The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

Barack Obama

Obama Supports FISA Legislation, Angering Left

By Paul Kane
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) today announced his support for a sweeping intelligence surveillance law that has been heavily denounced by the liberal activists who have fueled the financial engines of his presidential campaign.

In his most substantive break with the Democratic Party's base since becoming the presumptive nominee, Obama declared he will support the bill when it comes to a Senate vote, likely next week, despite misgivings about legal provisions for telecommunications corporations that cooperated with the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program of suspected terrorists.

In so doing, Obama sought to walk the fine political line between GOP accusations that he is weak on foreign policy -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) called passing the legislation a "vital national security matter" -- and alienating his base.

"Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program," Obama said in a statement hours after the House approved the legislation 293-129.

This marks something of a reversal of Obama's position from an earlier version of the bill, which was approved by the Senate Feb. 12, when Obama was locked in a fight for the Democratic nomination with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).

Obama missed the February vote on that FISA bill as he campaigned in the "Potomac Primaries," but issued a statement that day declaring "I am proud to stand with Senator Dodd, Senator Feingold and a grassroots movement of Americans who are refusing to let President Bush put protections for special interests ahead of our security and our liberty."

Sens. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) continue to oppose the new legislation, as does Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). All Obama backers in the primary, those senior lawmakers contend that the new version of the FISA law -- crafted after four months of intense negotiations between White House aides and congressional leaders -- provides insufficient court review of the pending 40 lawsuits against the telecommunications companies alleging privacy invasion for their participation in a warrantless wiretapping program after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"The immunity outcome is predetermined," Feingold wrote in a memo today.

Obama came down on the side of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who argued that a provision in the new law reaffirmed that FISA, and that act's courts, gives the final say over government spying. President Bush has argued that a war-time chief executive has powers that trump FISA.

"It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance -- making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law," Obama said today.

Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the most prominent Republican opponent of the compromise bill, issued a statement today calling that exclusivity provision "meaningless because that specific provision is now in [the] 1978 act." Specter said Bush just ignored existing law in starting the warrantless surveillance program.

Posted at 6:41 PM ET on Jun 20, 2008  | Category:  Barack Obama
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Trust in Congress Scrapes the Bottom of the Barrel | Next: Obama Targets "Enron Loophole"


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



It is possible that Obama may eventually turn out to be - through his own brain-dead carelessness or by forces beyond his capabilities to counter - a real disappointment to his ardent supporters like us.

The immediate, intense, and vehement criticisms of Obama's position of FISA-2008 do worry me, however. First, remember that Obama's support is for FISA-2008, not for FISA-1978. Pay more attention and we shall find out that FISA-2008 prohibits Presidents from using war powers act to justify abusing surveillance law. It certainly improves the situation a lot better than the FISA-in-practice of the last 7+ Bush years. From what I could tell, it enhances, not diminishes, our civil liberties. My criticism on Obama is not about his support of FISA-2008, but lack of specifics about how he will "monitor" its enforcement. Without effective monitoring, even good laws can produce evil results.

Second, I think Obama's action will make it easier for him to proceed with his plans for broader international issues. The opponents on Obama's Iraq plan, for example, cannot label him as having surrendered to the terrorists with no defense against American people. This will be cited as one example against the sellout charge. Obama will need more opportunities like this not less.

Obama is not running for President of Humanity, but I wish he could act like one. First he should be elected President of USA. Second he should govern USA as President. Third he could help promote the peace and harmony of the entire humanity a little bit. In everything he does now, he better think of the consequences of his actions in all three.

No, Obama did not act like a mere calculating politician by supporting FISA-2008. A mere politician would have denounced FASA-2008 like Michael Dukakis or John Kerry would have done.

Posted by: Jai Ryu | July 7, 2008 10:09 AM

Chris Redford...spot on!
People, READ the FISA amendments before you throw your tirades to the masses and appeal for support. It's SOOOO simple in this day to research something; it's literally a click away and you will find that the amendment of FISA 1978 prohibits activities the current administration assumed over our privacy and liberties.
I will say that I think there is ONE part of the amendment that is ambiguous and could lead to opportunistic advantage so often represented by Bush n' Bastards; that of allowing eavesdropping in "emergencies". However, it is the only thing that I dislike about this amendment; the rest (listed below) actually reign in the powers that FISA originally allowed.

The bill would also:[3]

* Require FISA court permission to wiretap Americans who are overseas.
* Prohibit targeting a foreigner to secretly eavesdrop on an American's calls or e-mails without court approval.
* Allow the FISA court 30 days to review existing but expiring surveillance orders before renewing them.
* Allow eavesdropping in emergencies without court approval, provided the government files required papers within a week.
* Prohibit the government from invoking war powers or other authorities to supersede surveillance rules in the future.
(from Wikipedia)

Posted by: P.Lost | July 7, 2008 7:41 AM

People........vote your conscience. You don't have to vote for what the mainstream media thrusts in your face! They're manipulating the American public. There is also the Constitutional party's Chuck Baldwin, Libertarian Bob Barr (who will be on all 50 state ballots), and Independent Ralph Nader. And please no McCain. No more Bush's please.

Posted by: Jane | July 7, 2008 1:56 AM

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. - Declaration of Independence

Posted by: Jane | July 7, 2008 1:54 AM

From The Trail article:
"Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) today announced his support for a sweeping intelligence surveillance law that has been heavily denounced by the liberal activists..."

I know people who are NOT "liberal activists" who also denounced this law. Why do journalists have to make it seem as though ONLY "liberal activists" have this opinion? What ever happened to objective journalism?

Actually, the fact is that conservative activists would be more likely to denounce this law because it gives MORE protection to our individual privacy, not less. The Bushies don't want us to have this protection, but Barack does.

Posted by: McBuff | July 4, 2008 6:03 PM

Most of the people on here are reactionary idiots who haven't even read a SUMMARY of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (it can be found on Wikipedia).

