and this is what our political leadership gives us.
Anyone with blue in their name should be fucking banned from the intertoobz.
joshers
What exactly did Bush compromise? He got everything he wanted. Meanwhile, Democrats caved on virtually every point. Again, how is that compromise?
Cols714
I agree that the Democrats come out badly here. But, and I realize this is a big but, does this sort of legislation even have a beginning if there is a Democratic president? I don’t think so. Remember, once Obama becomes president, all of the Republicans will suddenly remember that Congress is supposed to be a coequal branch of government and go about trying to reign in the presidential powers that they gave chimpy.
Republicans are much better as an opposition party that doesn’t hold any real power, and acts as a check on the Democrats.
arbitrista
John, I’m not holding Obama responsible for the passage of the bill. I’m holding him responsible for his own vote. If he votes to strip the telecom immunity provision and loses, and then goes on to vote against the underlying bill’s passage, then he’s fine. I’d have preferred a stronger leadership stance, but oh well. But if he actually votes for a bill that actively undermines the Constitution, that’s one step too far for me. I’ve been and Obama supporter from the beginning. I won’t vote for McCain, but I can’t in good conscience vote for a candidate who will sell the Constitution so lightly.
Colleen
For what it’s worth, I sent Act Blue 25$ the other day and they’re getting more money this weekend. Sorry Obama, just not in the budget at this time. We’ll see how the summer plays out.
Billy K
FWIW: I know Obama can’t single-handedly change the vote on this bill. I also don’t want him to damage his chances at winning in a Quixotic fight.
I just think he should speak up now (not a week or a month ago), while this is most relevant.
P.S. Compromise has nothing to do with letting the Telcos of the hook and setting a terrible, terrible precident. That’s what has me most angry.
Zifnab
But yeah, seriously, Obama is the golden boy and we expect him to be out in front on this sort of thing. Ultimately, however, you’re right. No one can blame Obama unless he quits the Senate, gets elected to the House, and then goes back in time and replaced the Majority Leader before the voice vote.
Still, we’re pissed at the Democrats. And Barack Obama, being the nominal head of the party, becomes our whipping boy. Ceice la vie.
Kevin K.
I don’t and won’t read OpenLeft (Matt Stoller’s extended online temper tantrum when the Clark ’04 camp didn’t coddle him being the primary reason). Only hung out at MyDD to taunt the Hilldos (and Jerome “Dancing with the Stars” Armstrong), but that ride’s mostly over. Occasionally check out Daily Kos, but frequently lose patience with the nutrooters (I studiously avoided it today). When it comes to lefty bloggers, the snarky bastards are the only consistently trustworthy ones. Plus, ya know, they’re funny and shit. Kos and Chris Bowers, not so much.
NR
Didn’t you see what happened today? The Republicans still control Congress, even with Pelosi and Hoyer in the “leadership” positions.
Remember, telecom immunity is something that Dennis Hastert and Bill Frist wouldn’t give Bush. It took a Democratic Congress to give him everything he wanted.
Ponzo Simonetz
I think your post is composed of straw men.
First, nobody expects Obama to have some magical power to change the minds of other Democrats. The problem is that Obama did nothing to oppose this bill. He remained silent on this issue until after the bill was passed by the House. His official position has been that he is opposed to telecom immunity and warrantless domestic spying, yet he now endorses the bill and, though stating he will work on trying to remove the immunity part, will vote yay on it regardless. He has failed to stand up to his own principles.
Second, this bill was not a “compromise”. It was a complete capitulation to everything Bush wanted. This is not an issue of what the “netroots” wanted; the majority of American citizens were against the provisions in this bill, and the Democrats voted for it anyway. This is a betrayal of the Democratic platform.
Third, this bill guts the Fourth Amendment and undermines the rule of law in the US. Obama has endorsed both of these activities.
Finally, Obama would have suffered little to no political damage from standing up for his own professed principles and the principles of his supporters. He betrayed them today, and for what? A few votes from fear-mongering Republicans? He wouldn’t get those, no matter what legislation he passed.
I imagine that Obama lost far more votes from Democrats today than he won from Republicans by doing this. So why not have a President McCain? How are they different after today? In the end, they both know who will sign their checks, and I don’t mean the “official” ones.
sidereal
Really? Like Bush changed minds on immigration? And he was the sitting President. Obama’s not a fucking Congressional dictator. Hell, at this point he’s a freshman Senator. He’s not even officially the nominee until the convention.
The degree to which some people believe Obama can just snap his fingers and make shit happen is galling.
You’re unnecessarily conflating ‘the party’, ‘votes’, and ‘Obama’. He’s not in the House. He didn’t vote for the House bill. He’s not going to vote for the Senate bill. He opposes amnesty. If half the Democrats in the Senate think they need to vote for it, they’re going to do it, and there’s nothing Obama can do about it, and holding him responsible for that is ridiculous.
John Cole
Meanwhile, checking memeorandum, I see attack after attack against Obama from the right wing, and all I see on left-wing sites are attak after attack for something he is not responsible for.
Fucking morons. Don’t support him. Go vote for Cindy Sheehan, you wankers.
You are collectively dumber than a two-time Bush voter. How does that sit with you?
Jinxi
I supported Kucinich originally and am now compromising by supporting Obama. So, bleh.
It’s the idiots that are passing the bills that should be held accountable. Those cowardly idiots aren’t worth the time it took to vote them in. I’m secretly convinced that Bush has the goods on the lot of them and they’re going to roll over for him until the end.
Unless they want that kind of power for themselves. Bush sliced himself off a nice piece of pie and maybe (pure speculation here) they just want some of that.
crw
I think the bigger danger here (from a long term view) is it looks to me like Obama is being swallowed by the Washington machinery and safely sealed in a bubble away from all that rabble. It seems like the back channel to his campaign, getting the voice of the people through to him, is attenuating. At this point I think a little pointed message sending with donations (or withholding thereof until he takes concrete steps to shoot down this travesty) would be a good idea, just to try and pop the bubble.
John Cole
Yeah, Hillary’s opposition to this was vital. Piss off, wanker. Aren’t you supposed to be at Riverdaughter’s and NoIQ telling us Obama is scary and McCain really has your best interests at heart?
srv
Mark my words – TZ and Cole will continue to throw up strawmen as every progressive cause is compromised in the GE.
And proactively, strongly opposing something that literally would cost you nothing is “going down with the ship” or “self immolation”. TZ and Cole no doubt see hoardes of redstaters marching everywhere for FISA…
We must all learn to compromise on those little things, like the Constitution, the AUMF, Iraq, Wall Street, anal raping torture and soon Iran. You see, they don’t matter. Winning does.
Cassidy
This is starting to remind me of a sitcom: good kid can’t be in 5 places at the same time, everyone demanding his best, clones himself, hilarity ensues…
Gwendy
While he himself is imperfect and always has been (and I think he could have been stronger on FISA), I always appreciate Obama’s ability to piss off all the right people. He’s truly been excelling in that department this past couple of days. Seriously, he never courted the left-wing bloggers and he certainly isn’t going to capitulate to the whiny David Brooks of the world. He’s bound to piss off both groups from time to time which probably plays well to a large segment of the population.
Also, if I had a nickel for every time a left wing blogger pronounced Obama doomed or totally compromised because he didn’t do things they way they wanted, I’d have a bank account bigger than Obama’s campaign fund.
DragonScholar
Thanks John,
I’d like to propose a speculation – and speculation is what it is indeed. But here it is:
Maybe one of the reasons Democrats loose is this:
1) Too many Republicans will apparently vote their candidate no matter what and then rally behind them.
2) Too many Democrats will gladly shred their candidate for a single flaw.
So if you’re a Democrat, what do you get? You get an opponent with a guaranteed motivated base while yours expects perfection and will rip into you too easy.
How the hell do you govern in that state?
Just a thought.
Sojourner
The Constitution is a belief?
John S.
Which explains why Hillary hasn’t said shit.
John O
It ain’t me, babe. I think Obama is a lot more politically savvy than he’s given credit for, and this was a cave he had to make, because the ship, as John points out, was going down.
His job a last year was to beat HC, something most people thought at the time was impossible. He did it by being VERY politically astute. He recognized the “change” landscape, organized brilliantly, took advantage of the technology, and won.
His job now is to beat John McCain, which seems far more possible, but why give the GOP a “weak on national defense” talking point for the next 5 months?
Once he has the job of President, if he gets it, with decent sized Congressional majorities, he’ll have about as free a hand as Bush did for 6 years, and he probably already has a long list he calls, “Repair and Repeal.” I’ll bet he just added this to it.
I’m a civil libertarian in severe degrees. So I HATE this FISA bill. But FISA is just a part of the larger Big Brother issue, and BOTH parties have basically trashed the 4th Amendment for about 3 decades now, or ever since Nixon went against his own Commission and declared the War on Drugs. It’s been a political winner ever since, despite being an abjectly and indisputably ineffective and stupid policy, unless you don’t, as I do, define “bad government” as spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to make no difference (or worse, as I believe) on the problem you’re trying to address with said taxpayer dollars.
Keep your eyes on the forest, folks. Trees are pretty, but forests are beautiful.
Obama is a Constitutional Law expert. I’m not coughing up my hope yet.
nightjar
This is what I learned today, but I already knew that.
MH
No one is going to jump ship to McCain, and virtually no one is going to stay home over this. I’ll still vote for Obama, but if he wants my money, he needs to do what I want. And what I want is for him to start explaining to the public, since he’s the politician with the most face-time in the entire country right now, that a) this was a bad bill, b) that it’s getting passed over his objections, c) that he will support any filibuster on it, and by ‘support’ I mean that he will vote against cloture, d) that he will, as President, pressure his Congress to try again and get it right, not say he’ll sit back and “monitor” the program.
None of those will cost him support, or legitimacy, or whatever other phony excuse is put forth.
I don’t blame Obama for the bill’s passage, but I sure as hell CAN blame him for his own tepid response. If he wants my vote, all he has to do is to leap over the low McCain bar. If he wants my money; if he wants me to recommend others vote for him; if he wants me to campaign for him; if he wants me to put up signs and hand out fliers, he needs to show me that he agrees that this bill is not good enough.
srv
Ding, ding, ding, you idiot.
Boy, that FISA position sure put those Republicans in their place.
joshers
Ahhh… the old “fucking morons” argument. Always a winner.
Jinxi
So what’s the alternative? We should all jump ship and write in Clinton? Or maybe vote McCain in protest?
Yeah. That’ll certainly get us somewhere.
Obama’s not responsible for the flippin’ House bowing down to The King.
matt
http://www.womenforjohnmccain.com
Snark Based Reality
Today reminded me to change my registration to Independent. Oh Obama and my local House rep still have my support and my vote but the rest of the party can go fuck itself. You want my vote and money? Fucking earn it.
And the next DCCC mailing I get possibly gets returned with a goatse printout included.
Ripley
Well, John, I ain’t exactly running to the PUMAs or anything here, but still…
I’m surprised that Obama hadn’t met with the PTB and said, “Look – there’s a very, very, very good chance that I will be the next President. Start acting like Democrats. Start acting and voting like you give a shit about the people who voted you into office. Look at my support. My supporters will support you, so stop worrying and start acting like Democrats with a spine!”
I don’t blame Obama – I blame the 129 cowards who actually voted for this BS.
Adrienne
Now you know why Democrats have lost 7 out of the last 10 elections.
Seems like we may have gotten exactly the candidates we deserved in the neutered Al Gore and egghead Kerry. Not this time. Obama is wisely choosing his battles so that he can WIN the war in November. Posturing against your own party and LOSING (and therefore looking weak) doesn’t help us to win the White House. Then we could be stuck with John McCain who actually *believes* that this is the right thing to do and would have no interest in high hell of scaling back the unprecedented Executive power grab. I may not like the bill, but what Barack is doing is just downright good politics. Dems haven’t had a good politician since Clinton. We are LOOONNNGGG overdue.
Jinxi
Oh, FFS. Here we go.
Time for a drink.
tballou
This basically proves that the Democratic leadership are either a bunch of pussies or are completely bought and sold by their big campaign contributors. Obama could have and should have come out against this – he had nothing to lose with his electorate, but evidently he is either a big pussy and afraid of the Repugs or he just likes getting lots of money from the telecoms.
This is the kind of shit that will make me stay home in November.
joel hanes
I think this comment by felagund over at Digby’s place is probably close to the truth.
myiq2xu
When Bill Clinton did this it was called “triangulating”
Elvis Elvisberg
1) Obama is a better candidate, by light years, than McCain, and probably than Clinton too.
2) This bill is not a compromise. It achieves nothing (everything Obama mentions in his statement is wholly illusory). It gives away stuff for no reason. It makes future unlawful spying more likely, because there’s every reason to believe that there will be no consequences to lawbreaking.
3) Obama at the least did nothing to stop this bill, and possibly gave it a tacit OK beforehand.
4) Given that it’s a pretty unpopular bill, and that it was presented to the House in a pretty sneaky way, a concerted effort to rally opposition to it could very well have succeeded.
All those things are true, ALL AT THE SAME TIME!
Best of luck fitting them all into your head at once, John.
Mike S
Very early in the primaries there was someone at dKos that was talking about how different Obama was. I said “look, he’s still a pol and a Chicago one at that.” He got furious with me. Obama wasn’t a Pol, he was totally different. I told him Obama would break his heart about three weeks into his Presidency.
I only wish I could remember who it was because even I didn’t think it would happen six months BEFORE his Presidency.
Ripley
I meant the 293 cowards, sorry.
Ted
Wow. TheLeftCoaster links to NoQuarter.
joel hanes
You all make me cranky.
Sorry. Not intentional, and your reaction quite understandable. Regret match/gasoline phenomenon.
Enjoy President McCain
Avert!
Surely we can express disappointment in our own candidate on something more substantive than his coat of arms without necessarily throwing the election to the opposition.
Chris Andersen
Wanting Obama to show some leadership on this issue does not mean I expect him to just snap his fingers and stop things like this in their tracks. But it would have been nice if he gave even some sign of caring about the important issues this bill raises. As it is all we are seeing from him is some formal “I will oppose” language and not much else.
Being a leader means showing leadership and Obama HAS shown leadership in many ways. In this particular instance he has failed miserably.
John Cole
Electing Obama is a progressive issue. Unless, of course, you want 4 more years of McBush.
Additionally, while I am sure you feel strongly about all the progressive issues, how many “progressive” Senators are there? Hell, the house is the progressive institution on Capitol Hill, and you ONLY GOT 128 nay votes out of there- yet somehow I am supposed to flay Obama alive because he “didn’t do enough to stop it.”
When Obama is President, if this shit happens on his watch, I will flay him alive. And look, I am upset about the immunity portion, as well. But Obama is a junior Senator from Illinois who just finished a grueling primary campaign, has his hands full staffing and preparing a strategy for what will be a very, very tough general election (you are aware he is black and his middle name is Hussein, aren’t you?), and you all are savaging him for something he can not control. This notion that he could have changed things is farcical, as is the overall response here from people.
We lost this battle, but let’s not kill our up and coming leaders because the current officers failed. There is a war in November to win.
Ted
Sooo.. You’re defending Obama now? Or do you think Bill Clinton sucked?
sidereal
Read closely. The serpent is subtile.
Or. . .you know. . he did come out against it and the House members voted the way they wanted to anyway. But I guess calling him a pussy for not physically forcing other Congresspeople to vote how he wants is probably more satisfying.
nightjar
No. You don’t have a clue what your talking about. Triangulating involves more than not fighting a fight you can’t win. It involves collaborating with an enemy to defeat another enemy with the same enemy you collaborated with. Chew on that for awhile.
Genine
Obama already voted against telecom immunity when it came up in the Senate the first time. He has spoken out against telecom immunity. What more do you want him to do? He is NOT the POTUS yet. He isn’t even THE Democratic nominee. He is the Presumptive nominee. Could he throw more clout against immunity? Sure. Would it make a difference? NO.
For some reason (insert your favored theory here), the Democratic congress is going out of its way to give Telecoms immunity. I would be way more pissed off at them (as a whole) than just Obama.
Obama is NOT Jesus and all this talk of him turning water into wine (or, magically changing the votes of hundreds of Democrats on his say-so) is fueling the belief that some Democrats see Obama as some kind of Messiah. He could yell and scream in the streets all day and night, Congress is still going to vote as they will. Obama can do what it is in his power to do and it looks like he is working towards stripping the immunity clause. I have not heard, however, that he will vote for the bill whether immunity is there or not. He did not vote for before when there was immunity, I see no reason for him to do it now.
So, it seems to me, Obama is using his powers as a United States senator ( because that’s what he is) to deal with this problem.
And for those that think Hillary could have done differently, let me remind you that if she could have changed the minds of Democrats with a snap of her finger- she would have been the nominee.
matt
Jinxi, click through to the site. :)
John Cole
Awesome. That is now Glenn greenwald and now Digby, both people I respect, just flat out making shit up because people are butt hurt about FISA.
Fucking awesome. Any evidence he gave approval beforehand? Well, of course not. But you know what- it gets worse! I heard he gave tacit approval for the invasion of iraq.
I don’t have any evidence, but I do have a blog, so my speculation MAKES IT SO.
Just Some Fuckhead
It’s a shame John Edwards isn’t still in the Senate so he could vote for immunity and spend the next eight years apologizing for it.
srv
I’ve been looking/working for change for 27 years. I thought maybe this country was finally ready, but it isn’t. JC, TZ, Obama all talk the talk, but they don’t walk the walk. They surrendered a long time ago, and they just want something they can feel good about.
John Cole
he spoke out against it, voted against it in the past, and will work to strip the offensive parts out, but he will probably fail. Yet that is not good enough for you.
You may say you don’t want it, but finger-snapping is what you are asking for.
MH
It’ll be a cold day in hell before I pay attention to a two-time Bush voter’s opinion on intelligence. :P
I assume you’re talking about those who are threatening to withhold a vote over this, in which case I agree, and not merely those who are upset and angry. If it’s the latter, reread the above but without the ‘:P’.
Since when is pissing off your entire base good politics? In what F’ing world is pleasing George Goddamn W. Bush, Crown Prince of 25%-ville, good politics?