FISA was established in 1978. It has been a governmental spying act for 3 decades. This bill that Obama is supporting actually makes it HARDER for the executive branch to abuse FISA. It requires them to have more authorization and prohibits them from using "war powers" as an excuse for ignoring surveillance law.

Also, those telecom companies were pressured by the NSA to help with surveillance. If *you* were pressured by a government agency to help them, wouldn't *you* want immunity from lawsuits?

So all you idiots who are screaming and crying that Obama betrayed you need to shut the hell up for a minute and read the actual summary of the bill. It actually gives MORE protection to your privacy, not LESS.

What the hell is going on here? This is the world turned upside down. People don't want to think, read, and make informed judgements anymore. They just want to react. Well you are going to end up screwing youself out of the best presidential candidate since JFK with an attitude like that. Be like Obama! Actually THINK before you react!

Posted by: Chris Redford | July 3, 2008 1:57 PM

Undated internet news stories are *useless.*

Internet news vendors hear this: place the *full date* of your story in reasonably large type somewhere near the headline or byline for the convenience of the reader. Be aware that he may be reading the story at some point well after the date of publication. In the event he's looking for the *most current news,* he'd like to be able to find that out easily.

Posted by: Daniel Winn | July 2, 2008 6:58 PM

DO NOT VOTE YES ON FISA............PLEASE!

Posted by: R J PLUTA | July 2, 2008 6:56 PM

"There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live--did live, from habit that became instinct--in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized."

"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing."

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

- Courtesy of George Orwell, "1984"
http://www.smarthomesllc.net

Posted by: Daniel Byrne | July 1, 2008 12:00 PM

They aren't listening because they don't care what you have to say. The plan is already set and they will continue with it no matter how much you reject it. If you post on blogs, they will ignore you. If you write your Senator's or Representatives, they will delete your message. If you protest in the streets, they will strike you down (check out YouTube anti-war protests in Oregon).

Wake up, we do not live in a Democracy. We live in a country controlled by a small group of wealthy elite who prey off of our hard labor and suffering.

Welcome to America, what it always was and still is.

Posted by: John | July 1, 2008 8:48 AM

A copy of the letter I sent to Obama:

Senator Obama,
I would like to start off by saying that I am a 22 year old college student at the Pennsylvania State University. I waited 5 hours in line to be one of the 22,000 people that came to hear you speak when you visited my school during the primary season. I am one of the many students that voted for you here, ultimately delivering you Centre County, PA during your race with Hillary Clinton. I have donated money to your campaign, it was not much but I gave what I could, despite the astronomical debt I have incurred to receive an education. I consider my donation to be an investment in my future, analogous to spending money to go to college. I have every intention of voting for you in the general election, a vote you will need to beat the conservative supporters of John McCain in Pennsylvania. This will be the second election I have voted in but it is the first I have truly been active in and excited about. You are certainly an inspiration to a younger generation of educated people that have watched in disgust for the past several years as George Bush has made every attempt to destroy this country and what it stands for. You are perhaps the first politician in a long time that even seems to be listening to the younger generation, acknowledging that this is our country too and that our opinions matter. All of that being said, Mr. Obama, I write to you with disappointment in my heart. Your campaign has stood on a message of change, you run as the man who will change the way things are done in Washington. You have spoken about many issues that are important to me that other candidates have ignored entirely such as net neutrality and refusing money from lobbyists. These are things that give me hope for the future of my country. The most important issue to me though, is the reinstatement of our precious Constitution of the United States. George Bush has used the Bill of Rights as a checklist of things to take from the people in the name of the war on terror for far too long. Some of your most meaningful words "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution", delivered in March of 2007, would have been reason enough for me to vote for you.
A little over a week ago, you announced your support of the new FISA bill. This bill endangers Americans' guaranteed right to privacy, encompassed by the fourth amendment, which we have not enjoyed since George Bush passed the Patriot Act and began amassing unprecedented executive powers without judicial oversight. So for the first time since your campaign began, Mr. Obama, I am seeing you as merely another politician, making idle promises to the people of this nation with a silver tongue. With one action, decisively chosen no doubt to make you look "tough on terror"; you have turned your back on those of us that believed you to be different. Even only as an attempt to deflect republican accusations of your inability to defend this country, even just as a means to get into the White House so you can really do all the good you have been promising to this country; the support of this violation to the bill of rights is in no way justifiable as a means to an end. That is the logic of President Bush and it is not by any stretch of the imagination a change to the current politics of Washington. It is because of your FISA decision that I will not be making any further donations to your campaign nor will I be volunteering any more of my time. I write to you so that perhaps the next time you are faced with a slippery slope, you decide to make the right choice; the one that protects the rights of the citizens of this country and not the one that earns you a few political points. I will still be voting for you in November and although you have lost my enthusiasm, Mr. Obama, my hope remains.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2008 4:38 PM


Think you know who this man is?

This possible President of the United States ?? Read Below and

ask yourselves, is this REALLY someone we can see as the

President of our great nation!!!!


Below are a few lines from Obama's books; In his words!


From Dreams of My Father:
'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'
From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'

And FINALLY the Most Damming one of ALL of them!!!

From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'

We CANNOT have someone with this type of mentality running our GREAT nation!!

I don't care whether you a Democrat or a Conservative.
We CANNOT turn ourselves over to this type of character in a President.
PLEASE help spread the word!

Posted by: Donna | June 28, 2008 2:53 PM

The integrity, security and safety of our national telephone and Internet communications systems must become a major concern as we look forward to Change in November.

Private government contractors monitor all U.S. telephone and Internet communications. Some of these private contractors are corrupt or have weak internal controls.

60-70% of the National Security Agency and the CIA's National Clandestine Services budgets are paid to private contractors. See http://HappinessHacker.com for links to NYTimes articles and respected sources that document private government contractor concerns.