It doesn’t take a fucking lot to say, “I’m going to vote ‘no’ when this comes up in the Senate.” joel hanes’ quote from Digby’s is about the only rational explanation.
You make me ashamed to share a first name with you.
Adam
Thanks, John.
Elvis Elvisberg
Pish posh. Glenn and digby infer that, on an issue of major concern to the party base, the party checked with its candidate before acting.
I wrote “at the least did nothing to stop this bill, and possibly gave it a tacit OK” on purpose, because we don’t know. But it’s not a wildly irrational inference.
John O
Oh, and as for the telecom immunity part, yeah, no Dems in on that shit, no, nothing to see here, Jay Rockefeller. They’ve been up to covering their asses on this from the beginning.
You have to OWN the stick before you can start using it. If Obama wins and has a reasonably successful first term, you don’t think he’s going to be wielding the stick of more and better Democrats?
That strikes me as a little naive, in addition to grossly underestimating both Obama’s savvy as a politician, his long view, and political reality.
Ted
Good god, get someone the smelling salts. You are aware that this country is full of people that disagree about stuff, right? And here you are expecting absolutely everything to go your (and our) way. It won’t. Ever. Picking politicians is an exercise in choosing what’s better, because you can never have your “best”. I know I’m not saying anything you and everyone else doesn’t already know, but get a grip.
sidereal
So lump digby in with the people who think that the Democrats all go before
freshman SenatorEmperor Obama on bended knee and ask his permission to vote. The entire Blue Dog caucus loves sticking it to the progressive/liberal wing. They don’t do it reluctantly, they enjoy it. Because then they can go home to Alabama and say ‘well, I’m not like those San Francisco Democrats’. You think they give a fuck what Obama thinks of this bill?JC
Points to you John – suspicion is not proof. Have the proof, or STFU. And neither Glenn or Digby are doing this.
John Cole
A synonym for infer- speculate.
Show me even an unnamed source, on background, claiming this is true and I will back off. Until then, they are just making shit up.
Tenguphule
The Concern trolls are out in force.
Bring out the Billy Goats.ex
Babybrie
joshers is right, it’s not a compromise it’s capitulation. and that wankstain Boehner is loving every minute of it. he predicted the Dems’d cave and he was right on the money. could Obama work a miracle? who knows, he sure as hell didn’t even try.
MH is right, too. Obama will probably still get my vote, but not another dime, not another joule of my energy.
Batocchio
Um, who exactly are you pissed at? This was an absolutely horrible bill, and this vote shouldn’t have even been close, let alone pass in the House. There are some things you don’t compromise, John, like human and civil rights. It’s not as if this was haggling over the amount of money going to some subitem. Pardoning illegal behavior without even bothering to find out what is was first ain’t too bright. Wouldn’t it be good to know who Dick Cheney was spying on? Did you miss that the majority of the public opposed this measure? It’s both bad policy and bad politics? No, Obama shouldn’t go down with the ship. Expecting him to speak out is hardly ridiculous. Expecting him to take on a core section of his party in Congress and their secret backroom deal isn’t entirely realistic, though. Anyone who isn’t voting for him over this ain’t that sharp given the reality of McCain, but I also don’t have much respect for anyone not angry over the bill. The people disappointed and pissed off over this are mostly the good guys. I also missed the part where being disappointed in Obama meant people suddenly weren’t going to vote for him (although I’mI sure you can dredge up somebody). This post reads like vestigial liberal blogger bashing. Perhaps you just don’t read the same liberal blogs I do, given your “cranky,” inaccurate characterization. As a wise man once said, save the crank for Congress. ;-)
Just Some Fuckhead
Do what? Who the fuck are you speaking for? Last I checked, Obama’s base is a bit larger than a few bitchy progressive blogs. If it was up to you fucks to get him elected, you’d be in here right now screaming about how presumptive nominee Clinton wasn’t falling down on her knees paying homage to your massive net root.
You all remind me of ant and the elephant.
joel hanes
Those San Francisco Democrats (Pelosi) didn’t exactly cover themselves with glory on this one. Silicon Valley, OTOH, quietly voted solidly against.
John Cole skrev :
don’t have any evidence, but I do have a blog, so my speculation MAKES IT SO.
Damn. I had no idea.
I will certainly pay better attention to your dicta in the future.
Ted
I speculate that Obama will keep and even expand the torture programs.
There. Now it’s a fact, despite loads of evidence to the contrary.
John Cole
Personally, I bet it was Fred Hobbs who went to Obama to get his double-secret approval of the bill.
Ted
Then why vote for him at all if you don’t care if he wins? I mean, I’m assuming you were previously going to give him donations.
MH
This isn’t “killing our leaders,” it’s “keeping them pointed in the right direction.” You’re new at this whole Democratic Party thing, so it’s understandable that you don’t appreciate just how easy it is for them NOT to do that and start the backstabbing.
Republicans will be fuckers just because that’s just who they are; Democrats will pull this shit only when they think it’s in their best interest to do so. Giving Obama a little bit of hell over this ALSO serves to remind him not to do it again in the future.
Sojourner
So why doesn’t Obama use his much touted eloquence to explain to the minority why giving the president the right to break the law is a bad thing? Certainly the majority understand that. How hard could it be?
Jinxi
Ah! My bad. I was a little gun shy.
Good stuff that.
sidereal
That may be the most important story I’ve ever read.
I think we can safely assume that Hobbs went to Obama and got his permission to call him a terrorist.
crw
One last time. It isn’t about the voters. It really isn’t. If anything, it’s about the power brokers (some of whom are intimately connected with the telecomm lobby). You know, the people who Obama is going to have to work with as POTUS to get anything done. We are far from the day where we’ve swept all the corrupt congresscritters out of office and replaced them with folks directly funded by the people. Even now, many in the Democratic Party structure don’t get it and still kow tow to those interests.
Obama still has to work with these people unless he wants to become another Carter. Carter had a popular mandate at his back when he came in iirc, and he still got screwed because he refused to work with the powers that be.
This is a long war. Yes, Obama could speak out strongly on this, and try to strongarm in the Senate. He’d almost certainly get accolades from the base. But he’d piss off the powers that be. THAT is the risk, more even than the GOP harping on him for five months. It’s the risk that the Clinton wing, the Big Money power brokers who still don’t like him, will revolt and make his term an unproductive hell.
The appropriate chess move here is to continue expanding the small donor model to get more representatives and senators in who aren’t beholden to corporate fat cats. Not to sacrifice a good but imperfect politician working in a totally corrupt system on the alter of ideological purity.
srv
Because he has no power now, Hillary exhausted him, and if he acts upity about it, he might as well skull-f*ck a kitten in Jane Fonda’s vagina at the Vietnam Memorial while wrapping himself in the flag and setting it on fire.
Davebo
Look, I’m 44 years old and today I made my first ever political contribution to any campaign. $500 to Obama.
I’m as cynical as they come. And honestly, the margaritas after work may have contributed to the contribution (eh?) but I’m proud I did it.
I participated in the bombing of Libya on April 15 1986, and I was pretty proud of my country that day. But I’m more proud today.
Call me an Obamamaniac or whatever you choose. I feel good about both my candidate, and my contribution to him. And you can bet by November that both myself and my wife will have maxed out at 2,300 each.
Thanks to John and the gang here. I honestly never thought I’d ever contribute to a political campaign, but I’m proud I have now.
nightjar
The dems in the house caved because the Blue Dogs were pissing their pants they wouldn’t get re-elected if it didn’t. The folks holding this back these months were in the distinct minority And were fearful the wingnuts were going to hammer all of them with ads of Pelosi breaking her promise to let run a non-partisan house, and also many that weren’t in conservative districts were afraid if there was another attack on US soil they’d get blamed for it.
It’s chickenshit governance in my opinion, but blame Pelosi and those who pushed for a vote to occur before the election. It’s Not Obama’s call pure and simple. And why would he vote against it now and give wingnuts ad ammo of being soft on terror. Ideological purity for the sake of a lost cause is for saints and fools in my book. Obama has vowed to fight it another day when he’s president with the power that holds, and that’s good enough for me.
flyerhawk
I don’t have time to read the bill right now but I have a quick question.
Is the telecom immunity pro-active or merely retro-active?
If it only protects telecoms for past transgressions, I don’t give much of a fig. That horse is out of the barn.
If it gives proactive immunity I am still opposed to it strongly.
The netroots can go ga-ga about Obama’s actions if they want. Obama’s PRIMARY concern right now is winning in November. You know how easy it would be to change this bill if Obama is in the White House and we pick up 7 seats in the Senate?
This is a Republican framed issue and as such the Democrats cannot allows themselves to be trapped into the same dumbshit Democrats loves terrorists meme that they got suckered by in 2004.
I don’t care about the concern trolls feelings.
JK
Don’t want to seem too out of touch here, but who the heck is TZ?
John O
I infer that Obama is Muslim Islamofacsist Manchurian candidate, wants to enslave white people, and *gasp* perhaps worst of all, is black.
I love Digby and Glenn, both doing spectacular work on the FISA bill (I coughed up some dough for the PAC last night), but you win some, you lose some. Going all kamikaze is simply bad politics, at least if you want to do something good before you’re dead.
I wish I could rule the world, too, for the record. I’m just not stupid enough to think I can or will.
This is ridiculous. First, you GET the power. Then you use it.
Yeah, he has some, but not enough to change this vote. C’mon. Take a vacation out here in RealityLand.
Dennis - SGMM
Doggone it, those telcos should be sued good and hard. Let’s sue them for, say, one-hundred-billion dollars. We’ll win, of course, and before the judge finishes banging his gavel three times your telephone rates will go up enough so that the telcos recoup two-hundred-billion dollars.
What else are you gonna’ do – give up the telephone?
I’d rather find out how a rogue Executive branch pulled this off, how they did it and how it can be prevented in the future.
Sojourner
So Obama doesn’t have the energy to go along with what the majority of the American people want?
WTF is that?
Just Some Fuckhead
lmfao
Jinxi
What’s your solution? Give me a break. How is Obama supposed to change the vote of all the Dems in the House? You may think we believe he’s a messiah, but we’re more realistic than that. Change would be getting those Bush Democrats out of office. Obama is not Atlas.
Also, what would McCain have done? Oh, that’s right…
Thank you.
Ted
A very nasty and dangerous program, one of the oldest of us. He’s called the ThymeZone.
sidereal
It’s retro. It names a specific start and end date. In fact, the start date is Sep 11. Meaning if there was any surveillance previous to that (and according to Qwest representatives, there likely was), they’re not immune.
I probably give a lot more of a fig than you do (I think retroactive immunity is a terrible precedent and in effect becomes a form of proactive immunity by serving as an example to future lawbreakers), but I have no interest in watching Obama get Howard Deaned over it.
Jinxi
P.S.
Matt, the comments there made my day. Thanks.
Dennis - SGMM
This is touching. I just saw a post from sojourner and earlier, a post from myiq. All we need now is pluk.
Genine
I’m all for giving the Democrats hell when they step out of bounds. Vocalizing concerns and giving our leaders hell when they’re not leading is a very important and healthy part of the process.
What isn’t healthy, however, is laying the actions of hundreds of Democrats at Obama’s feet. He is not offically party leader yet and he still have a few “enemies” (I hate using that word) in the party and plenty of people that are upset that he ran in the first place.
Obama will work to remove telecom immunity and I feel good about his chances with that. (He could fail) I think he would sincerely try to get it removed (not just for political reasons). If it is not removed, I hope he repeats his vote from before. If he does turn around and vote for the bill without the immunity being removed, I will be disappointed, severely disappointed.
Yes, things are changing but it takes time. The government has always done things to sheild and protect big business. They protected the airlines, the insurance companies, the oil companies and now the telcos. It sucks, its horrible, but what is happening now has happened before. I hope Obama can stop it, but I do believe that as President, he will uphold the Constitution and he has promised to review all the laws and policies Bush has enacted these last 8 years and if he finds something that’s not right, he’s going to do everything in his power (and he would have a lot more power than he has now) to have those policies reversed and/or tossed out.
cybergal619
Olbermann said it was a CYA vote. That’s the only thing I can think of that would put such urgency on this.
Thepanzer
Whatever, I’ll take TZ and JC’s advice and go to sleep for the next 6 months and then just pull the lever for the Obama miracle pill. Of course for the next 6 months the Republicans know they can divide and conquer the dems to get through every CYA bill they can think up and by using TZ/JC’s blinding logic so long as we don’t have the votes to oppose it we just STFU and enjoy the ride. I’m sure the Republicans won’t be able to pull the same shit in the next administration huh? Guess that’s what happens when you keep your powder dry until the wars over. Good luck with that plan.
Being familiar with all internet traditions means never having to say your sorry.
nightjar
I bet the TZ persona is really a cuddly kitten with a foul temper who happens to speak a saucy dialect of English.
jnfr
You’re learning the wrong lessons, John, if that’s what you learned today.
No one is going to stop fighting for Obama to win the Presidency. And no one is going to bow to him when he makes a wrong decision.
You’re still thinking like a Republican.
srv
It’s change g*d*m*t! Take whatever A-bomb issue progressives and Obama-leaning libertarians have (you know, those damn dirty-hippies and paleocons JC was roasting back in 2002 and 2003), and punt on it!
They’ll come around, there’s no alternative. It’s not like anybody voted for Nader or Buchanan in 2000.
John O
Also for the record, I live in RealityLand, but I vacation in Purityville all the time.
Fantasy Politics is one of my favorite games.
Davebo
Dennis – SGMM
If the Telco lose a 100 gazillion dollar suit who pays?
Not phone users through increased rates.
Taxpayers pay due to the indemnification that telcos have gotten from the government for every wiretap placed in the last fifty years. AT&T has more lawyers than you have pubic hairs. Trust me, they and all others know they have no liability here.
Trust me, it’s not about Telco liability. They have none. It’s about preventing discovery in lawsuits.
Hugh
I’ve read through many of the comments but not all. Sorry if this is a repeat of something someone else said better earlier but…
What became a deal-breaker for me regarding Hillary was that she made safe votes on 1) the Iraq war, and 2) (later) calling the Iranian guard (what is their exact name? Escapes me for the moment. Revolutionary Guard?) terrorists. The first vote enabled terrible consequences and the second made terrible consequences much more possible.
I have been a huge fan of Obama. But I am very disappointed in this stand he has taken. We are talking about our Constitution here. Spying with no real oversight. This is fundamentally unacceptable. Some things just are. You, me, or anyone can be listened in on with no real objective review. This is not a run-of-the-mill policy dispute. This demanded a much better response from Obama. The reason Republicans have been able to push things so far to the insane right is because they have not been afraid to show aggression. Aggression is neither good nor bad. Its effects are good or bad, depending on when and how it is used. Obama should have pushed this with some measure of ferocity. As Matt Yglesias noted, this really was the perfect issue for Obama to show what the core of his candidacy was about. He didn’t.
What does this mean? I’ll vote for Obama. I’ll give him money. There is no other option. But he needs to feel the heat from this somehow. Shame is sometimes very effective. I believe Obama is a man of genuine good intent with many good ideas. Obama, you must do better than this. You really must.
Ted
Actually, someone up thread said they were doing just that.
sidereal
I don’t believe anyone asked anyone to keep their powder dry. I’m certainly pissed off about the House vote. Very pissed off. It’s more a question of: when you put the powder in your gun, why is the barrel pointing at Obama? Here’s a list of House members who voted for the bill. Give those assholes a piece of your mind.
srv
The same way Bush did.
If your guy can’t beat Bush now, he won’t be able to beat him next year.
Church Lady
When trying to picture TZ, think Snidely Whiplash sitting behind a keyboard, rubbing his hands together in anticipation as he comes up with his next flaming bon mot to toss into the fray.
Sojourner
He can filibuster in the Senate. He can take a principled stand.
It’s not rocket science. Just ask Feingold and Leahy.
MH
“Caring if Obama wins” and “spending time and money on his campaign” aren’t the same things. Your argument is crap and you know it. Have YOU maxed out for your $2300 yet? OH MY GOD YOU MUST NOT REALLY CARE IF OBAMA WINS THEN.
I care about candidates maintaining, protecting, recovering, and expanding our rights. Obama will get my VOTE for not being McCain. Obama will get my SUPPORT in proportion to how effectively he does what I care about.
ThymeZone
I am watching MSNBC quote up a Newsweek poll, “Among registered voters in the US …”
56% say they will vote for Barack Obama
36% say they will vote for John McCain
I made a bet with the redoubtable DougJ about 3 months ago that requires McCain to get I bet the TZ persona is really a cuddly kitten with a foul temper who happens to speak a saucy dialect of English.
The TZ persona is whatever we write him to be. And, he is listed on the National Registry of Historic Places.
Church Lady
TZ, you’re listed on the National Registry of Historic Places only because you are old and have a crusty, peeling facade.
ThymeZone
Oh dear, I messed up a blockquote. How gauche.
My last post should have blockquoted this;
Sorries to the official archivist.
ThymeZone
I’ll take that as a compliment.
Dennis - SGMM
Was that back when Bush was an African-American first-term Senator and his party had easily vetoed or filibustered majorities in the House and Senate?
orogeny
Obama on the “compromise.”
I don’t get it. I really had begun to believe that Obama was different. Hell, Artur Davis, my rep, a man that I respected and worked for last election, voted for it.
I fucking give up. I’m thinking about voting for Barr.
Ted
Uh no, I couldn’t afford to do that actually. But I WILL continue to give what I can. That’s the difference. You donated to his primary. Now you won’t to his general election campaign. To each his own, but you can STFU about actually caring if he wins if you’re going to act like an irritated cat and discontinue supporting his election to send some kind of message about principle to… someone.
vwcat
John, I doesn’t matter how great a candidate is if they cannot get elected to do the changes we want.
You are going to have to come to understand that for the next few months, in order to bring indies and moderate republicans, gain the advantage in states that are leaning, keep the gop from tarring him as a fringie crazy far left guy, he is going to have be more centrist and that means sometimes having to do something odious like this.
remember, he needs to be elected to change things and banish such bills as this one for good.
We will see alot a gaming and moving more center for a few months.