Do you think all these private security contractors are honest and honorable?

The War on Terror is a $100+ billion industry, the people and organizations profiting from it will not let go easily.

Can we have fair and free elections in November if our telephone and Internet communications systems are compromised?

Please give this issue some attention.

Posted by: Happiness Hacker | June 28, 2008 2:16 PM

1cwd18yupbl9pca7 http://www.107033.com/268683.html > 15ztt60jaaghr [URL=http://www.241402.com/155999.html] 1gk6dob3h [/URL] 7rgnk7gcac1fr42

Posted by: 6h5mh56nlc | June 27, 2008 3:37 PM

m87n2opx http://www.1074477.com/444534.html > 0dow01xg1bhe [URL=http://www.669419.com/580473.html] nr057o93 [/URL] w49zh1m486y7ej

Posted by: dqp648qkqk | June 27, 2008 11:21 AM

It isn't the NSA we have to worry about. It's the private contractors they have hired to mine the data and their secondary customers. Everyone who has used a computer or cell phone now has a data file at one of these creepy companies. Our comments, work, and personal information is accumulated in these files at the speed of light. It affects our educational opportunities, credit ratings, insurance ratings, potential copyrighs and patents of itellectual property, and makes us unique targets for advertising, harassment, and discrimination. There is no oversight of these companies and no option for Freedom of Information requests. There is no opportunity for us to review these files and correct inaccuracies. It pervades every aspect of our lives.

Posted by: LA | June 26, 2008 9:47 PM

Wake up! Very left progressive here. I have been a strong Obama supporter and I am delighted to see his spine-ful stance on the new FISA legislation. I too am for it. It actually STRENGTHENS the Constitutional aspects of FISA, weakens the executive powers (are the rest of you READING the bill's text or just parroting lefty talking points?), and I too am for telecom partial immunity. Why should they pat for Bush's evilness and incompetence? Separately, we knew from the start that Obama was not progressive; we core highly informed Obamaites are for him because he is honest, uncorrupt, and thinks for himself. Bravo!

Posted by: Susan Taylor | June 26, 2008 5:27 PM

A wold in sheep's clothing...

A silver tongued devil...

A handsome devil...

He speaks with forked tongue...

[Add your own cliche here]


Oh, just wait you blind supporters, the best of Obama is yet to come...

He WILL be the final blow to this ailing country begging for a second of rest and recovery. What has been set into motion, the march toward a fascist state that tells you how many children you can have, when you must go to the doctor, tracks your every move, dictates your "rights", taxes what you exhale, can not be reversed.

You asked for it, watched it happen, had a chance to protest in the streets, but did nothing and now you will have your tyranny. Marvel as the velvet glove is slooooowly removed and the iron fist comes crashing down...

Posted by: Leaving Soon... | June 26, 2008 4:14 PM

HAHAHA. You idiots keep voting against your own interests. The best candidates were Kucinich and Ron Paul, based on their voting records and more.

On his AIPAC address, Obama says that he will do "anything" to prevent Iran from getting nuclear power and to defend Israel. He sure does sound like a Bush/McCain.

Go Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich!!!

Posted by: bleep | June 26, 2008 4:02 PM

What part of CHANGE do Obama supporters not understand?

Posted by: spintreebob Schmidt | June 26, 2008 12:33 PM

ROFLMAO........."whatever happened to Obama?" has to be the funniest phrase ever written!!!! You Obama supporters didn't want to know about him; and now you're surprised that he would vote with the Republicans? Perhaps if you had taken the time to check out his voting record (or lack of a voting record) in the State of Illinois you wouldn't be shocked today?

Posted by: Marie R. Rutherfold | June 25, 2008 3:19 PM

My erudite, sophisticated, and considered response to this news?

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

And to think, many of you thought Obama was the Messiah, Martin Luther King, and Santa Claus wrapped up in one nice, very clean, and articulate package. The double-whammy this past week was when the Obamessiah lied through his pearly whites and backflipped on public financing for his campaign.

Yup, you guys thought The Millenium was at hand, but now you've got the sick feeling that you've been suckered by the "Same Old S*** from Chicago."

Well, guys, take heart--the good news is that Obama is an "inclusive" kind of guy: there's room for everybody under his bus.

Y'know what I mean?

Posted by: MarkJ | June 24, 2008 5:53 PM

He just lost my financial support.

No more donations from this sucker. And to think, I actually started to *believe*. Shame on me. Wish I had that money back now.

Posted by: Robert | June 24, 2008 5:22 PM

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

"best of my ability" is our current president's "out."

"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

There is no "out" for the Senator and constitutional scholar; support the filibuster!

Posted by: neveragain | June 24, 2008 4:43 PM

ron paul is an idiot selling political fools gold. he doesn't know the first thing about applied Liberty.

Posted by: jp | June 24, 2008 4:33 PM

My head is spinning. I'm sick to my stomach. He promised not to support FISA only a few months ago. Now he's supporting Bush's worst actions. I have no where to go. I will not vote for McCain. I will not vote for Obama. What happened to Obama???

Posted by: Pat | June 24, 2008 4:29 PM

Posted by: derek | June 24, 2008 5:24 AM

"Barack is not the nominee - he won't be the nominee until the Convention. The people still have a chance of getting Hillary as the nominee"
Posted by: Iowatreasures | June 22, 2008 2:19 PM

---------------

Yeah, but first you go and save your girl, just out there begging for some money to clear up her debt...she's counting on you and all the PUMA's....

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2008 1:49 AM

Hello all..... my 1st post to this board, so I will try to walk softly :>)

It's good that the "War Between the States", aka "the American Civil War" was settled in the 19th century. Had it happened in the post-WWII era of the 20th century, North America would probably be a mass of little republics by now.

It is also good that WWII happened in the 1940s..... We woud lose a big one like that pretty quick in the 21st century.

You keep your cell phones in your ears all the time, being sure to do all your personal business at crowded checkout lines......... you post your innermost political opinions on these VERY public boards... and yet you pretend to desire privacy???
It's okay for us to "spy" on each other......... recording everything on new wave cameras and vidcams, but Big Brother should keep it's bloody eyes wide shut and plug it's ears?

Hypocrosy and arrogance rule the day. Whoever presents the majority favourite image on television and u-toob is our next prez. It's takes $$$$$ and lots of it to produce the images....... if I had just awakened from 40 year nap, I d figure the whole ball of wax must be a big-huge tee vee show...... i'd doubt my own existance and have to wonder if the terminaters and the matrices had taken over whilst i was napping.

Stop the hate. Vote for your candidate and be prepared to do what you can to make the World better regardless of which puppet.......i mean man..... wins.

be nice :>)

McCain and Obama don't scare me. I have faith that either candidate will be an improvement over what we've had for the past 15.5 years.

Posted by: EigthAv | June 24, 2008 1:45 AM

Presumptuous, elitist, arrogant, or not, there are now only two truly viable candidates for the office of president.

While I wish Obama's position on this issue was more radical, more of a "change," I still feel he would undoubtedly be a more progressive President than McCain.

It's completely understandable that the "we-don't-enjoy-our-civil-liberties-anyway" republi-droids would flood the discussion on this article. It's a given. What bothers me are the liberal impostors whose line of logic implies that the only way things will ever get better is if they get much, much worse. As though effective change can only be achieved though some kind of punishment.

Pointing a finger at the more thoughtful, progressive candidate, saying "look, look, he's not progressive ENOUGH" at this point in the campaign can only tip the scale toward a far less thoughtful and progressive presidency. It gives me the feeling some of you just don't want people to be happy. Face it - with 4 months to go, no momentum and no cash, it is fantasy to imagine an independent or 3rd party candidate stealing this election.

I sincerely hope progressive Americans do not choose to martyr their vote for the ideal of a greater revolution to come. Regardless of the candidacy of Paul, Barr or Nader, that revolution will not really be on the ballot this November. Please, please use your influence to encourage people who may not understand the importance of your fringe candidate to at least vote for the more progressive of the prevailing options.

Posted by: marshal | June 24, 2008 12:47 AM

I Wrote a special comment about this at.

http://allhiphop.com/forums/thread/20200119.aspx

Posted by: jonathan34us | June 23, 2008 7:46 PM

Here's why I've decided to vote Libertarian...

I was all set to vote for Obama in November. Now I'm thoroughly disillusioned.

I could never vote for the McCain either. After all, he supports the telecom immunity too. Indeed, every Republican representative but one voted for it (for the Democrats, 45% voted for it, 55% against).

I went to the Obama blog to post my protest. There were many other angry posts there too by other disillusioned Democrats. And then guess what happened - all our posts disappeared. The Obama moderators "solved" the controversy by deleting all our posts.

Forget Obama, forget McCain. I'm voting Libertarian. Bob Barr, you've got my vote, by default.

Posted by: Roberto | June 23, 2008 7:40 PM

Katie:

March 28, 2008--(CNN)--The University of Chicago said Friday Barack Obama accurately described himself as a onetime law professor at the school, despite the fact his formal title was "Senior Lecturer."

The university's statement comes after the Clinton campaign recently suggested on several occasions that the Illinois senator was embellishing his role at the school by calling himself a professor.

The campaign also sent out a press release quoting a 2004 Chicago Sun-Times column that stated of Obama's professor claim: "Several direct-mail pieces issued for Obama's primary campaign said he was a law professor at the University of Chicago. He is not. He is a senior lecturer (now on leave) at the school. In academia, there is a vast difference between the two titles. Details matter."

But in a statement, the university said its senior lecturers are considered professors.

"From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School," the statement said.

"He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track," it also said.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/28/university-of-chicago-obama-was-a-professor/

Posted by: whatmeregister | June 23, 2008 2:07 PM

"As bad as Obama is, a rejection for Obama means Mcbush in power. So what do you people want? Another destruction of the republic for 4 more years, or Obama? You people are so confused, you people should take logics classes, on how to think, how to choose. How can you not choose the lesser evil of 2 evils?"
Now you know his strategy. Tell the young and the gullible what they want to hear,and have your operatives demonize the republicans to get the nomination, then do your thing. This guy is truly scary. You think the republicans are taking away your civil liberties wait until this guy gets in office. Wake up!

Posted by: StephenM | June 23, 2008 12:22 PM

What's left out of the description is that the new FISA bill does NOT grant retroactive immunity from criminal charges.

He also mad this statement:
"[The bill] does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses."

I'm hoping to see a filibuster personally, but we'll see.

Posted by: Bryan in Miami | June 23, 2008 11:14 AM

Obama, you just lost me, I am now looking for a presidential candidate. Bush 44 is out of the question. Ron Paul is looking better all the time, but if Paul supports this lousy legislation he will be gone also. Then who?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 10:55 AM

Katie, give it up. Barack Obama was listed as a "Professor" in the University of Chicago directory. What your post has to do with the FISA issue, I can't fathom.

Sorry Hillary bombed, but get over it.

Posted by: Fact Check | June 23, 2008 7:04 AM

I could care less about amnesty for the telecoms.

What has been shrouded over in the clouds of technology is that the NSA has been and this law will allow the NSA to continue to listen to and mine ALL Internet traffic. That includes you and I posting to this site. That's the way the Internet works, there is no way for them to choose who to listen to. Then if they find something interesting, they're supposed to go to the FISA court.

Posted by: smc | June 23, 2008 6:56 AM

This is truly Senator Obama's audacity of betrayal: His small donors believed in his Hope for Change and Democratic values of civil liberties. Senator Obama and his fellow Democratic Leaders cannot compromise such values. The game is over.