This is politics and you gotta get elected.
Sure, I am disappointed and really upset but, I also realize why. And I understand the games that have to be played to get the votes and play chess with the republicans.
We will be tested alot over the summer but, remember the prize in the end. We can fix things after that.
But, I never expected to agree 100 percent with any candidate. it’s foolish to expect to and you have to take the whole of the thing.
Sojourner
Exactly. Shame on anyone who won’t vote for Obama because his support for the Constitution appears to be transitory.
shortstop
Okay, so lose the second half of Elvis’s #3 and then pay attention to the rest of his post.
All of those things are true at the same time.
I don’t hear too many if any people here threatening to vote for McCain. Given that we’re still supporting Obama, and we’re going to keep supporting him, expecting everyone to STFU with all (highly legitimate) criticism of Obama’s lack of moxie on a bill of this import and with these implications…well, that’s overreaction.
JC
As I’ve said, while I’m annoyed at Obama (a little less, now that I’ve expressed it some), really – I’m much more pissed at the House Dems – what the hell was going on with this vote?
I simply don’t get the motivation, to roll over the way they have rolled over. Again – ALL the Republicans, and less than HALF of the Democrats voted for, a bill brought to the floor by the DEMOCRATIC house? Why was this Republican bill (just look at the votes) even brought to the floor?
Is it the cash of the telecoms?
Seems doubtful. Lots of cash out there, AND the bill could have been written to give leeway to the telecoms, while not giving carte blanche to Bush and co. Plus, there are lots of sources of cash out there, as Obama has been proving.
Is it that they agree with the issue?
Beyond the 4th amendment concerns – why would the Congress agree to reduce their own power, given the abuse of power seen the last 7 years?
Is it because this is a “loser issue” for the Democrats?
That’s not the case – just look at the polling. Not only is this far down the list of concerns, but the polling doesn’t support the “go along or we will get beaten on national security”, for this go round, as this wasn’t a concern in 2006.
So what is it? What could possess NANCY PELOSI to sign on with this bill? To push it forward?
The only thing that makes sense – tinfoil hat or not – are the various suggestions that it’s some form of Dem leader CYA: Either afraid that THEY could be swept up, by being read into the lawbreaking by the telecoms, and want to close that down.
Or, that there is some form of blackmail being practiced by the Bush administration.
Someone explain this to me.
Sojourner
When did shunning the Constitution become a centrist position?
John Cole
Just go vote for Hillary.
Concern trolls are killing me. Not only are you politically naive, you are mathematically challenged. A filibuster will not hold. What you want him to do is spend political capital while he is trying to build a coalition to after a brusing primary to win the Presidency to try and run a filibuster that will fail so he can lose the vote on the bill, lose the filibuster, alienate his own party members in the house and Senate, and then be smeared by Republicans as wanting the terrorists to win for 6 months. yeah, that will put him in a position of strength for the general. But hey- he will have glowing words from people who, if they are sane, should be working their ass off to support him anyway after spending the last six months weakening him while supporting Hillary’s white people won’t vote for him tour.
You people are fucking hopeless. Beyond spoof- you don’t even deserve to be ridiculed, you are so unaware. A total fucking joke.
Ted
Enjoy President McCain.
Christ, these purist wankers. YOU’LL NEVER GET EVERYTHING YOU WANT. Yes, it sucks. Yes, it’s an outrageous ratification of civil rights violations. But that’s the country we live in, and the only way to change it is incrementally. Being a Nader voter of ’08 won’t even take the first step. It will prevent it.
Chris
I raced to the end, so I could comment. Apologies if I’m repeating anyone.
John! How can you say this?
How can this be a compromise? It’s supported by a split vote of Dems and 188 of 189 Republicans. Glenn Greenwald has a great compendium of about a dozen other such compromises. This is another Dem cave — if it were a compromise, you’d expect some of the Repubs to defect and vote against. As it is, they’ve gotten everything they wanted and more.
Oh, good luck on Dems removing things from the bill that we don’t like, especially telecom amnesty. We’ll see how well that turns out.
Just Some Fuckhead
So now Obama has to personally whip Bush’s ass after he becomes President? And to prove he can do that, he needs to magically derail this FISA bill retroactively in a legislative body of which he is not a member?
Cool, but it seems pretty small potatoes. If Obama wants my vote, he has to fly into space, grab Earth and spin it backwards to change the direction of time and erase the last seven and a half years of Bush. Anything less means he wipes his big brown ass with torn pieces of the Constitution.
Sojourner
If demanding that a candidate preserve the Constitution makes me a concern troll, I will wear the title proudly.
I want him to explain to the American people why this matters. Why the Constitution matters. The polls I’ve seen show that most Americans get this. I wish you did.
Funny. I didn’t vote twice for Bush.
John Cole
And yet, you are dumber than me. Nicely played.
Ted
You people are just too full of yourselves. I could give a shit less if you don’t for Obama. I don’t presume to tell anyone who they should vote for. But I will call you a whining wanker when you declare, “I’ll still vote for the guy, but NO MORE DONATIONS!” It’s stupid, petulant, and whiny, doesn’t serve any purpose at all, other than to express your anger to the Obama campaign’s donor spreadsheets. That’s it.
Sojourner
OMG! Insisting on preserving the Constitution makes one a purist wanker?????
What the hell is the matter with you?
Sojourner
Nope. Just not willing to sell my soul for the lesser of two evils.
Rock on, John.
MH
Okay, this, I can -almost- buy. But even assuming everything you say is true, it doesn’t explain why he couldn’t have said, “This bill doesn’t protect Americans’ rights. I’m voting nay.” He said he would vote yea. That is what is so angering. He doesn’t have to “strongarm” anyone, he just has to vote against it. Which he said he won’t do.
He didn’t have to try stopping a runaway train, he just has to stop shoveling coal in the engine. He failed to do this, and deserves to catch some shit for it.
Even if you don’t have the power to stop this bill, don’t fucking HELP it get passed.
John Cole
Oh, because even though I opposed the immunity, I somehow don’t care about the Constitution because I recognize a no-win situation. Forget Hillary. You are a Naderite.
crw
For those of you who think Internet fundraising has suddenly changed everything and the party is magically Obama’s to push around, you might want to check out Al Giordano’s post about the recent dustup he had with a certain member of the Dem establishment. It’s pretty revealing, and I think helps explain why Obama isn’t pushing this one. And also just how much work needs to be done if you want to fix the Democratic party.
Sojourner
Too bad I never said this.
Sojourner
He opposed it but he’s going to vote for it? WTF is that?
John Cole
No, you are just willing to attack the lesser of two evil to make sure the greater one wins. How that serves the Constitution is beyond me, but I am sure you have some solid “logic” behind it.
Obama opposed immunity. He lost. Now you want him to double down and lose twice and help McCain in November, and nothing he does is going to change the outcome of this bill or help the Constitution. Your vanity is sickening.
Thepanzer
Sidereal I hear what your saying and I’ve been doing the calling staffers for fun and games routine and donated to the actblue campaign for FISA accountability. But on the Obama issue we’re not talking about minority whip, a senate seat, etc but the next president and I’d like to vote for someone for a change because I think they’ll be good for the country, not that they’re less bad than the Republican candidate. The precedent this sets is awful, if Obama wins I don’t want the the only change in the equation to be the addition of the presidential veto. The Republicans just demonstrated that they can use bluedog dems to introduce legislation on their behalf and they can split off enough dem votes to keep republican obstructionism alive and potentially continue to push the Bush agenda even with him out of power. I don’t get the JC/TZ mystical pizza view that the equation changes in ’08 and we don’t get the same lousy policies being stuffed through the congress and senate. Based on Obama’s actions today would he even veto the same bill as president or would it not be worth taking the heat? The issue is Obama’s actions today as portents for what he’ll do as president. His Iraq vote gave me real hope for a change, todays actions are demoralizing as it signals if we don’t have the votes we’re going to roll over forever. Even with a blowout in November the vote today has shown that a determined Republican minority can overcome high public disaproval to convince dems to vote against their own interests. If Obama as potential leader of the party now can’t muster party unity how is that going to change in the future? Magic? Puppies? Magic puppies? The problem with not fighting tooth and claw on every issue is you wind up never fighting tooth and claw. The last 7 1/2 years the dems might as well have just stayed home and mailed in some rubber stamps.
ThymeZone
Pretending that impaling onesself on a futile gesture against FISA on June 20, 2008 is “preserving the Constitution” makes you …. well, you aren’t a wanker, but the rhetoric is way out of alingment with the reality here.
Just saying.
Throwin Stones
John O, I’m with ya. I love the forest.
It’s Solstice, I’m going to start a fire and work on getting to +6
Just Some Fuckhead
Goddammit John. I’m about this close to the ultimatum “it’s me or the trolls” but you need the ad revenue and you’ve never really indicated you’re even aware of my existence or my value as a contributing human being so I’m going to go biking with the dog. Don’t feel like you have to reply. ;)
jnfr
Ted, you are right and I should have said “no one”. I will stand by “not many”, though.
Ted
I’m presented with two options of who will occupy the WH next. One is more of Bush, the other is not (and claiming that Obama’s lack of going nuclear on this while having little power is not more Bush).
It’s an extremely simple equation. I’m sorry it doesn’t add up for you.
srv
Perhaps Bush’s Ghost would be a better term.
Why are you supporting this guy if he’s so impotent? Is that why John Barrow was begging for his endorsement? Not that facts like that matter to you, TZ of Cole…
Y’all have already lost, whether he wins in Nov. or not. He’s already surrendered to the machine and accepted his place. Laugh all you want at the roots and suck all red meat you want, it’s who you are.
ThymeZone
Have I ever mentioned what a great job Fuckhead has been doing here?
Without question, one of the greatest Fuckheads I have ever seen.
Sojourner
He opposed immunity but then he supported it. And supported it when the majority of the American people don’t.
Vanity? Fine. I’m good with that. If setting the bar on the basis of civil liberties and refusing to go below it is vanity, then call me vain!
Call me the vainest person in the whole world!!! Yes, I am vain!!! Yes, I refuse to support anyone who will give away my civil rights to George Bush!!!!
Excuse me while I go revel in my vanity.
Velvet Elvis
Yay sanity.
Seriously, since you’re new to the party, here’s the deal. The democratic party is a big coalition of interest groups, many of whom put their one pet issue above all else. We’ve got environmentalists, civil libertarians, anti-war groups, womens groups, gun control groups, human rights activists, trade reform activists, church and state seperationsists, health care reformers, left-libertarians, unions, minority groups, animal right groups, teachers groups, research advocates, and a partridge in a pear tree. Most people seem to have one issue that they put front and center, ahead of everything else. A democratic politician can’t take as dump without shitting on somebody’s pet issue causing them to hold their breath until they turn blue. I think that’s why they call them blue states.
Sojourner
So let’s give Bush everything he asks for!! Keep it simple.
Ted
Than, from your (and my) political perspective, things will only get worse. Forever.
Jesus. This isn’t fucking Star Wars. Get back to the real world.
ThymeZone
{ voice of Homer Simpson }
Mmmmmmm, mmmeeeaattttttttt.
{ slurping sounds }
jnfr
And I’ll add that I don’t think Obama needs to somehow fling himself on the pyre and ruin his chances of election in order to make a stand against this. I don’t blame him as much as Pelosi and Hoyer at this point, since the Senate hasn’t even voted yet.
But he could have strongly condemned the passage of this bill, he could have defended the Constitution in that stirring way he is entirely capable of. Instead he wimped out. I’m disappointed.
Sojourner
John Dean is talking about the damage to the Constitution that has been done and you guys are lecturing me on vanity.
Talk about wankers.
ThymeZone
Bush is the wanker in this scenario, obviously. And what’s great is in a few months, he goes away to Crawford and we get a new Democrat president.
Smile, this is a very good thing. Very, very good.
Ted
You’re right. That was a different whining wanker. I apologize.
orogeny
There’s a big difference between accepting the inevitable and fucking cheerleading the rape of the constitution. Obama just said “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.” What “improvement”…there was no compromise, the House Dems just sold out to the telecoms because they didn’t have the guts to take a stand for the constitution and Obama says that’s just peachy.
Sojourner
Doesn’t get more real world than voting to remove civil rights. Once they’re gone, good luck getting them back.
crw
Good point. And I’d be curious to know that too.
AkaDad
As of today, I’m suspending my campaign to have Obama put on Mt. Rushmore.
Sojourner
Until the Repubs look cross-eyed at the Dems, threaten a filibuster, and off we go again.
Just Some Fuckhead
*blush*
It’s really just a matter of beating embarrasingly low expectations and not even all or most of the time. :)
Sojourner
TZ, you do understand that the Dems put this legislation up for a vote, don’t you?
Ted
You’re right. So why don’t you whip out your Green Lantern and WILL it to BE. Because if you just have the WILL, Obama can ‘make it so’.
You people are whining that Obama didn’t give a damn speech that you wanted him to give about something he can’t control.
Dennis - SGMM
Did you listen to everything that Dean had to say or did you start typing as soon as you heard the part you agreed with?
ThymeZone
Well, we will have both houses with good margins, and the White House. The majority party, thankfully, only gets so much power. Or should, anyway. But the beauty part will be, we will be the majority party. With a lot of challenges and things to fix and put right.
Half the government right now is hamstrung by slashed budgets and idiot administrators sent in to deliberately gum up the gears.
There’s a lot to do. It will take four whole years just to restore order and competancy to our government.
Just Some Fuckhead
Some of those whiners are former (and apparently still) Clinton supporters who told us Obama wasn’t nothin’ but a good speech. Oopsie.
Sojourner
Oh wow. You’re right. I thought we were talking about the future leader of the free world. You know, someone who provides leadership.
ThymeZone
That’s the way it works, the majority controls what gets to the floor. So, yes.
Sorry, I have a hard time getting upset over this bill when I look at the Mount Everest of Shit(r) that our GOP friends are leaving us to deal with in a few months.
Sojourner
I heard a rationale for why the Dems did what they did. I didn’t hear a defense for it. Those are two different things.
John Cole
Still waiting for Sojourner and MYIQ to point me to St. Hillary’s leadership on this issue.
I wish I could say you were just being silly, but sadly this is the distilled truth of the matter. it is absurd.
ThymeZone
Leader of the Free World? I’d think after eight years of messianic lunacy, we’d be ready to stow that kind of hyperbole for a while. Just give me somebody who can put together a cabinet, and be competant. I’ll be very happy.
Sojourner
So why would Obama vote to perpetuate it?
crw
You are aware that Hillary only conceded two weeks ago tomorrow, right? And that at best, Obama was only able to start consolidating power about a month ago, right? He’s an insurgent who just came off a grueling 17 month slog to the nomination, which he won by TKO. I’m not saying this to excuse his behavior, but to explain it. Yes, it sucks that he has flip-flopped on a very important Constitutional issue and I am disappointed he’s taking such a weak stance. I agree that he doesn’t have to vote yea and he should at the very least use the failure to strip telco immunity as an excuse to vote nay.
But I’m not sure us stamping our feet and threatening to vote Nader or whatev is going to fix anything. We need to strengthen his position by applying pressure to other elements in the party, so he can take bold stands and have the party watching his back, instead of knifing it.
Sojourner
I didn’t vote for Hillary in the primary because she didn’t show up for the first telecom vote.
big cloud
Ouch! Don’t blame me!
John S.
I like Dean and have a few of his books. He has been a clear voice of sanity lo these dark years of the Bush. But you have to remember that before that…
John Wesley Dean III was consigliari to Richard Nixon and did a lot of fucked up shit.
People make mistakes. Maybe one day you’ll be citing Obama instead of Dean when defending our Constitution and the rule of law on Balloon Juice. You never know.
Tsulagi
Irrespective of the immunity issue, apparently Obama of today is good to go with the FISA changes themselves to battle “grave concerns.” Guess he now agrees pre-Bush FISA isn’t good enough. Maybe grandma could be talking to the evildoers. An opinion of the FISA changes Obama now supports from the DFH lawyers…
I’m not so much just pissed off at Obama as I am at Dems in general. Just once, just ONCE I’d like to see the party I donated money to on the promise they wouldn’t be rubberstampers draw a line and say no further. A little spine.
Instead, the argument seems to be from some to capitulate/cave/surrender/whatever if the other guy says BOO! Then dream of glory next year. I dunno, I guess I missed that training where ceding all the ground and battles to the bad guys with the thought next year would be better when magically it would all be undone turning into gold was a winning strategy.
Tsulagi +5. I will put my money into good Scotch before I give those bastards another dime until they show at least baby steps in walking the walk. Talk don’t cut it.
ThymeZone
Sigh. I’ll consider the point missed.
But clearly, he is parking the issue for now, and staying focussed on his real responsibility, which is getting elected.
In that, I support him fully. If he accomplishes this, which I expect that he will, I will not show on Inauguration Day to heckle him about the FISA vote. Instead, I will weep tears of great joy and thank Jesus NMYM for delivering us from evil.
Sojourner
Bravo!
Sojourner
For now? How can you expect Obama to undo legislation that he votes for?
Ted
I just don’t get this. Both major parties SUCK. One sucks a lot less than the other. You do what you can to move not just the media Overton window, but the elected official one as well.
Cassidy
Easily said from the sidelines. Everyone wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die.
Sojourner, go fall on a fuckin’ sword or something. At the very least, un-cornhole yourself from the martyr stick, and stop acting like a skycrane*.
* world’s biggest tool
ThymeZone
Nose, face, spite.
Discuss.
John Cole
I see a potential new blog motto here.
Ted
Response of the day.
ThymeZone
By working with Congress to fix the problem? What presidents are supposed to do?
I dunno, call me crazy. Call me a dreamer. Call me a taxi.
“You’re a taxi!”
Thank you.
joshers
Shorter John Cole: Anyone who disagrees with me is a fucking moron.
Teh awesome. Mature, incisive, and thought-provoking. Remind me again why I read this blog.
joshers
Oh yeah… Today, I learned that this blog kinda sucks.
Sojourner
Martyr? Wow. I never realized that not worshipping a political candidate made me a martyr. Does that mean you worship the god of Obama?