Posted by: peace4world | June 23, 2008 6:44 AM

Obama wasn't a professor at the University of Chicago. He was a lecturer. He never got tenured.

Posted by: Katie | June 23, 2008 5:28 AM

For a professor of constitutional law to add his name to a list of sleazy legislators deliberately undermining the fourth amendment and the criminal laws of the U.S. makes the oath he will take in January already a lie. Same for McClueless, who, if he should take the oath would be being no less deceitful. Along with Pelosi who defines incompetent legislator and who has damaged our national security by not allowing the impeachment of Bushboy what is happening to us?

Posted by: cyberman | June 23, 2008 3:29 AM

The Bush regime has created enormous hatred and disrespect for the United States. A recent world wide poll found that George W. Bush ranks at the bottom of world leaders as one of the least trusted along with US Pakistani puppet Musharraf and the Iranian president, Ahmadinejad, who has the disadvantage of being the victim of demonization by the US and European corporate-controlled media, which serve as ministries of propaganda for the governments that control their broadcast licenses. The American and European media lie for their living.

If Americans return a Republican regime, Americans will validate the right of the president to violate with impunity US and international law. Americans will validate the use by the president of the United States of deception and lies in order to initiate wars of aggression, aggression that is a war crime under the Nuremburg standard established by the US. Americans will validate the infringement of US civil liberties in the name of "safety" and "national security." Americans will disembowel the US Constitution and leave themselves at the total mercy of the government.

If a Democratic House of Representatives will pass a retroactive law in order to legalize the criminal violations of a Republican regime, the same House will pass a retroactive law making illegal what you did legally yesterday. No one is any longer safe in America. By abandoning the US Constitution, Republicans and Democrats have made America as potentially unsafe as Zimbabwe for anyone who takes exception to the government.

The total collapse of the Democratic Party and the House of Representatives signals the end of liberty and democracy in America. Henceforth, led by the Republican Federalist Society, we will gravitate toward the beautiful regime of "energy in the executive" that has been achieved in Zimbabwe by Robert Mugabe.

Posted by: Anti-Mccain | June 23, 2008 12:53 AM

To hell with Mccain !! Mccain is a real psychopath !! and his supporters are right-wing evangelical lunatic psychopaths like nazis, who hate muslims, black people and immigrants. And that's why they want Mccain in power, so that he can turn USA into a gulag jail. So no way. If Mccain becomes presidents, we will rise up and bear arms. We will not permit another 4 more years of Republican Party zionism

Posted by: Marxist-Socialist | June 23, 2008 12:35 AM

As bad as Obama is, a rejection for Obama means Mcbush in power. So what do you people want? Another destruction of the republic for 4 more years, or Obama? You people are so confused, you people should take logics classes, on how to think, how to choose. How can you not choose the lesser evil of 2 evils?

Posted by: Marxist-Socialist | June 23, 2008 12:30 AM

In saying that he will meet directly with the president of Iran without preconditions, Obama has single handedly undermined Europe's effort to rid Iran of it's nuke program. I wish Obama would just put a soap in his mouth and stop being so quick to criticize others when he's got major faults of his own. The hypocrite!

Posted by: Maggie | June 22, 2008 11:43 PM

WHY IS LARRY SINCLAIR IN JAIL? AND WHY IS NOBODY REQUESTING THE TELEPHONE RECORDS OF OBAMA FOR THE PERIOD OF TIME HE WAS SUPPOSEDLY ENGAGED IN SUSPECT BEHAVIOR?

WHY WOULD YOU COVER AN ALLEGED MCCAIN TRYST WITH NO BASIS IN FACT AND THEN NOT COVER SPECIFIC TIMES AND DATES ON AN ALLEGED OBAMA DRUG AND HOMOSEXUAL TRYST. THE SOONER YOU INVESTIGATE AND PUT TO BED THE SOONER PEOPLE WILL QUIT TALKING ABOUT IT BUT IGNORING WON'T MAKE IT GO AWAY.

Posted by: dave51 | June 22, 2008 11:20 PM

I agree 100% that Obama's stance on the FISA revision is poor judgement (the business about the telecom immunity is just a smokescreen to take our eye off the real objective: domestic spying). But all of you who say you won't vote for him or he is more of the same politics as usual:remember, there were many who said the same about Bush and Gore. We all know now that is a dangerous way to think. He may not be perfect but he is far better than McBush. Keep writing all your senators to fight this atrocious bill and protect our 4th ammendment rights.

Posted by: richard | June 22, 2008 11:14 PM

The FISA legislation is a chance for Obama to show he is really an agent for change.

The FISA bill is an abomination. Not only does it give immunity to telecoms who do not deserve it, it basically legalizes one of the most egregious (and unnecessary) assaults on civil liberties ever prosecuted.

I have been an Obama donor, but won't give any more unless Obama comes through on this one. This is one of the things that needs to change.

Posted by: MMC | June 22, 2008 11:07 PM

I will reserve my judgement about this until I hear more from the candidate himself. Clearly, there is more to this story than we know right now.

All of the trolls posting here today can't sway my support. Fear is powerful but lies are even worse.

Posted by: Susan | June 22, 2008 10:24 PM

I am sending money to Ralph Nader as we speak! I'll vote for a Communist before I'll vote for any politician that supports 'Home Invasions'. You take away my privacy and give it to billion dollar monopolies, and expect me to support your campaigns?

Posted by: 90014 | June 22, 2008 8:08 PM

Obama's a phony. He had a Period.

Posted by: No Sense At All | June 22, 2008 7:37 PM

Obama is a smooth talker. He's got America in bed on a first date. That is smooth. I read this today:

http://www.observer.com/2008/spike-lee-predicts-chocolate-city-under-obama

Posted by: Rico Suave | June 22, 2008 7:27 PM

Another reason to reject Senator Obama. First, he broke his promise on campaign finance. Now, Obama supports FISA's Spy Program. As a Constitutional Lawyer, Obama should know better. This is wrong. No Obama.