Ponzo Simonetz
Should I be amused at all the rationalization going on right now among thoughtless Obama fanboys? Or all the deflection: let’s blame the Republicans! Oh, and Obama is not just “a junior senator”, he is the presumptive Democratic nominee; that puts him in an entirely different class.
Today Obama did precisely what John McCain would have done in his place. What does that say about how he will vote when Guantanamo is the issue, or Roe v. Wade, or [name your favorite cause]? This goes well beyond one issue: if Obama is so willing to undermine the Constitution and the rule of law, then what won’t he do when the pressure is on?
Karmakin
The Democrats are making the call that the American public is still WATB enough to give away the privacy of their neighbors (not themselves, of course) in order to keep themselves “safe”. They’re probably making the right call here. Sure, they might not SAY that they’re that chickenshit, but electoral history shows that they are.
nightjar
In the world next to uncornholed martyr’s, it’s called an AMENDMENT.
John Cole
It is not the diagreement, it is the petulant “I am not giving money anymore,” the “Obama is no better,” the, well, you get the point. Add to it the complete refusal to recognize there is really not much Obama could have done. He is a junior Senator from New York, bruised from a bloody primary, with his hands full getting ready to try to win the general.
Not to mention, of Hillary, mcCain, and Obama, the only candidate out there who actually did something. And because he didn’t do “enough,” he is somehow damaged goods. It is a moronic position to take.
Cassidy
Cute. Junior high-ish response…middle school level side-stepping….Republican level dodging of your own words….I’d say a 6.5
Sojourner
I’m sure he’ll have no trouble convincing the Congress to vote for an amendment that he first was for, then was against, then…
Oh never mind.
4tehlulz
Oh dear God what fail.
ThymeZone
That settles it, I am voting for Giuliani.
funfunfun
thanks for that. really. it was getting stupid.
Ted
Not to mention, an Obama administration, working with a (possibly) filibuster-proof Senate majority can ram shit through just like the repugs did for years without the media even really paying attention at all (i.e., no flip-flopping crap about Obama), and even if they did, who cares?
This “Obama can’t fix it later when he has real power because he voted for it!” whining is ridiculous.
Jinxi
You know, I’m not pissed off at Obama, but Zack Space can kiss my ass. Why? Because that sonofabitch is in the House and voted for this fucking bill. Of course, he’s a Bush Dem (why do we call them Blue?) and I hate him.
That’s it! You’ve done it. I’m voting for McCain for sure now. Pfft!
Sojourner
John, what I’m hearing from Olbermann is that Obama intends to vote FOR IT.
So if you can’t do anything to influence the party that you now lead (i.e., encouraging Pelosi not to put it forward as a bill), then that means you vote FOR IT?
What the hell are you talking about?
Dennis - SGMM
As are hearing and listening. Nonetheless, I wish you and your preferred candidate all the luck you both deserve in 2012.
Cassidy
….and this is why I don’t go into the emotional hysterics of progressive positions. If you’re rational and objective from the start, it is so much easirer to stay that way.
Ted
They all do to varying degrees. But I’d bet money you’ll still be back to read this one.
ThymeZone
Yes, but we know about the self-flagellation.
And the witchcraft.
And the bra.
John Cole
I love this. Take it out on Obama. It was his fault this passed the House today.
He didn’t do enough.
I am the one who named him the MUP, and correctly recognized he was a centrist and a good pol and thus am not surprised he recognizes there is nothing but lose-lose for him in this bill right now, and I am the fanboy?
He opposed it. He tried to stop it. He failed, is cutting his losses, and moving on so shit like this does not happen again after Jan 20, 2009. You all are creating your own reality here.
Sojourner
Or Obama could change his mind and vote his conscience next week. He still has that opportunity.
t jasper parnell
I hear from the neighbor’s dog he is voting against it. Jesus. Before we decide that Obama is selling out the constitution lets let the vote, its debate, and related whatnottery occur. FFS.
This whole thing reminds me of Groucho waiting for Ambasador Trentino in Duck Soup
Dennis - SGMM
Or he could vote your conscience.
AkaDad
That’s easy. You read this blog because I post here. Amiright?
Cassidy
Not being a smart ass….do you know what the purpose of a jab, or good footwork and head movement is for? To bait your opponent into making a retarded move and throwing a solid counter-punch.
After all that we’ve seen in the past year, do you really think he’s just letting this slide for no reason? For fuck’s sake, he took on Hillary and her sun cult…and won.
Dennis - SGMM
t jasper parnell Says:
Bravo!
ThymeZone
Ba-ding-bing!
Ted
And Sojourner thinks the best course of action here is for Obama to pull what the media will call a very high-profile stunt by going nuclear about it right at the beginning of the general election campaign that Obama will have to run to the center of anyway. Millions of voters who think FISA is something you get if you travel out of country will, instead of being carefully introduced to the real Obama (the non-muslim, non-America-hating one) by a well-crafted general campaign beginning, be introduced to him as a candidate by what will look like just theatrical grandstanding.
Brilliant.
Svensker
There was no down side for Obama to vote against this bill. There might be a down side for making a big deal out of it, but standing with Feingold, Dodd and Leahy doesn’t seem particularly scary. He didn’t and I’m pretty pissed off about it. Why that makes me a wanker I don’t understand. Obama’s the wanker here, even if Hoyer, Reid, Pelosi and every Republican except Ron Paul are even bigger wankers.
Doesn’t mean I won’t vote for him, but I am very disappointed in him.
Bill of Rights is fairly non-negotiable to me. That and torture.
Obama just screwed the pooch on an important issue to me. And I don’t think he had a very good reason to do it.
ThymeZone
Ted, we’re facing down a mob with pitchforks here. I think we should try offering them pizza.
nightjar
In the old days, it was just wingnut Bush worshipping trolls. Now we have a mind-fucking array of all sorts of trolls and it’s nerve racking which is which.
You got, still HC trolls and sort of used to be HC trolls, but now maybe Obama subsets trolls, also, Obama OMG not messiah type trolls, then the standard wingnut splitter Mccain/Bush trolls. It’s all very confusing here in BJville.
ThymeZone
Jesus MYM wept.
t jasper parnell
He hasn’t voted. Nor debated. He issued a statement of bland support for a HR bill. God alone knows what is going to happen and she ain’t talking, except to the neighbor’s dog.
Cassidy
Did I miss something? I thought only the House voted.
Jinxi
I’ve got mac ‘n cheese and possum stew. Anyone?
srv
nj, besides Cole, all the MUP’ers here are all the same guy.
Jinxi
You know who voted for it? One of my Reps. You know what I did? Blamed him.
Dennis - SGMM
Nope.
nightjar
Good advice, you should take it.
ThymeZone
We all only have one.
But anyway, there’s nothing worse than getting hungry at a food fight. There’s nothing that I can be sure hasn’t been on the floor.
Ted
I guess my position on this piece of shit bill is: let Obama win first. Seriously, all of you whiners, just shut up and help him win. THEN we can all flame his ass for stupid decisions to the same extent that the wingnuts have absolutely worshiped Bush all these years.
Hell, even SadlyNo will probably get in on it.
Sojourner
So he didn’t vote his conscience when he voted against telecom immunity the first time?
kate r
No, You read it because just a fuckhead posts here. (And speaking of going off-topic tangents, how come no one started going nuts because upthread John Cole said BHO was the jr senator from NY? Or was that a subtle Hillary dig?)
Ted
It occurs to me we wouldn’t be dealing with any of this if Obama were not a damn Senator, but a governor instead. Of course, they did try to nail Clinton on execution and other crap in Arkansas in ’92, I guess.
Dennis - SGMM
And he’s voted for it now? Or are you telepathic?
Otto Man
Agreed.
I’m as pissed off as anyone about this piece of shit bill passing the House — no, no, fuck you, Steny Hoyer — but the train’s left the station and I’m not going throw this entire election away because Obama won’t lay down on the tracks in a noble gesture.
Obama has his eye on November, and so should we. If you’re worried about the Fourth Amendment, remember this — this piece of shit will expire soon; the federal circuit, appeals and Supreme Court judges appointed to the bench by the next president will be there for life.
Sojourner
Nope. Just responding to what I’m hearing. And what I’m hearing is that it was people complaining mightily on the blogs that kept this piece of shit bill from passing the first time.
So I’m encouraging everyone who is against this bill to complain mightily in the hope that Obama and the other Dem senators will grow a pair and vote it down.
Jinxi
Yes. My bad. I was thinking of something else. Oops. Ah well, back to the stew.
handy
Wow, major party presidential candidate turns out to be M.O.R. and not ideologically pure. Shocking. Who would have predicted that?
Call me an Obamapologist or whatever, but sorry folks, on these arcane constitutional issues, political movement and change is ground-up, not top-to-bottom. If we’re not satisfied with the Democratic Party we’ve got, WE are the ones who change it.
ThymeZone
Pass the possum, please.
t jasper parnell
An anecdote: I am terrifically bad at politics. In a recent meeting there was vote on some key issue and I did not want it to pass. So, I called it crazy talk and other such intemperate remarks. I was the most recently hired and the deally on which we were voting was the result of two years of intense discussion between the admin and all the departments. Guess who lost? Standing up and shouting you are all immoral twits for supporting something is not the ideal way to start a discussion with waverers designed to defeat the bill. Mayhap, as Chaucer would have it, this is Obama’s game. Mayhap we ought to wait until he does something substantive before condemning him. Or, to quote Groucho, Imagine that I the president of a country stick out may hand and he refuses to shake it. Works himself into a rage before Trentino arrives and then slaps him for what he thinks he will do.
Just Some Fuckhead
You are correct, BUT..
Obama didn’t stand outside Congress passing out pocket constitutions and secretly hypnotizing white folks to vote against the bill.
Ted
Slightly off-but-still-on-topic, I’ll bet anyone $1000 that Andrew Sullivan, who’s spent the last year slathering praise on Obama, changes his mind around mid-October, and supports McCain or Barr.
Roy Edroso was the first one I’ve seen predict this, but I’ll get a good laugh if/when it comes true.
Sojourner
Good point. Obama has been all over the news demonstrating his clear position against the bill.
Seve Ballesteros
This is a tough one.
John is right, at least in one sense, in that political capital spent in this fight is probably political capital wasted. But Greenwald is also right: this bill is kind of a big deal.
Obama is the only sane choice in this election. We’ve swung so far into crazy-land that, at some point, capital will have to be spent to overcome the whining, filibustering Republican minority and swing the pendulum back to saneville. Is there a code that we should be listening for that will signify Obama will cede the powers accumulated over the last 8 yrs?
Call me crazy, but it is very hard for me to believe someone-anyone(excepting GWash)-would give back power that has been handed to them.
The problem isn’t that John is wrong or that the dissenting commenters are wrong; the problem is that shit has become so goddamn fucked-up (hell, John is a Dem. now) that who knows which are the good compromises and which are or not.
Hold onto the anger, but have perspective. If I repeat that to myself enough, I might not go crazy.
srv
tjp, shit. Are you already at the Toronado? Is there a free seat?
t jasper parnell
Yes because publicly denouncing your fellow Democratic colleagues is the best way to cobble together a coalition.
Cassidy
Am I the only who immediately thought of Blazing Saddles…
Where all the white women at?
t jasper parnell
No, but depending on where it is I can get there quick enough.
Cassidy
Ideological purity is so much cooler than 4 (maybe 8) years of accomplishment.
Cassidy
that was supposed to be “maybe 8”
Sojourner
Since he’s now the head of the party, I certainly wouldn’t expect him to influence his Democratic colleagues.
nightjar
Yum! One bowl will last a week, maybe two.
Cassidy
Ummmm…are you really not getting the difference between presumptive nominee and junior senator? Seriously? For real?
Ted
Dear FSM, I can’t take it anymore.
John O
(*sigh*)
This is just not that fucking complicated. The Bushies and their predecessors have had us all under their microscopes for far longer than the 6 months we’ll have to live with more of it, if I may be FISA-specific. As I said in a galaxy far, far away, somewhere up-thread, if you think FISA is the be all end all in the surveillance game you’re a fool. The average American who leaves their house is photographed several times a day. Take a good look at your ATM machine.
This issue is WAY bigger than FISA, and this focus (again, I donated to the PAC to fight it just last night) on this particular piece of our erosion of civil liberties, which both parties have supported consistently in the epic battle of exhausted compromises with the moderates between the crazies of left and right over decades, is just a microcosm of the larger problem. This is what Power does, and as it is, so has it ever been, and always will be.
Why anyone would pick this issue to draw the line is beyond me. What have you done to release non-violent MJ prisoners lately? Anything? I didn’t think so, and I don’t blame you, because it is politically unpopular.
Get. A. Grip. See the ball, be the ball. The problems that this bill represents, which can be fixed to our liking with enough activism on a new Obama Presidency and bigger majorities in Congress, is a really small part of our erosion of civil liberties.
Oh, and immunity for rich/famous/powerful people? What an incredibly uncommon characteristic of the entirety of the human condition from
Day 1. Two words: OJ.
t jasper parnell
1) You have no idea what he is now doing with his Democratic colleagues
2)You have no idea how the Senate’s vote will turn out.
3)Like you, I assume, I have written my Senators and explained why I think they ought vote against the bill.
4) Should things go badly here, like all real Americans, I will be very angry.
5) The future is an unknown territory.
srv
Imagine when he’s the young, inexperienced first term president. Baby steps. Maybe TZ can sow up a redshirt for him to wear until his Junior year.
Cassidy
Hey now…don’t fuck with the Democratic way. We can talk ourselves into losing on our best day.
Sojourner
True. There’s still time for him to do the right thing.
nightjar
Or maybe Cole himself is all the MUP’ers, or we could all just be ghosts in the ethers controlled by the evil Soros.
Hee heee hawwa he he.
sidereal
Why would someone support someone for a position of power before he already has that power? So. . I’m only supposed to support incumbent Presidents? I think you’re confused about how the Republic thing works.
You didn’t blame Obama for what your rep did? YOU HATE THE CONSTITUTION!
anne
People kind of forget how spineless the party has been this year, or every year and what they have let Bush get away with. Now 2 weeks after he become “leader” of the party Obama is supposed to magically be able to save us all?
I hope people calm the hell down eventually.
srv
Cole is too lazy to usually start an open thread and we have to page Tom or Michael to do it.
handy
If the wiretap don’t fit, you must acquit. Rest in peace, Johnny Cochrane.
Cassidy
I’m gonna go with “What are people to ideologically childish to view the world through the lens of reality” Alex.
t jasper parnell
Exactly. Or right things, even, because there may be multiple right ways to deal with the Bill.
I confess, having watched the HR debate, I could make little sense of Pelosi’s position and I had no idea Hoyer was a thousand years old.
Xenos
The issue is the criminal penalties but the civil penalties, which are in the hundreds of dollars per violation, with the violations numbering in the millions, or even billions. This is about immunity from legal mechanisms that could result in the nationalization of the telcos because with trillions of dollars of fines, the government will own those suckers.
I would say it serves them right, but I am farther left than most congressional democrats, so there you have it. I would just love to crush a generation of cynical telco executives and replace them all with afscme members.
Sojourner
I just want to know the extent of the spying.
srv
J. H. C. You people are throwing straw everywhere. Nobody has said he should beat every Dem into submission. They’re saying he should
LEAD
What an f*ing concept.
In case you missed it, the Clinton Era of the DNC is over. Your candidate is JeffG’ing the nails into her coffin, and you act like he is some paralyzed newborn. Perhaps he should just keep his mouth shut until Nov?
ThymeZone
I’m on it.
Just Some Fuckhead
No, some of the commenters are spoofers having fun, some are ignorant of how the legislative process works and at least two are Obama haters from way back.
The trick is identifying and enjoying group A while informing and educating group B and ignoring or ridiculing group C.
L. Ron Obama
3) Not only did he not do so, prominent bloggers have speculated–and even inferred–that he may have secretly hypnotized them to vote for the bill.
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it would be irresponsible to speculate otherwise.
J. Michael Neal
Jesus Christ there are a lot of people who can’t think their way from A to D, let alone through the rest of the alphabet. Sojourner and others are acting is if opposition to this bill would be costless. It’s not. There are two costs to it.
1) It takes time, effort and capital, even to make an attempt to defeat the bill. This doesn’t occur in a vacuum. If you are going to insist on this, then be explicit about what you want Obama to not do in order to try this. Offshore oil drilling? Not fight McCain on how to think of Iraq and terror? Not put the work in to unite the party? Maybe stop making an issue of habeas corpus? Tell me what you’ll give up.
2) You want him to give a speech? You do realize that, by doing so, he would publicly be saying that a large chunk of his own party is supporting unconstitutional laws, right? Even if that’s correct (and I think it is) do you honestly think that that’s a good approach to take? I’m sure that Obama ripping into them will make House Democrats a lot more likely to work with him in the future.
Genine
From what I am reading this bill restores FISA to what it was before the tampering- or close to it. Before the tampering, a wiretap could be done right away but they had to get judicial approval for it within 72 hours of the tap. That is nothing new. Also the court really had no say in guilt or innocence of the party being tapped, the purpose of the tap is to gain such evidence. The court is to make sure the wiretap is within legal parameters.
So this appears to be part of the “compromise”
There is no telco immunity and that sucks. I am even angry that Obama says he’ll vote for it even without that provision taken out. But then, I am angry at ALL the democrats, both in the House and the Senate who have or will vote yes for it. My ire is for everyone, not just one person.
Also, once Obama is President, he CAN work with congress to enact legislation to undo all the poisonous policies of the last several years. He has already said he will hire a bunch of attorneys to look over the policies and those that don’t cut the constitutional muster are out.
This whole thing sucks, this “compromise” sucks and I am none too happy with Obama saying he will vote yes. But I have to look at the bigger picture and look at all of the factors at play.
There is also something else to think about: Obama is the PRESUMPTIVE nominee. Since the primary was so close, who put him over the edge? Superdelgates? Who are superdelegates? Congress people, Senators and their backers- people who, obviously, want this legislation passed.
Its easy to bitch and moan from the sidelines, but who knows what is going on on the field when the whole team is huddled?
plus C
It might be a bit early to decide all is lost, the senate is the place where bills go to die. And Obama, or any one of the other 99 senators, actually can snap their fingers and block it.
Posturing hasn’t really been a big thing for Obama, so it might be better to see what he does rather than what he says.
Reid, on the other hand can DIAF. Dodd should have that spot after his last filibuster.
John O
LOL, Cassidy. I’ll never call myself a Democrat, because I hate The Man in all forms, but that doesn’t mean I’m insane and won’t vote for them when my country depends on it within the constraints of our lovely bichromatic rainbow of political thought..
*embarrassed and defiant* Living in IL, depending on which way the wind is blowing, I’ll have the luxury of voting for a legitimate crazy, Bob Barr, because THAT is the direction I think we need to go.
An Obamabot I’m not, though the man has spoken to me like I was an adult far more often than any politician I can remember for a long time. I think he would be a good POTUS.
Picking nits is just not my thing, I guess, and this isn’t a nit to me in the slightest degree where principle or in terms of deeply held positions is concerned, but it is a nit to me in terms of what we can change if we behave rationally and practical, cold-blooded politics. In any case, I won’t hold my breath.
This is nothing but smart practical politics, until proven otherwise. And if that happens, no one will scream louder than me. I have met Obama in an intimate setting, a private conversation that went about an hour, in which my involvement consisted of Obama asking me, “John, who are you?” and my choking so bad all I could come up with was, “I’m nobody,” and shut my pie-hole for the rest of the meeting. Durbin was there, too. At least everyone laughed at my answer.
Biggest lost opportunity in my life, but this was 2006, pre-election, so I had no idea what a lost opportunity it was to me at the time.
He’ll be all right.
Sojourner
Dodd had my vote in the primary until he dropped out.
handy
Speaking of No Quarter, SusanUPC over there says loud and proud, “Told you so!”
Just Some Fuckhead
Nonononononononononononono. He didn’t have to worry about any of this stuff. All he had to do was lead. See? Everything is simple when you remove all the complicated stuff.
J. Michael Neal
Sojourner, has it occurred to you that, if he gets elected next year, Barack Obama has access to all of that information? If all you want to know is what happened, telecom immunity just isn’t that important. Who controls the classification process, now, that’s crucial.
I’m honestly stunned that I haven’t seen a single person, on any blog, who seems to have realized this.
Sojourner
Civil rights is my number one issue. And going against this bill would only be controversial with the 28%s who wouldn’t vote for Obama anyway.
As to being controversial with his own party, he is the leader of the party. If he will capitulate on this, what else will he capitulate on? The blue dogs aren’t going anywhere. They’re not going to suddenly become progressives if Obama becomes president. In fact, just the opposite. They may feel pressure to show their independence. What will President Obama do then?
The Moar You Know
Cole, this idea of an online school for the mentally retarded sounded good on paper but isn’t working out so well in real life. Some of your students here seem to…well, they seem to be getting dumber instead of smarter.
Sojourner
It’s my understanding that the bill authorizes the president to order companies to break the law if he believes it’s in the interest of national security.
J. Michael Neal
On the whole, I like Chris Dodd. If he were the nominee right now, though, how would you have taken the revelation of his closeness to Angelo Mozilo?
Sojourner
If he votes for the bill, why would he go looking for evidence that he made a bad vote?
Bob In Pacifica
Hugh writes: “But I am very disappointed in this stand he [Obama] has taken.”
He voted against the first version of this, he spoke out against it, and he says he’ll fight against the immunity sections in the Senate. What stand disappoints you?
MYIQ, please, your H. Clinton didn’t even bother to show up to vote the last time. What has she said? Nothing. And Steny is her little butt boy.
John Cole, you are absolutely right on this. This insanity that Obama now has absolute control over Congress is just weird.
Sojourner
Since he’s no longer a candidate and he’s not my senator, I really haven’t paid that much attention.
Cassidy
And the resounding ring of hammer hitting nail….
People (generically) can piss and moan all they want, making mumbling noises about the right thing and other such nonsense. Or, they can do the right thing themselves and get a Democrat into the WH and be a part of the solution of fixing things from a base of power and influence.
J. Michael Neal
You’re fucking clueless. It would be controversial with about 100 House Democrats. This isn’t about the voters.
You also didn’t tell me what you were willing to give up. Much like I’m not going to take John McCain seriously about cutting spending until he’s prepared to be specific, if you won’t tell me which of the things that Obama might prevail on you would give up for this, I’m not going to take you seriously, either.
srv
Uh, not. You seem to think taking power from the courts to pursue this matter and leave it up to only the next executive means he’s hankering to do something about it.
He’s not. And he’s going to pardon anyone/anything missed by GW. It will be time for America to move on, for the healing to begin…
J. Michael Neal
I repeat: you’re fucking clueless. Apparently, the idea of picking your battles doesn’t even register with you. The only person that seems wrapped in the idea that this is something that Obama wants is you. You have no evidence for it. You ignore all of the times that he’s voted against telecom immunity. You ignore the fact that he’s said that he’s going to try to strip it from this bill. All you can see is that he isn’t 100% in agreement with you, so you assume that he’ll never be in agreement with you.
Grow up.
Cassidy
And the mongols might rise up again….and aliens might come enslave our women…and a giant asteroid might be heading towards Earth…and M. Night Shamylan might make another movie…
What will President Obama do then?
John O
Cassidy, I love you, though if you’re a male, only as friends.
Sojourner
Yes, I am. I am clueless enough to expect my candidate to use his leadership and oratorial skills to educate people about the Constitution and why they should give a shit.
I am clueless enough to have bought into the “change” message that Obama has been bandying about for the past year.
Yes, I took him seriously on that, which is why I voted for him. I believed him when he said he would take the principled stand.
Yes, I am clueless.
srv
No one has said that. You are an idiot.
J. Michael Neal
Okay, Sojourner isn’t the only one who is fucking clueless. Does it ever occur to you that maybe the best way to get an idea as to what Barack Obama thinks on a subject is to pay attention to what he actually says about that subject?
handy
Sorry, but I’m not willing to take the risk on America’s ability to understand nuanced positions–at least that portion of voting Americans that made the difference for GWB in ’04. I still have nightmares of Kerry tripping over “international test.”
Sojourner
I haven’t heard him say anything on this topic in quite a while.
So, oh wise one, what is he saying?
John O
(*resigh*)
Sojourner, has it crossed your mind at all that timing counts?
Never mind.
IF Obama wins, he’ll have plenty of time and a much larger, much less politicized platform to do exactly what you want him to do.
Why can’t you wait? He’s gotta WIN first. And The Man already knows you love porn.
Cassidy
That metronomic banging is the sound of my head against a desk…
sidereal
I think we should rhetorically elevate the Magical Leadership Pony right up there alongside the Magical Unity Pony. Any leader who gets on his Magical Leadership Pony can just make people vote how he wants them to, even if they think it’s against their self interest, and even if he has no leverage over them.
No doubt McCain will mount his Magical Leadership Pony and make all of the conservative Republicans in the House go along with a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Because he’s a LEADER who LEADS.
No doubt Bill Clinton, as a sitting President, was able to mount his MLP and LEAD a Democratic Senate to support Hillary’s health care plan, because a leader leads. And no doubt Bush, a sitting President, was able to LEAD Frist to bring a bill on Social Security privatization through the Senate without Republican opposition.
See where I’m going here?
Sojourner
It sure does. He has the American public’s attention. Why doesn’t he use it?
The Moar You Know
Fuck, you haven’t even read the thing. Jesus fucking Christ.
Sojourner
Except, the American people are indicating that they don’t like Bush intruding into their lives. So how hard can it be to encourage the people to move in a direction they’re already going?
Cassidy
Is it too early to go with epic fail, or would I be the one guy in the movie theater who starts clapping too early?
John O
Sojourner, you’re a political neophyte. Or, from Blazing Saddles again (OT: GREAT marketing to re-release it this summer) a moron?
HE DOESN’T HAVE THE VOTES, OR THE POWER. You may think he’s an unprincipled hack, but I’ll bet even you thing he can count.
First, let’s give him the stick. If he doesn’t use it properly, I’ll be leading the charge for more and better Dems, right down to him, though I’ll probably be reduced to voting third party in that circumstance given that I’ve coughed up all “hope.”
Sojourner
So you disagree with this:
MH
You people and your delusions sound just like the Clinton Camp three weeks ago. They said, “It won’t matter if we get McCain, we’ll have the majority in Congress and he won’t get anything done!” and now you’re saying, “It won’t matter what happens between now and January, we’ll just undo it all with our Magic Majority Missle!”
It was bullshit when the Clintonistas used that logic and it’s bullshit now. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but Republicans are quite adept at accomplishing their agenda from the minority. If you want to avoid watching President Obama “coming together” and “forging a bipartisan consensus” as the Republicans keep him and the Democrats from fixing any of their messes, you need to keep his feet to the fire, starting now.
I don’t know how you’re able to, in one breath, say that Obama needs to yet recover from the primary, and in the next, say that the people giving Obama shit for this are all just a bunch of Clinton-supporters. Did you ever stop to think that if Clinton-supporters want Obama to have said a few words AGAINST this bill, if Obama was interested in reaching out to them that this would have been a perfect opportunity to do so?
You keep sending up this ludicrous assumption, that somehow those who are upset at Obama today are going to…what? Write in Hillary? Vote McCain? You’re completely bonkers if you think that’s actually going to happen. Stop pretending like the most extreme position represents everyone who’s angry. Your republican roots are showing.
Also, what exactly did Obama “do”?
Hahahaha. You DO know what blog you’re on right? The one owned by the “two-time Bush voter”…? It’s extremely laughable if you’re going to pull up people’s past Republican-based sins as a means to discredit their present stance.
Yeah, see, the thing is, some of us don’t WANT to flame him for this shit. Some of us want him to sit down for the first time in the Oval Office and think, “Shit, I better get on that whole ‘fourth amendment’ thing!” And you know how you make that happen? I’ll give you a hint: it ain’t by letting it slide today.
Here’s your lesson for today, and yes, there will be a test: If you want your politicians to do something, you need to MAKE them do it by making it too painful for them NOT to.
Uh, and what do you think the netroots are? The Commissar, handing down edicts? Analogy fail.
John O
Bedtime alert: …even you THINK he can count.”
God I hate posting typos. In my defense, it is prerequisite to be fast in blogoworld.
Sorry.
mapaghimagsik
The Republicans didn’t get where they *were*, and are now, by giving in. Its hard to watch the Dems do it again, rolling over. I just don’t understand why the Democratic House is so willing to let this happen.
I realize it was unrealistic, but I did hope that at some point, Bush wouldn’t get what he wanted, and there actually would be some truth and reconciliation. It does seem that this closes that final door, and they really will get away with it. Its a bitter pill to swallow.
For all this talk that some pundits threw out about the Democrats had a deep bench in candidates for president — Where’s Richardson on this, where’s Kerry? Where’s Clinton?
I don’t know if Obama could have done more, and I sure don’t know what happened behind the scenes. I hope that it was good, for the price that’s being paid, because right now, the price feels very high.
I’m not sure that making a stronger stand would do *anything* for John McCain. What, they’ll say he’s weak on national security? They’re *already* saying that, and this vote in support of the bill will not change their minds, because this really isn’t about *minds* anymore.
I also think that the Democrats sometimes are the party of excuses. “Not enough of a majority” then, it’ll be “not veto proof! We need more” And more and more with very little return to the constitution.
I’m in a wait and see mode. I’m tired of how Bush will get away with his crimes *and* Retired Major General Antonio Taguba can accuse the Bush Administration of War Crimes with the major news outlets not talking about it. Its a sad state of affairs.
But I’d definitely vote for Obama over McCain. McCain thinks Roe vs Wade should be overturned, for goshsakes. If Obama is only half as bad as McCain, and I think he’ll be about 5,000 times better, this might be a small price to pay.
Cassidy
Self-important political geeks with nothing better to do at 9:30 at night on Friday?
The Moar You Know
Yes, I do. I read the bill. You obviously haven’t.
All your bawling on this thread (and so many others) just leaves you with a well-deserved reputation as a fucking hysteric and a moron to boot, whose utter and absolute failure will go down in internet history.*
*probably not true.
mapaghimagsik
I was reading upthread that somehow this can all be improved upon after the whitehouse is won. How does this get reversed? Law types?
John O
LOL, again, Cassidy. Please tell me you’re young, hot, single, love older men, and live in my development, since I already know you’re smart and funny.
That being said, God Bless the netroots. They’ve done one helluva lot of good work, and now they’re just about mainstreamed.
I would use “we,” but
srv
MH, we have to surrender now so we don’t have to surrender later. We are weak, and tired, junior and only presumptive.
You are hysterical, wanting MUP to SELF-IMMOLATE (John Cole’s words) in straw if you are unwilling to wait for the 4th Ammendment Super Pony in January.
Change is a’comin. It’s right around the bend.
John O
???
“…but less than 100 hits/day doesn’t count.
Sojourner
But Chris Dodd did?
MH
So Bill couldn’t get health care passed with a Democratic majority, but Obama will be able to clean up Bushmess after Bushmess with no problem! Over 9000 joy missles, each with a warhead of 20 megatons of sunshine and rainbows are launching themselves into my brain RIGHT NOW! The Magic Majority Wand will make everything better!
The doublethink, it burns.
Furthermore, if you think all those Blue Dog Dems aren’t going to suddenly feel the need to prove their “bipartisanship” by voting against Obama’s agenda at every turn, you’re fucking clueless and/or have been in a coma the last 20 years.
Sojourner
Exactly.
mapaghimagsik
Yeah, remember the Democrats are also waving that wand, or at least trying to get us to give it to them.
I’d like to think we have a chance of keeping the Democrats more responsible than the Republicans. But its going to probably take even more work than getting the majority in the first place.
Sojourner
You’re right. I haven’t read the bill. And I should assume that Bush is ready to sign this bill because, for the first time, he’s willing to give up the executive privileges he has consistently insisted on to this point. Plus the Repubs I’ve watched on C-Span who consistently crow that Bush got everything (and more) that he asked for.
Be sure to contact Feingold, Leahy, and the others who have studied this bill and, obviously, misread it. I’m sure they are anxiously awaiting your tremendous insight.
Too bad insults are all you have to support your “argument.”
BH-Buck
Damn! When did questioning the actions of our elected officials become so un-American?
Sojourner
It’s okay unless it’s interpreted as a challenge to Obama.
Welcome to Balloon Juice.
Doug H. (Fausto no more)
I don’t know. When did blaming our presumptive nominee for not using his magical bill-stopping powers become rational thought?
Sojourner
Perhaps Obama could get a consult from Chris Dodd. Apparently Dodd knows the magic handshake.
BH-Buck
Obama has magical bill-stopping powers? Really!?
Dang. I’d be happy if he just showed some balls.
John O
Argghhh. Someone shoot me. Just make it clean.
Look, Sojourner, I’m with you 100% on the PRINCIPLE of the thing.
Dodd LOST. Dodd currently has NOTHING to lose. Dodd was my first choice while still in it.
Our Founding Fathers did not define a purity contest. Again, I’m with you when I vacation to Purityville. Again, you should vacation to RealityLand.
BH-Buck
Maybe Obama should hide under a bed until November. Wouldn’t want him taking any unnecessary risks.
Corner Stone
“You are collectively dumber than a two-time Bush voter. How does that sit with you?”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fuck you John Cole. This isn’t complicated, no matter how you try pathetically to frame it.
Obama has moved the DNC to CHI! He IS the head of the Democratic party now! To act as if he has no way to stand up and lead on this issue is to be the uber-douche that John Cole is.
You fucking apologists. Enjoy rationalizing all the ways this motha f’ng MUP busses your ass.
Desmond
Speaking as a BIG Obama supporter, I must say that I am very disappointed in his actions, and I think a lot of you guys, John included, are being overly defensive of our MUP. We can be disappointed in Obama and still support him over McCain.
But the fact is that Obama is the presumptive nominee; he’s someone who wields a lot of influence over the party right now. If he spoke out strongly against this capitulation, the House and Senate leadership would listen.
And I don’t think it would be this huge political risk, given that most Americans actually do oppose warrantless wiretapping and telecom immunity, when the issue is explained clearly. Standing up for progressive causes and constitutional issues is not what’s hurting the Dems; what’s hurting them is their routine capitulations in the face of Republican pressure. They are perceived as weak because they act weak.
srv
I think MH did the trick, they’ve thrown up the white flag.
They’ll be doing a lot of that this year.
Doug H. (Fausto no more)
Pander to us! Hillary did! Speaking of whom, where is Fightin’ Hillary herself? She has nothing to lose either, shouldn’t she be making a stand right now?
Oh, right, she is not to be named lest some start pearl-clutching again. Odd that the ones loudest ‘criticizing’ the MUP are the ones who were the loudest against him during the primary, though. Even though Senator Clinton herself isn’t going down with the ship. Things that make you go ‘hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm’.
Corner Stone
“So Bill couldn’t get health care passed with a Democratic majority, but Obama will be able to clean up Bushmess after Bushmess with no problem!”
You fucking clown. The so-called D majority stuck the shiv in at least as hard as the R portion.
Hmmmm, let’s see. There’s a D majority now yet somehow they are voting to pass a wet dream of a Republican bill to protect the telco’s. I’m thinking there’s something here…
Why won’t some leader fucking LEAD on this and listen to the people?
Oh wait, he doesn’t give a fuck about the people, just their checks…
nepat
Here, here, John! Caterwauling from a bunch of whining, weepy babies is what we’re seeing here. Their candidate didn’t deliver exactly what they demanded. Boo freakin’ who. Nevermind that the Democrats in Congress boxed him in and forced his compromise (to contradict them would suggest a divided party). Let’s ignore their votes and hammer away at Obama – the best candidate for the presidency that this party has seen since … Kennedy. It is just so disappointing that his support is tissue-paper thin. Go vote for McCain you miserable cry-babies. Get Hillary on the phone to pander, I mean, console you.
J. Michael Neal
Senator Mortgage doesn’t have anything on the line.
Doug H. (Fausto no more)
Sure, they’d listen. Then they would ignore what he said and go right on ahead. Hell, look what they did to Jimmy Carter – or even the Big Dog during impeachment.