Posted by: mmarii | June 22, 2008 7:26 PM

Obama's a phony.
Period.

Posted by: Yoschoharo | June 22, 2008 5:56 PM

Obama will fail to raise the same level of cash as he did before, now that he has reversed many promises that he made to people.

Posted by: Katherine | June 22, 2008 5:37 PM

Finally, some people are waking up to con. If anyone thinks that the democrats are going to pull out of Iraq or not take advantage of technology to intercept communications coming and going to terrorists, then they are truly naive. Obama supports FISA. The democrats just passed a bill to support the troops until June '09. A bill that has no pull out dates connected to it. Are you awake yet? How many red flags to you need until you realize that those you elect will do whatever it takes to prevent another 911?

Posted by: StephenMartin | June 22, 2008 4:38 PM

"It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance -- making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law"

WRONG. The only way to send that message is to punish the President for Violating the law. This would involve:

1. Impeachment
2. Subsequent Criminal Charges

Sadly, no one of significance on the hill has the balls to do it :(

Posted by: Phillip | June 22, 2008 4:07 PM

As a supporter and donator to Obama's campaign I am devastated that the democrats have caved on fisa. Some things are worth fighting for and this is one of them. The dems are back to their old tricks of taking us progressives for granted and doing what is expedient for them. If Obama caves as we expect he will then all of us on the left need to stop sending him funds. Lets send him a message that we wont be taken for granted and we can do that by not sending him money. He may regret passing on public financing after all.

Posted by: robbe p | June 22, 2008 3:13 PM

Posted by: PUMA | June 22, 2008 3:01 PM


"Audacity.-The Real Barack"


Being sold now! ;~)

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 22, 2008 2:35 PM

When will Obama choose his VP?

Posted by: Jordy | June 22, 2008 2:22 PM

"So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program."

So its McSame (to quote the Obama supporters) vs. OSame.

So - was Hillary's stated position so evil after all? Guess it doesn't matter now that BHO is the nominee. And he adopted her position.

Posted by: Echo21 | June 22, 2008 2:13 PM

------------------------------
Barack is not the nominee - he won't be the nominee until the Convention. The people still have a chance of getting Hillary as the nominee - but the super delegates are going to have to start reading their e-mails and taking the phone calls from the eighteen million people who want Hillary to be the next president.

The super delegates "endorsed," they haven't voted yet. Obama is presumptious, arrogant, self-serving and sharp elbowing his way into the nomination - he hasn't won the nomination yet. We need to get fired up and keep him out of the White House. gw.

Posted by: Iowatreasures | June 22, 2008 2:19 PM


To an educateed person:

You know that people who donate less than $200 don't have to be identified. The "employees" of drug companies and oil companies and other major industries don't have to be identified.

Who is monitoring these contributions? Who knows where Obama gets his money from? He used to get it from Antoin Rezko/Auchi - and perhaps he still is. Obama is "buying" this election, he isn't earning it.

Many states where Obama outspent Hillary 2 and 3 and 4 times to one, she beat him anyway. And, have you noticed, since Obama only brought in the same amount as McCain did in May, we haven't seen any rip roaring crowds like we did before. I think people are realizing Obama has enough money, they may as well keep their money for gas and food. No Obama, never, never, ever, ever. gw.

Posted by: Iowatreasures | June 22, 2008 2:15 PM

"So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program."

So its McSame (to quote the Obama supporters) vs. OSame.

So - was Hillary's stated position so evil after all? Guess it doesn't matter now that BHO is the nominee. And he adopted her position.


Posted by: Echo21 | June 22, 2008 2:13 PM

Well I said it from the start, Obama is not a real leader to our party and this is another reason why I will not vote for him. He talks about special interest in Washington D.C. with all the powers and now he gaves them a very big one which is to SPY ON US. Thanks OBAMA

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:19 PM

Does anybody notice that the Fannie Mae scandal with Obama's VP search party being related to race? Or is it a racial coincidence.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1077/is_6_56/ai_72502699?tag=rbxcra.2.a.3

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:13 PM

As a recovering Republican, I must show my utter contempt for the Republican Party, their neo-con fascist supporters and their Democrat accomplices. They have sunk to the level of Soviet era politburo members.

Democrats are now serving as enablers and criminal accomplices. This latest piece of Stalinist spyware, (FISA w/ex post facto, telecom immunity), authored by the Bush administration hacks and sheparded through the Congress by Steny Hoyer and the rest of the Democratic leadership is just the latest in our slide toward a police state.

For those diehard Democrats that believe Barak Obama is going to miraculously save the country and convert all the Nancy Pelosis' Steny Hoyers' and the rest into real Democrat Representatives,
there's more bad news.

Obama is reconstituting many of the Clinton admin cronies for his campaign staff and possibly his cabinet.
You remember the Clinton administration cronies dont you? The ones that brought us the Waco Massacre, numerous domestic scandals, the destruction of Yugoslavia and the resultant Bosnian Civil War. The unprovoked and illegal bombing of Kosovo using NATO as cover. The Nato/UN occupation that turned a blind eye to our friends the Kosovo Albanian Mafia's slave trading, drug and weapons smuggling and murder for the last nine years. And more!

Airstrikes on aspirin factories in Karthoum. Weekly airstrikes on Iraq civilian targets for Clinton's entire term of office causing hundreds if not thousands of civilian deaths and billions of $$ of destruction.
Mad Bomber Madeline Albright appears to be heading up Obama's campaign operation. She is (in)famous for stating that 400,000 Iraqi children's deaths as a result of the US controlled Iraq sanctions were "worth it."