John O
BH-Buck,
Dude, if you think Obama’s very PRESENCE in a national election isn’t taking the biggest risk of all on a daily basis, you need to step out once in a while.
Jesus Christ, I’m embarrassed for you, and I HATE being embarrassed for other people.
If you don’t think the man has balls of steel, you ARE a moron. You bet your ass I’m talking about a widow and two fatherless chilens.
When you show me that level of courage, come back to me. Until then, try to think rationally from time to time. You know, walk a mile in another man’s shoes?
You might be too young to remember, and if that’s the case you’re forgiven. I’m not.
And, central to my point, the history of Mankind is not pleasant for change-agents.
Zuzu's Petals
Sorry if this was posted or linked somewhere else, but I didn’t think it’d hurt to post O’s full statement again here:
Sojourner
He did at the time he did it.
mapaghimagsik
I think making immunity an issue would play well with Ron Paul Republicans. There might be a play there.
Corner Stone
Oh Doug H. (Fausto no more)…
If HRC did step up at this point your kool-aid brigade leader would instantly toss up another post about how EVERYTHING MUST be about HRC!!! All HRC all the time.
The GWB voting fool and other igmo’s like him would screech at the top of their lungs about why she won’t just fade away for God’s sake!
Shorter me: Fuck you Doug. Ask your savior to save us.
Doug H. (Fausto no more)
How much of the party did he have behind him?
Sojourner
As I recall, he pissed off a bunch of his colleagues. Which is why making a principled stand can take guts. Especially since he was anything but the leader of the party and didn’t have much clout. But he did understand the unique role of the senate.
John O
Dodd had nothing to lose, ever, and was counting on us.
They’re weren’t enough of us. Not unlike Obama’s politics on the matter.
Get it?
Desmond
What did they do to Jimmy Carter? Are you saying that Obama does not have any influence over the Democratic Congress? Hell, he even has some influence over the Blue Dogs, otherwise he wouldn’t be taping advertisements for them.
Corner Stone
“the best candidate for the presidency that this party has seen since … Kennedy. It is just so disappointing that his support is tissue-paper thin. Go vote for McCain you miserable cry-babies. Get Hillary on the phone to pander, I mean, console you.”
What? You mean since Bill Clinton who had an actual resume with executive experience? BHO has a BETTER resume then Bill Clinton?
Are you for real?
BH-Buck
Doug H, you’re kidding, right? If you check out my web site, I think you’ll see just how foolish and misplaced that statement was.
John O, I’d rather walk a mile in ladies pumps – thank you very much!
;-)
srv
I know some who have sent him money, but not if he folds on this. MUP is going to do what he did with Hitlery. He’s going to tack to McSames right.
L. Ron Obama
Well, if HRC were the nominee, she would have made the same statement as Obama except probably without the promise to try and knock out the immunity provision later. And Corner Stone would have been her first defender.
I’m just inferring, of course.
nightjar
Corner Stone. vacuous Hilltroll. Larry Johnson is missing one his pus filled Zombie troopers. Comes here now and then to show us what a genuine asshat sounds like.
srv
FACTS ARE IRRELEVANT! HE IS POWERLESS! THE PARTY WOULD ABANDON HIM!
BH-Buck
I Fix-ted it.
John O
Oh, for Christ’s sake, Desmond.
Do you honestly think Obama would have more influence over the Blue Dogs as nominee than he would as President?
OT, I have some riverfront property in the heartland I could use to sell.
Repeating now: PRINCIPLE IS FOR SHIT until you WIN. And I think Obama has principles, he’s demonstrated more than I’ve seen in a long time, but you gotta know when to fold ’em.
Where am I? This is Politics 101 shit.
Genine
That’s just it. He’s the PRESUMPTIVE nominee. Right now, the poeple Obama supposedly have power over, have power over him. Come August, they can vote for Hillary. Remember, the primary was very close and it took superdelegates to win it. For some reason, the Democratic party really wants to cave Bush on this. Hell, aside from, literally, a handfull of senators and congressmen, they have been fighting to cave-in. There must be something going on behind the scenes because, really, the bill is really bad.
So, as it stands, the party has power over Obama. His nomination isn’t sealed-yet. Not only that, half of the party wants him to fail or they want Hillary. So, these magical powers you’re according to him do not exist.
The party elders really want Bush and the Telcos to get away with this and they’ve done a lot to make that happen. Who’s to say they’re not putting pressure on Obama?
I do NOT like what Obama is doing with this. It pisses me off. But I am not going to pull out the self-righteous indignation at this point.
BH-Buck
Can you imagine the STINK everyone here would have made if that had been the case?
John O
BH-Buck,
I don’t give a flying shit about your shoe preferences. Address my point about Obama’s balls, with which I can hardly believe he can have a normal gait with.
Haven’t you read how many black people think it is a waste of time because “he’ll be dead” before anything gets done?
When you risk your life and family for PRINCIPLE, let me know. I’ll be on your side, even if I disagree with the principle.
srv
That’s different.
Desmond
I said I think he has SOME influence with them, otherwise assholes like John Barrow wouldn’t be getting him to tape commercials for them.
This is NOT a time to fold ’em. The president has a fucking approval rating less than 30%! The public does NOT support telco immunity. Yet you guys are acting like it would be some huge risk for Obama to take a stand! It wouldn’t be. It’s a perfectly logical step for him to take, given the circumstances.
Wonk
Screw FISA, I want to see Fuckhead’s dog riding a bicycle.
Desmond
And furthermore, the Republicans in Congress were in total disarray, in a state of panic over what’s going to transpire in November. The Democrats, led by Obama, should have been smelling blood. Go for the fucking jugular! Say “fuck you Bush, you’re not getting your precious immunity.”
Instead, this is like manna from heaven for the Republicans. Obama pisses off his base by not taking a stand, the Dems appear weak and craven yet again, and Bush gets everything he wants.
Church Lady
Just out of curiousity, when did the prevailing opinion of the BJers go from “Obama’s kicking the bitch’s ass” to “ooh, he barely won and it took the Supers to drag him across the finish line”? Why is anyone bringing Hillary Clinton into the conversation? Remember, she lost – he doesn’t need her, her voters or her donors. Wasn’t that the mantra around these parts, oh, about three weeks ago?
The anger is at him – he’s got control of the DNC now, not her. Why mention Hillary at all?
Gemina13
First of all, John, good post. I cannot for the life of me understand how the fuck so many people missed the sarcasm. It proves that, just maybe, more adults have Attention Deficit Disorder–or just a sustained lack of reading comprehension–than we ever dreamed.
Second of all . . . good God, I don’t know what’s worse: the panic, the flailing, and the ranting from former Hillary supporters, or the panic, flailing and ranting from so-called progressives who simply don’t realize that:
(a) you pick your battles;
(b) some battles have to WAIT until you’re in a strategic place, with better ground, better troops or higher numbers, and/or enormous fucking firepower that will wipe your enemy off the face of the earth (read Sun Tzu);
(c) and you learn when to cut your losses and fight another day.
Yes, we’re in the shit now. At various times over the years, we’ve been in it even worse. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus; McKinley and Johnson led us into pointless, groundless wars; various states enacted venomously racist legislation, with the Federal Government doing its worst with the anti-German and anti-Japanese incarcerations during World War II. This is nothing we haven’t seen before–reference Ecclesiastes, if you will–and it’s nothing we won’t defeat in the end.
For now, just hold tight and get ready. We lost a big one. We need to note the politicians who’ve been in Congress longer than one particular junior Senator, who (as noted) has a lot of illusory authority, but not a hell of a lot of real power. Compared to a man who was selected President by the Supreme Court who managed to get his cronies in places of power to help him hijack the nation, Obama has about as much power as a backbencher who suddenly comes up with a great idea. People love him, the press hang on his every word, and he’s a media darling. Let him make a huge mistake, and he’d be set adrift. No authority, no clout, no attention–NOTHING.
If we’re going to do anything, we’ve got to start laying groundwork now. And panicking every time the bricks move isn’t going to solve anything.
BH-Buck
John O, I’m not arguing with you. I gladly stand behind Obama. I also know there isn’t/wasn’t a whole lot he could do in the way of stopping this bill. I would have felt better about it if he said a little more than he did though.
But that’s not important. What’s important here is that there are some who have stated they would be voting for McCain now that Obama hasn’t solved their every little problem. Those people can not be defended, or saved. But there are some who are upset, are venting, and rightly so… and being told to shut up. That, I can not stand by and ignore.
Most people upset with Obama are not asking that he step down or whatever the hell. They are simply upset. Then they visit their favorite blog to talk about it and are promptly told to fuck off.
Has been a rough day for a lot of people.
John O
Desmond, that’s fair, and I agree with you about the atmospherics of the matter.
The problem I have with your position is that you’re questioning an unquestionably TACTICAL decision, given the time frame and the vote count, in the misguided (IMO) context of thinking he can’t do anything about it less than a year from now with super-majorities.
He’s the first black guy ever who has ever had a chance. You can’t understand why he might err on the cautious side while trying to win?
Details, schmetails. Average Joe and the wife think in sound bites, because The Man has given them no other choice, and a lot of them grew up in the paradigm of, in their defense, of thinking everyone they watch talking about this shit is Walter F. Cronkite.
One of my favorite life-maxims: Everyone secretly wishes everybody else was more like them. So it is with us political junkies.
You can’t understand the downside politics of a strong anti-FISA stance? I have some bad news for you: Average Joe and Josette voter is a moron. Obama clearly understand this, as do I.
John O
Well, BH, I can understand why you feel that way, since I share the disappointment.
But I don’t think you can point to me saying you should be told to fuck off.
I’m a free speech absolutist. :-)
I just don’t like to see the baby thrown out with the bath water. And that’s the sense I get having gone from stone-cold sober to pretty buzzed over the course of ignoring my own blog. :-)
BH-Buck
John O, lots and lots of info on your blog. Heading to bed now, but have you bookmarked. Will check your site out tomorrow.
Have a good night.
John O
You too, BH. And a good weekend to you, too.
scarshapedstar
Fuck you too, John. Obama doesn’t have to “snap his fingers and magically change the minds of hundreds of Democrats.” All he has to do is to say that, as the presumptive head of the Democratic Party, he wants to preserve the Fourth Amendment. Period.
But he won’t? Okay, that’s cool, I guess. Just don’t give us any bullshit excuses. He knows the issue as well as the netroots do. He just has Other Priorities.
Corner Stone
“Well, if HRC were the nominee, she would have made the same statement as Obama except probably without the promise to try and knock out the immunity provision later. And Corner Stone would have been her first defender.”
Are you kidding us all? The thirteen furies would’ve prevented anyone from discussing this issue here if HRC was thr presumption.
And that *promise* to knock out shit later? Yeah, that’s like promising to de-virginize a young lady.
You fucking MUP’s.
mapaghimagsik
What’s a MUP?
John O
Yes, he does, scarshapedstar.
I like to call his Other Priorities, “winning.” And arguing he doesn’t know how to do that is pretty silly, IMHO.
Like I said earlier, you have to get the stick before you can use it.
Corner Stone
“Corner Stone. vacuous Hilltroll. Larry Johnson is missing one his pus filled Zombie troopers. Comes here now and then to show us what a genuine asshat sounds like.”
Ohhh my dear NJ. Yes, the fact that I disagree with Two Time GWB Voter John Cole makes me a vacuous something or other.
Should the leader of the Democratic party, the individual who received almost 18 million votes in the primaries, not step up here? He shouldn’t show what a change candidate he is? Show us all how he’s not your typical calculating politician?
I know it’s hard to admit you sucked in the kool-aid. That now that everyone can see BHO will never fight for anything you’re a little embarassed by your empassioned love for The One.
It’s ok. It’s O.K.
TenguPhule
Where have you been? Obama has been fighting McCain on two fronts so far, when the fuck is the rest of the damn party going to help out?
John O
And let me say again, like you have a choice, the 4th Amendment?
You’re going to blame Obama for damage to the 4th? That’s just some bad reading of very recent history. Both parties have engaged heavily in trashing #4.
Like I said earlier, it is, was, and always will be what The (non-partisan) Man does: Try to get more power. Blaming Obama for the larger issue is weird. Almost racist in its lack of historical perspective.
The 4th Amendment has been shit since about 1980, and is one of very few things I still hate Bill Clinton about, since I KNOW he was smart enough to know better.
Wonk
Magical Unity Pony
Corner Stone
“I like to call his Other Priorities, “winning.” And arguing he doesn’t know how to do that is pretty silly, IMHO.
Like I said earlier, you have to get the stick before you can use it.”
John O – are you saying that fighting and leading on the 4th amendment is not a winning position?
L. Ron Obama
John has gone above and beyond in encouraging dissenting discussion here. But that has been explained to you before. Also, your post is a pleasant reminder that you have degenerated into spouting mainly vulgarities in recent weeks.
Is that a sly Muslim reference? ;)
John Cole
And you all have my permission to tell me to fuck off, call me a moron, or even call me a fucking moron, and I will return the favor. This is not our day job, where we have to behave according to certain societal rules- this is a blog. The rules have been adjusted accordingly.
Have at it.
Corner Stone
“Where have you been? Obama has been fighting McCain on two fronts so far, when the fuck is the rest of the damn party going to help out?”
What? What does Johnny have to do with this? If Obama stands up and leads on this do you not think he can more than take McCain on re: 4th amendment?
This makes no sense.
Corner Stone
“John has gone above and beyond in encouraging dissenting discussion here. But that has been explained to you before. Also, your post is a pleasant reminder that you have degenerated into spouting mainly vulgarities in recent weeks.”
What? Is this a comity post? I suggest you go back to fighting the German govt for tax rights.
Oh and John Cole? fuck off, you’re a moron, and a fucking moron.
mapaghimagsik
I don’t understand why the message of “Gosh, don’t you think telecom immunity is to cover up crimes” doesn’t seem to sink into the electorate, and into our congresscritters.
John O
Well, cornerstone, I think #4 has been largely eviscerated by the War on Drugs, which has been going on for a generation and a half, and I don’t see any politician over that time winning by arguing the WOD is stupid.
Americans are infamously (now) willing to cough up liberty in the pursuit of prosecution of people they don’t like and The Others in general (Gay people? People who prefer drugs other than MJ, Rush Limbaugh? Prosecution/habeus-free “terrorists?) have proven beyond reasonable doubt that protecting the 4th is bad politics.
Tell me why is it is, politically, with examples. I’m a Bill of Rights purist, so you don’t have to bother with me on the principles. Hell, I want the “fire in the theater” exemption overturned, because we have alarms and sprinkler systems and shit now, and fires in public places are about as rare as alien videos.
Corner Stone
Call me John Cole-esque dense here but John O – I’m just not getting your rebuttal here.
The WOD has to do with the current telco immunity how?
I get that our BoR has been bent the hell over, but just not getting your analogy.
John O
Doesn’t anyone here ever read Radley Balko?
He documents the embarrassment that is the current interpretation of the 4th Amendment for a living. It’s horrifying.
And it has little to do with FISA.
I strongly encourage all of you to take a tour.
L. Ron Obama
Corner Stone: taking full advantage of this blog’s policy of free speech while simultaneously denying said policy exists since 2008.
I’d like to apologize for saying your comments have degenerated in recent weeks. Your posting history indicates that, in point of fact, you’ve always been a complete asshole.
This has been a comedy post.
GSP
Cole, you MORAN. Perhaps the suggestion of putting a bullet in your ear when you had that ear ache wasn’t such bad advice.
You are left leaning now, quit thinking like a blind Republican. We don’t simply want a Democrat in power but someone that actually espouses Democratic values. That is the biggest difference between “us and them.” We don’t follow blindly though if we keep getting people like you on our side, that will change soon enough.
FROM DAILY KOS:
“I think the White House got a better deal than they even they had hoped to get,” said Senator Christopher Bond, the Missouri Republican who led the negotiations.
How do you like them apples, Rainman?
Where’s the fucking compromise? Smartin’ the hell up, Cole.
TenguPhule
Dumbass, Obama has a gun composed of the Fucking Super Delegates held to his head. He can’t publically kick them in the balls for this abomination if he wants to get the nomination. If he doesn’t get the nomination, he is only a junior senator.
If he endorses and votes for the complete shit, then feel free to flay him alive. I will join you.
But until that happens, this isn’t Obama’s fault.
This is that shit turd Pelosi’s baby.
John O
Sorry, CS.
The devolution of the 4th Amendment is only peripherally related to FISA. The 4th has been under assault for a long time, by both parties, because it is good politics, and because The Man fundamentally hates the very concept of the 4th Amendment.
#4 has been eroded since about 1970. Because drugs other than alcohol and prescription pain-killers are OK. Read this, and you’ll get a fuller understanding of why, even though I warn you in advance it is long and boring, me being not a professional or even competently amateur writer. But it was written a long time ago, and is still holding up just fine.
Telecom immunity is a little bit different, in that it relates more to money in politics, and class warfare. Telecom immunity is only peripherally related to the 4th Amendment in the context of the erosion of #4 because of the WOD, and The Man’s chronic inability to relinquish power, because, of course, The Man knows what is best for us.
The two issues are only tangentially related, but related they are. It may, in fact, take an ex drug-head like Barack to change the direction we’ve been on for 35 years.
L. Ron Obama
Tengu, my thoughts exactly.
John O
Sorry again, CS.
Poor minority people are HIGHLY disproportionately represented in minor-league drug crimes, and spying on them helps jail them.
Hume's Ghost
I’m not sure if there is any point in commenting since the thread is topping 400 but…
Look, I am utterly disgusted, frustrated and angered by the latest Democratic capitulation. I am seriously dissapointed with Obama for this action – I believe he has failed to live up to his own campaign rhetoric.
Am I going to vote for McCain or throw my vote away with a third party candidate? Hell, no.
But in my view, it’s not my job to make political calculations like Obama has quite apparently made here. I just want to keep my elected officials as honest as possible, and I’m not sure how to do that with voicing what I feel and why about voting Yes on telecom amnesty and expanded surveillance powers.
Corner Stone
“Poor minority people are HIGHLY disproportionately represented in minor-league drug crimes, and spying on them helps jail them.”
I’m getting that, just not sure how that fact plays here. I’ve seen your previous post and will read through it again when I’m not kicking L. Ron or TP in their empty nutsacks.
Nut up you fucking scrubs!
John O
The connection, in short, CS, is that spying on us is the roughly the same as telling us what stuff we can ingest.
Power run riot is all it is.
Corner Stone
“Dumbass, Obama has a gun composed of the Fucking Super Delegates held to his head. He can’t publically kick them in the balls for this abomination if he wants to get the nomination. If he doesn’t get the nomination, he is only a junior senator.”
You fucking clown. What else are these bought and paid for SD’s going to do? Nominate Edwards? Gore? Fuck you, you silly piece of shit.
However, if you choose to continue with your head in the sand and make excuses of why Obama can’t actually *lead* on an issue that is important to huge block of his supposed support, well then that’s your problem.
Shorter TP – Oh Noes!!! Messiah can’t possibly stands up for that! The pressure to does right mays be too intense for him to do the right thing!
Fuck you equivacator.
nightjar
You should actually read my comments today and other days on this subject. BO is a calculating politician, it’s just that I happen agree with his calculated politics more than those of any other candidate in the race. And the only thing I’m embarrassed about is watching torch waving “told you so hilbot” idiots making an flaming ass out of themeselves, like say you CS. You waste my time responding to your pathetic and adopted wingnut spittle spraying nonsense.
If I were a doctor, I’d recommend a shot of some sort to bring you back from the vaporous wingnut-like netherworld you reside in. But then maybe it’s too late for that.
Hume's Ghost
Also, I mean, c’mon!
A president who has unprecedented unpopularity levels, is arguably the worst president in American history, had an historical defeat of his party in the last election, who is now approaching lame duck territory, looks as though he is going to get telecom amnesty which he couldn’t get from a Republican led Congress from the Democrats who were voted in because the public was sick of Bush vassal Republicans with the Democratic candidate for Presidendt voting Yes on it as well.
Practical considerations or not, that’s still like a massive kick in the balls. People are going to be pissed.
Corner Stone
“Corner Stone: taking full advantage of this blog’s policy of free speech while simultaneously denying said policy exists since 2008.
I’d like to apologize for saying your comments have degenerated in recent weeks. Your posting history indicates that, in point of fact, you’ve always been a complete asshole.”
Oh L. Ron…this only proves your lack of remedial reading skills. Of *course* I’ve always been an asshole on this simpleton’s blog. I disagree with The Dear Leader.
Follower’s such as yourself just can’t take that. We all understand you’d be more comfortable if we all went along with your trope.
Sorry I couldn’t make myself more clear here months ago when I started by telling JC he could fuck himself over his inane anti Democratic rants.
John O
Gotta call it a night.
Thanks for giving a shit, every one of you. That alone puts you in rarified atmosphere in American politics, though I have a feeling that may be one of those paradigms Obama can shift this fall, if enough of you are able to get past the tactical trees.
Losers change nothing.
Corner Stone
“You waste my time”
I would respind here but it looks like Hume’s Ghost just slapped you right where your balls would be if you had any.
“it’s just that I happen agree with his calculated politics”
Seriously? You agree the 4th amendment means nothing and that by ducking and covering BHO is in a better position to win somehow?
What an unmitigated follower you are.
CharlesF
John, I have been reading your site for a couple of weeks and somehow didn’t get what a jerk you were. No longer, after all your insults in the post and comments.
For some of us, the Constitution is the main issue after these last 8 years, and think it should be a top priority for Obama, too. This isn’t just about doing what’s politically expedient. Obama has earned a lot of respect and followers for ‘telling people the truth, not what they want to hear.’ It was time for him to stand up for what is right, not go along. If you are unclear what this bill means, please watch the video of Turley on Olberman today:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/20/turley-on-new-fisa-bill-its-what-any-criminal-would-love-to-do/
This is the exact place a leader takes a stand. Your insults show you don’t get the gravity of this situation for the future of the Democratic party and for our country. I have better places to be.
Frank Jacobs
John,
I’m with you, man. Some folks are obstinate ideologues (what, you really thought you’d left those behind in the GOP?) who are unwilling to compromise a single principle even if they know they already don’t have a chance in hell of getting their way on it, and even if a compromise could win them the rest of the whole damn bag of principles. Fortunately, most of us do grow up and graduate to the real world eventually, so there’s hope yet for the worst of ’em.
In the meantime, all I can say is, buck up, son, it’s a long way to go ’till November and we can’t be having this “enjoy President McCain” talk now. Let’s just suck it up and move on. There’s real fights ahead, so this mishagass of slinging mudpies around the playground can wait.
nightjar
Take your BHO and your other tired insults and your stupidity and go shove it up your worthless ass. And the BHO thing tells me your also a racist piece of shit, just like your ButtBuddy Lukisiak.
Seriously!
Just Some Fuckhead
John O, you seem like a smart guy. Here’s some smart advice: Don’t rassle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it.
These folks were trashing Obama six months ago for different reasons and they’ll be trashing him six months from now for other reasons. All yer doing is allowing them to imagine they have credibility.
Michael Brown
Telling us we make you cranky is like telling us we make water wet.
This is IMPORTANT, god damn it. I read you all the time and mostly like what you have to say. Fuck Obama for not fighting this harder (NO, he DID NOT do everything he could to oppose it), and fuck you for treating it like it was minor appropriations bill pushed by some backbenchers.
John Cole: Wrong about the Republicans, wrong about the War, now wrong about the Constitution.
L. Ron Obama
There was until recently this other candidate who was staying in the race in case of a complete Obama collapse… whose shot at the nomination was predicated upon convincing the SDs to convert en masse… let me see if I can remember her name… c’mon, work with me here….
Conservatively Liberal
My my! Some of you do go on such that I think you’ve got the vapors, you poor dears. It’s the end of the world as we know it, and it is all Obama’s fault. Right. Do go on.
I see lots of new names here who say that they are not going to donate to Obama anymore, as if I am to believe that they have ever done so yet. Or they will vote for him but not lift a finger to help or donate. Big fucking whooptee-doo, as if I give a shit. You vapor-locked idiots go on and do whatever you want, and Obama will do what he has to.
There is no way Obama can stop this, and no matter what he does he will piss off someone. So this is a lose-lose proposition, no matter how you slice it. He said he does not like the amnesty provision and he will work to remove it but I really doubt that the presumptive nominee who is a junior Senator is going to be able to do it. Why?
Because I am a realist, not some pie in the sky idiot like some of the posters here. I know that the junior Senator who is the presumptive nominee for the Democratic party is not Superman or the Messiah, unlike some of you morans. There are limits to what he can do, and the most progressive body in our government just approved what they wanted. Obama is one voice, and a weak one at that. It is not his fault this is the way it is, but these are the cards he was dealt and he is playing with the hand he is holding, not the one he wishes he had.
I am sure that more than a few of the dissenting voices are former (and still current) Hillary supporters, and some others are ratfuckers out to have some fun with this. Any Obama supporter worth their salt (politically) know that this is a big to-do about nothing, a tempest in a teapot. Obama is only one of over 500 voices in this FISA vote, and he is not going to stop the yellow dogs stampeding to pass this. If anything, they would love to tell him to shove it just to show their constituents that they don’t agree with the presumptive nominee for president.
Politics is a battle of wins and losses. While I am not happy to see this crap happening, I am smart enough to know that it is not Obama’s fault. Anyone who thinks that simplistically needs a brain transplant. I do believe that if Obama is president, these would be powers that he would not abuse like the current occupant does.
The ‘tough on terrorists’ Democrats want this for the upcoming election and that is the end of it. This takes it off the table and puts it on the back burner. Dreggas made what I think is a valid point that was largely ignored. We want the culprits, and imprisoning the telecoms will not accomplish anything when people like myself want to see the people who are responsible for ordering these breaches of law to be put on trial. Why the big deal on amnesty? It is likely that the prosecutor in any trial would probably grant it to compel testimony, and the telecoms are not the ones who ordered the wiretapping, are they? Our current government is at fault, not the telecoms.
What about Pelosi and Reid? They have are the respective leaders in the House and Senate, yet both are AWOL on this issue. Pelosi let this come out now, so if there is anyone is to blame it is her. But nooooo, hardly a mention of her complicity in this, is there? Mrs. “Impeachment is off the table” Pelosi is not the target of the ire, just Obama. She is at fault here, so place the blame and outrage where it belongs.
I think some of his supporters will not be happy, but based on the influx of new names here who are in disagreement with Obama but claim to be (or have been) his supporters, I call bullshit. John, TZ, Genine and other regulars here are right on this, and I fully agree with them. Wail away though kids, I am sure you will get some attention somewhere. For me, I am done with this.
We have a election to win this fall, and that is my target. Same with Obama, and I have seen enough of his maneuvering to know that I can trust him to do what he feels is best. He is doing the political equivalent of threading a needle that is a mile away from him, and so far he has outperformed my expectations.
This fall. Obama wins, McCain loses. That is what I am working for and that is my focus. You other whiners do whatever the hell you want.
John Cole
The immunity portion sucks. The rest of it, from what I have read, does appear to have been a restoration of the spirit of the law to pre-Bush era setting. Others with legal training can fill you in more on the good parts of it.
But what I am merely pointing out that if the numbers were not there, the numbers were not there. If a filibuster can not be sustained in the Senate, and they can only must 128 no votes in the house, there is nothing Obama can do. This train left the station and Obama was not the conductor.
Oh, sure, he could launch a Quixotic show defense. He can even probably deliver a Special Comment on Countdown. I am sure that would make everyone feel smug and self-satisfied and happy the Constitution was bravely being defended.
Until, of course, the vote rolls around, it passes, and Obama has then alienated all the people who voted for it in the house, pissed off all his colleagues in the Senate who will vote for it, been portrayed as a loser who was unable to rally people to defeat it (“How can Obama lead the Democrats if he can not even defeat this bill?”- I can read the headlines now), and also then take shit from the GOP as being soft on terrorism- a meme that would dovetail nicely with his support for the SCOTUS ruling last week and the general overall storyline feckless Democrats have allowed Republicans to pass for the past 30 years. All that is just the added bonus of the bill passing. You all want to turn what I see as a losing situation into a lose-lose-lose situation in which Obama squanders what little political capital he has and comes out looking like a loser and a chump.
Any of you who think that Obama could have stopped this passing the House are simply smoking rock. You are not dealing with reality.
Conservatively Liberal
Here is the perfect diary at Kos for the
whinersChicken Littles over here.myiq2xu
I guess the same thing applies to Hillary’s vote on the AUMF?
John Cole
Because returning a law to the pre-Bush era status is exactly the same thing as handing whiskey and more missiles to George Bush.
Captain USA
Whatever, Republican.
Joe Beese
Nice try, myiq2xu. Just because you were right about Obama doesn’t mean you weren’t wrong about Hillary.
She was, and remains, an unprincipled tool of her corporate paymasters. She would have caved on this faster and (if such a thing is possible) even more completely than Obama did.
myiq2xu
But the votes weren’t there to defeat the AUMF and Hillary couldn’t alienate her fellow Senators, right? She couldn’t give the GOP an opportunity to portray her as weak on defense, right?
Rationalize all you want John, you got fucked by your candidate.
Desmond
Much as I hate to agree with myiq2xu, he’s right on this one. Whether the votes are there or not, you stand up for what is right. It wouldn’t be squandering any political capital; Obama would be the stronger for it. Regardless of who he “alienated” in the fucking Congress, the votes he earned elsewhere would more than make up for it.
And I can’t believe we’re still afraid of Democrats being called “soft on terrorism”. For Christ’s sake people, it isn’t 2004! That boat has sailed. It doesn’t work for the GOP anymore.
Just Some Fuckhead
The once mighty myiq2xu reduced to sneaking in late at night and snuffling about poor Billary and STILL taking shots at Obama after telling us it was we who weren’t willing to support the Democratic candidate when hers so desperately hoped it would be the queen.
You are a poor loser reduced to picking fights over things that haven’t happened.
To your point, Obama hasn’t yet fucked anyone, except you HRC fangirlz. When the Senate takes up the FISA matter, we’ll see what happens. Until then I’m cool with not prosecuting the black man for a crime he hssn’t committed.
AFTER the Senate FISA vote, if he votes for the bill, I imagine you can say some of his supporters “got fucked” but you’ll probably run into a majority who don’t really care if the telecoms get retroactive immunity from civil lawsuits or not at this late date in the game. But it will allow you to poke at someone for a day or two and make them as miserable as you clearly are.
We’ll talk then.
Doug H. (Fausto no more)
Before or after Obama drops another missive before the election? Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s another attack before November. The GOP has been the best buddies Al Qaeda could ask for.
Michael Brown
Yeah, right. Like the ACLU and about 200 constitutional lawyers have been silent on this. You want legal advice, go argue with Glenzilla . (I’d link to Jonathan Turley too, but we’ve already heard you sneer at Countdown at least once this thread. Hate to get you extra cranky.)
The law restores nothing, spritual or otherwise. It is a wholesale rejection of the 4th amendment and the precedents set at Nuremberg. It is a frank sellout to Bush and the most chickenshit Bush-enablers in the Democratic Party. It extends the damage Bush has done by establishing a precedent that every tryant we elect in the future can now point to, and which will be used in the near future to unravel every case against the higher-ups that are so near and dear to CL’s little heart. And there was no need for it, as Greenwald makes very clear.
And to CL and the other crackpot “realists” who want to sneer at the outrage over this: Yeah, I know, mofo. We don’t matter. But legislation, like an election, has consequences. We’ll start in on Hoyer and Carney right away, and we’ll get around to the rest of the Blue Dogs soon enough.. Money’s better spent there than on Obama.
handy
I swear this place is gonna be a riot next week if Obama actually votes against telco immunity or gets the bill on the floor without it.
But by all means, concern away.
Just Some Fuckhead
Half of these fuckers will shamelessly slink back into their own personal swamp. The other half will crow it was their pressure (read: making us all miserable on Balloon-juice for a week) that caused Obama to cave.
If it does go down that way, I can only hope at least one of the ants remembers the cry of victory: “Take it all bitch!”
drag0n
John. You are so FUCKING right!
It’s like the mirror image of the Keyboard Kommandoes.
It’s ridiculous.
TenguPhule
By all means, let us compare Hillary’s craptastic vote against a vote that hasn’t even come up yet for Obama.
Crime first. Punishment follows.
TenguPhule
Says the idiots who forget the convention vote is in August.
TenguPhule
How so? By not voting on a bill that wasn’t even in his Senate?
He doesn’t have the nomination until August. We can’t drag Pelosi and Reid out back to shoot them until after the votes are cast, because the stupid fucking traitors are fucking Super Delegates who as the Hillary trolls love to remind us all CAN STILL CHANGE THEIR MINDS. Obama has a gun to his head and he’s still swinging at things like ANWR and Habus. Give him next week at least before breaking out the ropes and whips.
The pooch is screwed. But that’s not the cum you’re looking for.
TenguPhule
Have you ever tried to herd a swarm of unruly cats with the runs?
scarshapedstar
Uh-huh. Which is a bigger voting block: people who give a shit about the Constitution, or telecom CEOs? Give me a break.
This issue is an absolute political albatross. It’s time you faced up to that fact. There is no public outcry for retroactive immunity. There is, however, a substantial portion of loyal, activist Democrats who are supremely pissed off that anyone would consider this shit.
Oh, and did I mention that Obama isn’t even right on the fucking merits, and neither are you? Bush’s NSA has been reading all of your emails and some of your physical mail as well, and listening in on all of your phone calls, since before 9/11. This is not conjecture. And you’d rather sweep it all under the rug in the name of “winning”. Thanks but no thanks, that looks a lot like surrender from where I’m standing.
CharlesF
There’s the heavy stink of Republican ‘do whatever it takes to win elections’ expediency about this place. And a snarling arrogance from what seems to be your regular gang towards the Constitutional idealists who have a naive attachment to the 4th amendment. I think it would have been better if you had stayed on the other side, John, and attracted your regulars there with you. The fact is it would have cost Obama nothing if he hadn’t said ‘this is a good bill.’ Doing so has seriously undercut his message and his standing with party activists and others who know the purpose of this bill.
Conservatively Liberal
Yeah, we all know that Democrats who have taken a stand against their own party always win. Obama hasn’t even voted and the crybabies are whining at full throttle that he is doing nothing to stop this. Never mind the 535 other politicians and where they stand, they are not important. If this goes through then Obama is to blame.
Idiots.
Can anyone point me in the direction of the perfect politician? The way people are whining here I would think there would be at least one example out there for Obama to follow. Anyone? Just one perfect politician?
Nope? Idiots.
fleinn
John Cole:
It just proves that politically engaged people in the US are completely insane, and easily manipulated into seriously imagining there are two sides to sacrificing the constitution.
Basically, you’re proving that if you want actual discussion about issues, in the US you will lose no matter what case you take up, no matter what the facts are – what matters is the insider calculations, the personality based claptrap, and the self- gratifying wankery that passes for political dialogue. Even among those who should know better, when push comes to shove.
This holds true for the blogosphere as well as Congress – for inexplicable reasons having to do with the wonder of democracy, where you get the people in power you thoroughly deserve.
And you, Mr. Cole, are a coward.
fleinn
John Cole:
What the law does is put any determination on surveillance targets solely in the hands of the executive branch. Just as the military commissions act let the president define the law, and decide what should be called a terrorist who can be incarcerated indefinitively, this bill removes any rule of law from the equation.
PaulB
Since that isn’t the case here, I’m not sure what point you think you’re making. If you really want to have this debate, shouldn’t you at least have read the bill and reviewed the arguments of legal scholars opposed to it?
What’s weird is how Cole and those like him are completely ignoring the real substance of the debate, both as to the nature of the changes to the FISA law, the politics of opposing those changes, and what people actually expect Obama to do (free clue: nobody expects him to wave a magic wand). Instead, it’s pointless snark and strawman arguments that make them feel better and contribute nothing to the discussion.
PaulB
Um, what does that have to do with anything? Obama has the money, he has the DNC, he’s the party’s nominee. That doesn’t mean he can do anything he wants but pretending that he doesn’t have any influence until August is pretty silly.