I'm afraid that there is nowhere to go for either Democrats or Republicans this November without more of the same and possibly worse. Holding your nose and voting for the lesser of evils won't get it! Lesser of evils is still evil.
It looks like Bob Barr for me. I believe he is also a recovering Republican

It is long past the time to give both the House and the Senate a thorough "House Cleaning." Any Congressman or Senator (one third of the Senate is up for reelection)that has served for more than two terms should be updating their resumes. Maybe they'll find out what it feels like to be a working American in the society and the economy they have created for the rest of us.

and not to mention the north american union is also coming which will destroy american sovereignty.

See this video at.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU0EA

Posted by: jonathan34us | June 22, 2008 11:15 AM

Good Morning! :-)

Soooooo,


What has "Barry" O'Flip-Flopa "Changed" on Today?


Seriously, anyone who has been to the guy's Website, and had to REGISTER first in order to get in and see anything about what he does not want you to know, should realize HE lives to collect people's Information to use!

The illegitimate "Big Brother", you never Wanted! ;~)

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 22, 2008 10:55 AM

Lol

Posted by: JakeD | June 22, 2008 8:51 AM

Obama changes his mind of often that he'll probably flip-flop back to Islam when he's elected. Everyone will be living in Obamaland. Only in America can this story happen.

Posted by: Oracle | June 22, 2008 5:26 AM

This was a major test of personal integrity. I am so sorry that he failed this challenge. He is our only nominee now and has already failed us all.

Posted by: weltec2 | June 22, 2008 4:56 AM

But what did Obama just get passed? A bill that gives Bush everything he wanted on spying powers, and about 99% gives immunity to the telecoms. Basically everything the Republicans wanted.

So, if this was a 'compromise' what did Obama and the Democrats get? Pretty much nothing. That's not compromise, that's surrender. Except to surrender first you have to oppose and the Dems don't even oppose. So, that's not surrender, that's collaboration.

Quisling for President! Yeah!

Posted by: Samson | June 22, 2008 4:48 AM

For anyone who thought Obama would not accept this compromise and support telecom immunity, you haven't been reading his website. He emphasizes being sick of ideology (ideas that protect the Constitution and our rights) and he emphasizes "reaching across the aisle" which means, screw our rights, he'll let Republicans do whatever they want to us. Not standing up for what you believe in is something Obama has been specializing in since this race started. He has rarely taken a stand on anything, and now this evasive tendency is finally being noticed? Wake up people.

Posted by: ShellyT | June 22, 2008 4:15 AM

these blogs are better than Saturday night live.

Posted by: justadad55+ | June 22, 2008 3:56 AM

Politics IS compromise, with out compromise the laws don't get passed. very few laws are supported in their infantcy by a majority. To get them passed it requires people working together. Give and take. Taking a hard view on the FISA law stops it from passing but does NOTHING to improve the situation as Bush is openly breaking the law as it is. Creating a new law even an imperfect one, provides the frame work to prevent abuse (at best) or curb it(more likely)

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 2:19 AM

Watch carefully how Obama audaciously plays the race card in the coming weeks.

Posted by: Independent | June 22, 2008 2:00 AM

"So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program."

I am so disappointed that Obama said this. I'm beginning to find it hard to believe in any promise or pledge that Obama makes.
I listened, with my friends, to his televised words and promises months ago. We got disappointed that he has failed to keep his them. The tragic thing is that he's not even president and already the reversals are happening. We're not as enthusiastic about Obama now as we were during the caucuses. When we talk about Obama in these days, it's mostly not positive. At first, we felt that he's got novelty. But this has worn off. Somehow, he's not as likable as when he gave that speech at the last Democratic Convention. Obama today is a shrewd and calculating politician, ironically more than the veterans in Congress.

Posted by: Grace | June 22, 2008 1:42 AM

Obama will lose in California and, ironically, in Iowa this November.

Posted by: Oracle | June 22, 2008 1:17 AM

Obama doesn't have a clue. If he gets elected, he probably won't be around long, from what I hear.

Posted by: Mimi | June 22, 2008 12:58 AM

"So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program"?

What a delusion...The general election campaign has just started. Obama made a big mistake, so did Democratic Leaders.

Posted by: Susie | June 22, 2008 12:48 AM

I'm only surprised that anyone is surprised. Do you really think BO has a problem with being Big Brother? I've seen for many months on his site comments by posters "Don't question HQ - they know what we should do", "HQ knows best", "Obama will lead us, we must follow". Wake up and put down the kool-aid before it is too late!

As to Pelosi - she sold us down the river when she said impeachment was off the table the minute she took her seat.

PUMA!

Posted by: TheUnityPonybrokealeg | June 22, 2008 12:33 AM

Nobama:

Another Republican

Posted by: Gator-ron | June 21, 2008 11:40 PM

Truthhurts:

There is no test for Obama, he has already said he will waffle on this one. He may be adroit in how he handles voting the wrong way but wrong he will be. Not everyone who is against Obama is a Republican but I think you are.

Your name is a misnomer. the truth helps. Apparently you are unaware of that.


Posted by: Gator-ron | June 21, 2008 11:38 PM

I HOPE you Obamatards will CHANGE your minds before it's too late. You've been had by a phony man in an empty suit. Just think, he's already screwed you and he isn't even president yet. Idiots!

Posted by: Nobama | June 21, 2008 11:37 PM

i will say this if he truely supports this he is no better then bush. looks like he is trying to show he is a strong defensive mind but all i see is a weak back bone.

Posted by: phil | June 21, 2008 11:31 PM

Educated person wrote,
"he seems to vote against the Republicain stance from time to time."

That was at one time true. Using the standard of frequency of voting with the administration as the standard, 95% in 2007 and 100% in 2008. You are thinking of the McCain at the start of the decade.

One other issue taxes. In 2001 he said the tax cuts were skewed to the rich. The growth in wealth of the top quintile compared to the lower four and particularly the growth in the wealth of the top 1% and .1% has been astronomic. This proves that McCain was right. In 2003 he disagreed with tax cuts when we are fighting a war and we still are and will be if he has his say. John McCain flip-flopped on this issue and changed from being correct to incorrect. I can tolerate flip-flops but not changes that are foolishness.