John S.
Have you read the bill in its entirety? Are you a legal scholar?
Just wondering.
PaulB
Really? Strange … i don’t remember “trashing” Obama any time in the past six months. Perhaps you can point me to those posts?
John S.
And where is your candidate on the issue, ratfucker? Saint Hillary has been awfully quiet lately.
PaulB
Am I a prominent blogger who has two posts on this subject on his front page?
In any case, the answers to your questions are yes and no, respectively. And since the answer to the second question is no, that’s why I go to see what the legal scholars are actually saying, which is why I’m reasonably confident that John’s assessment of this law is bullshit.
John S.
You hold John to a far higher standard than he holds himself to. The blog is called Balloon Juice, and John is its most frequent purveyor of hot air. I don’t recall John claiming to be a legal expert, and overall I find the thrust of his argument to be political rather than legal, which frankly anyone is qualified to comment on.
I commend you on having the time to do something most of Congress didn’t — namely reading the bill in the couple of days since the full text was released (granted, it’s a mere 114 pages). I don’t have the patience to read shit like that, especially when bills are worded in a way that requires you to have the entire US code next to as cross-reference for the myriad of circular statements they make.
D-Chance.
Mark my words. Mr Cole will re-register as a Republican by 2012.
Zifnab
Yes, but that’s because we’re all misogynists who subject her to the soft bigotry of low expectations. I mean, this was a big piece of legislation. What was a little old woman going to do about it?
nightjar
It’s pointless snark and strawman arguments to bray about that Obama has the power, at this time, to change what the congress is doing. Your whining and knashing of teeth for him to do something is soley a product of people like you satisfying their self-centered need for pointless displays of ideological purity.
John S.
Speaking of…did you happen to catch John Dean’s take on the bill? He doesn’t seem to think it grants all the protections people think it does – chiefly that the ‘immunity’ may only provide cover from civil suits and not criminal prosecution.
Remember, Glenn Greenwald isn’t the only constitutional legal scholar out there.
Hugh
Bob in Pacifica says, “He voted against the first version of this, he spoke out against it, and he says he’ll fight against the immunity sections in the Senate. What stand disappoints you?”
My disappointment lies in Obama’s stand in ultimately supporting this legislation. The languare he uses in his statement about it feels insufficient given the fundamental nature of the issue. TPM, Gleen Greenwald, Matt Yglesias and Fire Dog Lake make a convincing case. As I said in my comment however, I continue to be an Obama supporter. I like him. I will vote for him and continue to give money to him. Don’t demonize the netroots on this. Hard pushback on big issues is important. Aggressive right wing force has pulled (pushed? what is the proper language here?) our politics to a crazy place. Left-wing pressure is essential to counter this. Politicians respond to pressure. The netroots’ anger can feel impulsive and simplistic, and many comments are, but this is momentarily reactive. I don’t believe it reflects a substantive move of the base away from Obama. Yet I bet Obama’s people are paying attention. That’s a good thing.
Obama is now functionally the head of the Democratic Party. His political stances are formative for it so his responsibility for charting future political discourse is significant. Those of us who are disappointed feel he missed an important opportunity to clearly frame a discussion around protecting our basic rights.
John Cole, I love your blog.
shortstop
That’s for sure. But if you think John Dean is a constitutional scholar by any generous interpretation of the term, you may also believe George W. Bush would have gotten into Yale and Harvard without legacy admissions.
Conservatively Liberal
Yes he is. Head of a bunch of people who don’t want a head because they prefer to think for themselves rather than vote in a monolithic block like the Republicans. He is the head in name only at this point, and if he wins the general he will finally have a small amount of clout.
This is not the “Obama Party”, and people have to quit acting like it is. Democrats are an unorganized party, as Will Rogers famously said, and herding them in any one direction is next to impossible. All Obama would do at this point is alienate the very super delegates he needs to secure his primary win, which would not be a very smart move, would it?
Between now and November we are going to get these bouts of hyperventilating idiots who are going to try to blame Obama for whatever the latest slight that they perceive. Many of these idiots are going to be the few remaining die hard Hillary supporters, and others are going to be ratfuckers, goatfuckers and racists. A few are going to be actual Obama supporters. A few.
In the end though, it comes down to McCain or Obama. That is the finish line as it now stands. So every time some idiot thinks they are armed for the latest round of GOTCHA, they are going to head out to pro-Obama sites and shit all over the place. But in the end it will still come down to McCain or Obama as the final choices to make.
Everything else is a distraction, and we have quite a few people willing to become a distraction just for that reason.
McCain or Obama. Or nobody. Those are your choices, end of story.
shortstop
Whoa! WRONG. Okay, Cole, I generally admire your analysis, but this one is inexcusably ignorant. Before you throw hissies at people for getting upset at this legislation and Obama’s response to it, educate yourself minimally about this bill. This is embarrassing.
Corner Stone
“Take your BHO and your other tired insults and your stupidity and go shove it up your worthless ass. And the BHO thing tells me your also a racist piece of shit, just like your ButtBuddy Lukisiak.”
This thread is dead but I’m not going to let the racist BS charge stand. I understand you’re an ignorant kool-aid infected fuck but get this straight you garbage – just because people disagree with Obama as the candidate does not make them a racist.
I use all initials when I talk about HRC, BHO and refer to Bush as GWB. I shortened John Cole to JC only because I’m unaware of his middle initial, which I suspect is J for Jackie.
How in the world using BHO as a reference makes me a racist is something only sick little punks like yourself can come up with.
Of course, for those who know deep down that they are wrong and have no logical place left to argue from I guess calling someone else a racist is the classiest move left in their bag. What’s next? Going to say I’m a traitor or possibly teh ghey?
Lose.
John Cole
This certainly seems to be a bullshit accusation to me.
Although, I did not know you were shortening John Cole to JC because there is a commenter named JC in this thread.
slightly_peeved
I by and large agree with your comment, but one point: part of the reason right wing force has pulled American politics to the point it has (or so it seems to a foreign observer) is that when it comes to elections, they all pull together. When you look at successful parties in most western parliamentary systems, you’ll see a similar thing – it’s not just some evil Republican thing. Agitating for change within a party is the best way to change a party, but if the party to actually achieve anything, message discipline becomes a factor. I can’t imagine that senators Feingold and Dodd would agree with the vehemence of some of the comments here.
As a side note:
There is a website, bullshido.net, which aims to stop a lot of the con-artistry involved in martial-arts training – people charging money to teach martial-arts techniques that may be even more likely to get someone injured. As part of this work, they organise meetings through the forum where the members of the forum meet, irl, and spar in a variety of ways, to test techniques.
When these people say they’ll come kick your ass in real life, they make arrangements to do exactly that. (that being said, from my reading of the forum, they have complete respect for anyone willing to attend such an event.)
Anyone, other than these guys, who claims “courage” or “cowardice” based on an internet post is a blowhard whose opinion of themselves needs taking down a peg or two.
nightjar
It’s because BHO is used almost exclusively by wingnut Malkinites and NOQUARTER psychopathic racists. I do read the intertubes, and the rest of your comment could have easily come from the mouth of chief ratfucker and racist Larry Johnson himself. You have a nice day there CS.
MH
Saying, “I plan on voting against this bill because it gives away too much” is fucking not going to fucking piss off one fucking super-fucking-delegate. You’re completely delirious if you think so.
That said, now that a day has passed, when I reread Obama’s statement, it’s not quite as bad as it looked fresh. It’s still unnecessarily weak, but at least I do get the sense that he might want to push for better once he’s president. I still have large doubts that a) he’ll have the opportunity to do so, and b) that he’ll have the power to do so. Democrats, even with two Democratic congressbodies, do not have a stellar track record of passing real improvements. Telling yourself, “Once Obama’s president, things will all get better” may feel good but it’s complete hogwash.
The “just a junior senator” defense is completely worthless. Obama is by far the most visible politician in the country (in the WORLD, even), everyone is paying attention to him, and when you have all the microphones pointed at you, what you say and think matters a metric fuckton more than your congressional seniority.
WereBear
I’m coming in late, but I wanted to thank all the posters who delineated the siuation with such detail and care.
I was disappointed things didn’t go differently, but part of supporting Obama as my preferred Presidential candidate is the recognition that:
a) he knows a lot more about politics than I do
b) he’s done more to create my preferred politics than I have
and thus, I’m not going to abandon my support, or even whine about it, and I don’t blame him; this is bigger than him.
The way I see it, this is a Blue Dog problem. We have a Blue Dog problem because they run in conservative districts and think they have to act like Republicans to get elected.
Maybe they are right. But maybe they are not.
The current DNC, Howard Dean, and Barack Obama have embarked on a program to test these very waters. To put progressive policies like Constitutional protection into play and see just how brainwashed the voters are.
That’s the bigger picture. I don’t want to mess it up for them. I’m counting on them not messing it up for us.
nightjar
I don’t know maybe racist is the wrong term for you. Maybe you meant, BHO the scary black terrorist. If so, I stand corrected.
Corner Stone
“I do read the intertubes, and the rest of your comment could have easily come from the mouth of chief ratfucker and racist Larry Johnson himself.”
So…someone is running to be the *leader* of the free world, yet asking or expecting him to really, actually *lead* on an issue that is crucial is somehow racist? Or it is somehow, slightly, in a roundabout way akin to something you’ve read at a site on the intertubes you consider to be run by a racist.
You are a clown.
nightjar
So…someone is running to be the leader of the free world, yet asking or expecting him to really, actually lead on an issue that is crucial is somehow racist? Or it is somehow, slightly, in a roundabout way akin to something you’ve read at a site on the intertubes you consider to be run by a racist.
You are a clown.
Corner Stone
I’ve thought about it NJ, and you’re right. Now if you’ll kindly list, or point me to an approved list, of MUP Approved Free Speech and References to The Almighty MUP that are acceptable to you then I will certainly abridge my references to better conform to your definition of civil.
You can assert all you care to that BHO is a bad thing, and “everyone” knows it but that doesn’t make it true. If that is the standard then Salma Hayek and I are having an affair. Salma Hayek and I are having an affair and everyone knows it.
Or maybe I’m a racist because I said MUP? A term I believe John Jackie Cole possibly coined?
When someone disagrees with the awesomeness that is BHO they are immediately labeled as racist by fucking punk bags such as yourself. When they reject the racist label they are tagged as obvious racists because they object to being smeared as a racist. That’s a nice game you’ve got going there. Sure you’re not suckling at the Republican teat JJC paid homage to for his whole life?
nightjar
Hey man, what’s your complaint? Didn’t Cole agree with you on my initial racist charge. You should give him credit. As for free speech rules, as I understand it, they are few and far between hear at BJ. But that street runs both ways. You act like an asshole, you’d better expect to be treated like on.
:)
Dave_Violence
What the heck?
What’s wrong with FISA? Don’t we Americans want every edge we can get against our enemies? Oh, wait, it’s all a “False Flag” operation. War is Peace, Ignorance is Knowledge, etc. Forgot about that. Shoot, no one blinks at blatantly unconstitutional Hate Crimes legislation, but when it comes to legal “information gathering” – with clearly defined, written processes – and it has bipartisan approval – everyone’s shit gets dumped… ?
Idea: how about using FISA to combat spam? Just a thought…
PaulB
Which is why so few people are actually making that argument and why Cole’s rant, and yours, fall flat, since you’re arguing against something of your own creation, the classic definition of “strawman.” And, for the record, were anyone making the argument you describe, it would be neither a “strawman” argument nor “snark.”
PaulB
Not really. I was just responding to your comments more than holding John accountable. Nonetheless, given that there is yet another snarky, content-free post on this, it would seem to me that some of the attention that John is giving to attacking people like me would be better spent actually reading up on the serious issues involved, not to mention reading what we’re actually saying instead of simply making shit up.
John Cole
What is there to read up on- we both agree it is a bad bill. We both agree we would prefer it would not pass. We both agree, for the most part, on the content of the bill.
Where we disagree is on the politics of the issue. You think a valiant stand accomplishes something. I think the die has been cast and there is nothing he can do but get out of the way of the train coming down the tracks.
Woo, mixed metaphors.
TenguPhule
Wrong.
In the Senate, the only fucking thing that matters is 41 votes.
Obama could try to publically draw a line in the sand.
And then what?
He can’t bluff on this. If he calls people out on this bill, he better have 41 bulletproof votes or his ‘power’ a.k.a. credibility will crash and burn.
Hugh
Slightly_Peeved refrences the following quote from my last comment, “Aggressive right wing force has pulled (pushed? what is the proper language here?) our politics to a crazy place. Left-wing pressure is essential to counter this.”
He then goes on to say, “I by and large agree with your comment, but one point: part of the reason right wing force has pulled American politics to the point it has (or so it seems to a foreign observer) is that when it comes to elections, they all pull together. When you look at successful parties in most western parliamentary systems, you’ll see a similar thing – it’s not just some evil Republican thing. Agitating for change within a party is the best way to change a party, but if the party to actually achieve anything, message discipline becomes a factor. I can’t imagine that senators Feingold and Dodd would agree with the vehemence of some of the comments here.”
I agree. Blog comments are often impulsive vents however and I think one shouldn’t interpret them to be predictive of how their authors will actually behave when they cool down. It’s a bit like being in a bar. Having said that, I think Obama supporters are generally willing to give him a pass on a number of things out of recognition of political realities. I, for example, am gay. I’ll give him a pass on his gay marriage stand. I give him a pass on other stands too that I don’t wholly like (I like Hillary’s health care plan better). I agree that it is ridiculous to not vote for Obama or to not support him financially in reaction to his support of this particular legislation. But I believe the anger his support of this legislation brings out from the netroots is ultimately productive, even necessary, for good governance as long as it doesn’t result in silly acting-out. John Cole perhaps is worried that this will undermine Obama’s candidacy. I am not. I think the horror of a McCain presidency is too well understood for that to happen. The anger expressed by many here is perhaps better understood as a reflection of the importance of this issue. When the govt. collects information about its citizens with no real oversight, that’s a prescription for abuse. We have seen true abuse of power over the past eight years. Cointelpro is an example of serious abuse in other administrations. This is one of those structural political issues that must be attended to with great care. Think of the sociopaths who find their way into power. My god, we’ve had a such a terrifying parade of them. Who wants them to have this kind of tool? Our whole constitutional framework was designed to protect us from them. Even the Democratic ones!
TenguPhule
Not until August and the vote. What fucking part of that is so hard to understand?
He is the ‘presumptive’ nominee.
There is a difference.
nightjar
I like, most people commenting, do not like the fact that the House leadership allowed this bill to come to a vote. It’s a bad bill. Some Folks claim Obama has special powers, as the presumptive nominee to influence 105 house members to change their votes, when they are obviously in pre election self-interest mode. To Make such a claim of Obama’s powers is either a strawman argument or a moronic one (And if you chose the latter, i wouldn’t disagree). So Take your pick. And what again are the strawmen and snark arguments you were accusing people like me of.?
And as for snark it lives everywhere on the tubes, even where it’s not apparent.
scarshapedstar
Question. If Obama votes to break a filibuster on this awful bill and then votes “no” on it, can we then become pissed off?
scarshapedstar
Uh… maybe in beltway gasbag world. Back in reality, I actually LIKE seeing a Senator take a principled stand for truth, justice, and the American way, even if everyone else is too corrupt to join him. Didn’t they make a movie about that once?
nightjar
You can be pissed off at whatever he does and express it almost any way you wish. And I’ll do the same. Whatever Obama does, I’m sure it will be thought out given the reality of the situation, that he’s in the midst of campaign for the POTUS, and not necessarily to sooth the delicate sensibilities of a few outraged liberal purists. If the dems have 59 votes and Obama then votes no to the filibuster, then I’ll be pissed. Otherwise not so much. Although maybe a little disappointed.
If you really believe he may be for this bill and amnesty for telcoms when He’s actually president, I wouldn’t blame you for staying home or writing in HC on election day.
scarshapedstar
So you’re willing to state that it’s perfectly A-OK for the government to listen in on all of your phone calls and read all of your email, eh, comrade? Good thing you’re not one of the 300 million “liberal purists” who don’t want to live in an Orwellian panopticon.
I sure do wish I’d get a little Unity spread my way now and again. I mean, granted, my concerns are awful paltry…
nightjar
The above is dishonest bullshit. As has been said here about 500 times today, Obama is not responsible for what the congress does and holding him so, is just silly. And for preening “liberal purists” to wail on about how he should “do something” dramatic and cause more dem infighting in the midst of POTUS campaign is plain childish. I curse the warrantless wiretapping started by Bush and have since it was revealed, so fuck off wanker.
You don’t know what will happen in the senate and what Obama will do. ALthough, this might be an early indicator.
TenguPhule
And it would be a nice stand. And if he doesn’t have the votes, you’ll have a choice in November.
Hillary or Fuckstain.
And the shitbill will still have passed.
Instead of bitching on Obama for things he hasn’t done yet, try putting some pressure on the assholes in the Senate who ARE in favor of pissing on American liberties.
TenguPhule
Yes. SATSQ IV.
humpf
John, what facile, dishonest bullpuckey. You’re basing your insulting “whiners” claim on the false premise that voting against a FISA revision would cost Obama the election. Um, no, considering his previous stand was in fact part of the issue.
Also, considering the point that FISA works just fine without the compromise and this bill and the urgency is based on falsehoods and retroactive immunity, I think opposing it would have little cost compared to supporting it.
Voting for the “winning” side is not the point – it will cost Obama little if he the bill passes anyway and give him freedom to fix it if he’s elected. There is a definite cost, both now and in the future, if he doesn’t.
Obama holding the same position he’s held before is not “going down with the ship”. If you think politicians should abandon positions just because their vote might be on the side which doesn’t prevail – you really don’t get how the whole democratic process works, do you?
Also it is dishonest to say people are expecting Obama to singlehandedly defeat the bill – they want him to take the same stand he already has done. It’s also bull to pretend it’s a foregone conclusion the bill will pass the senate, although having the presidential nominee cave doesn’t make it easier. You seem to forget that a win at all costs bull means electing a candidate too weak to do the things his supporters want.