I am a believer in allowing the ignorant to be themselves as long as they are not hurting anything and when they are you have to clean up after them.

Posted by: Gator-ron | June 21, 2008 11:27 PM

I'm very disappointed by Obama. He's turning into the same as everyone else.

Posted by: Razzle459, US | June 21, 2008 11:25 PM

McCain votes yes for this bill and that proves he is McSame. Obama says he would voted yes on the bill, and that proves he is a wonderful and effective politician?

Posted by: Sternberg | June 21, 2008 11:20 PM

If any of you truly were thinking of voting for Obama and are disillusioned, it's time to get real.
===========================

u need to get real and understand not everyone against Obama is a republican. Your addiction to the kool-aid has clouded your commen sense and judgement.

Posted by: Truthhurts | June 21, 2008 11:18 PM

For those of you who are Republicans complaining about Obama, It's sour grapes from the loser. If any of you truly were thinking of voting for Obama and are disillusioned, it's time to get real. Sure he was wrong and he'll do the politically expedient thing when he finds it's necessary. He is a politician not a saint and he will not be ethically pure, he is a politician. He is a good one which frustrates the Republicans. On the issues he is on the right side, he has demonstrated competence and thoroughness. Because he disappoints you on this issue does not mean that he will chose the expedient way on every issue.

With the gas tax holiday he told the truth. McClain has consistently lied as he panders on the energy issue. Obama's approach is to solving problems which means making compromises. Problems that have not been solved like health care are not going to be solved without compromise. You live in a world with other people who don't necessarily think the way you. You are much better off with Obama in the White House than McCain so get over your moralistic attitude and do something to improve this country. Barack is blessed but he is not an angel.

Posted by: Gator-ron | June 21, 2008 11:02 PM

First off I like most of the people who read and post here DO respect everyones right to form their own opinion, and post their respective thoughts. But please if you are going to rant and rave with rumor and factless drama... this is not the site for you. Whether you are for or against McCain, Obama or whoever, if you are commenting, use factual info and leave the hate at the door.

I am an independant, undisided at that.

On Obama, Opting out of public finacing actually is in line with his CHANGE message. The public finance money is provided to each candidate from the treasury from contributions made by individual tax payers annually when filing taxes. This system is pretty fair yet does but allow people to choose WHO they wish to support. Obama Opted out which allows him to raise funds privately which allows his to POTENTIALLY raise more than the roughly 87 MILLION he would be given through PF. The fact that no candidate sinse 1976 has opted out is not a reason to take it. No candidate sinse 1976 has been able to generate the kind of money to consider it as a choice. That is a FACT. So how does this sit with CHANGE. From early on Obama set strict rules as to who he would accept money from. He stood hard against taking money from lobbist and the like. So limiting his intake to actual US citizens has resulted in over 80% of his donors contributing 200$ or less. This is change because as many politions have said if you take from lobbist enough... you owe them. The only person the president should owe loyalty to is the American people. Not lobbist not companies, and not other politicians. By opting out with the means in place to limit non-citizen influence that IS CHANGE.

On the position of FISA, once again there is a lot of BAD info on the subject. One the current bill is a compromise. It moves closer to the center ( but not in the center) to allow action instead of Stagnation. Two READ OBAMA'S STATEMENT ON THE BILL. It is NOT a glowing indorsement of the bill, he clearly says he is working to REMOVE THE AMNASTY portion of the bill. There is more to it than i'll sign the bill.

On McCain

McCain's support of the bill is seen as some as continued support of President Bush. Perhaps it is, but McCain has defined him self as an advocate of national security. This is in line with his views. McCain's invitation to town hall meeting sounded like a good jesture on the surface, not it seems more like pandering. McCain is rumored to do well in SMALL groups in town hall meetings, but I have seen very little coverage of them on TV. What I have seen is not encouraging for the man "Of Straight Talk" As he didn't answer not ONE of the questions asked of him... he simply turned it into a talking point about his campain, views, or love of the country. That being said McCain is a dynamic and interesting candidate. I would not label him a maverick, but he seems to vote against the Republicain stance from time to time.

Some say McCains call for off shore drilling is a reversal, betrayal, or flip floping. It has been said many times He IS BIG on the environment. I think a call for the drilling was a difficult desission, one that examined the potential for environmental impact, to the results of the last 15 years of not providing new resouces to secure our energy future. Most of us know if they started drilling tomorrow, oil would not make it to our cars for 5 to 7 years MINIMIUM. But the fix to the energy problem is multi-tiered. There is no simple solution, a fix will require short, mid, and long term solutions. Yes, invest in alternative energy, some of it is available now... Most is YEARS even decades a way. Hybrids help some but they dont pull a 20 ton SEMI to the store to supply us. Raising milage standards can promote invention... but can also cripple the auto industry if over done. But the biggest thing to consider is there are 100 million gas/deisel vehicals on the road... if the solution existed to offer a new engine that got 200 mpg... how many of use could afford to do so... your trade would be WORTHLESS, as know one will want anything but 200 MPG. Sure the oil companies will take a hit.. ... I think most of us are willing to live with that, but the fact is it would take many Years, over a decade to replace the currnent autos, and you would STILL NEED GAS. if the vehical was all electric, IT STILL HAS OIL, So new fossil resources will always be needed.
( we also use oil in thousands of other things like rubber)

Finally I hope that my post shows a LITTLE thought went into it using facts as FACTS and stating my opinion clearly as " I THINK, or MY OPINION". And remember there is always more to be researched. I picked a few talking points to discuss.

Remember, Ignorance is no excuse... and rumors have their roots firmly planted in it.

Posted by: an educateed person | June 21, 2008 10:53 PM

As a recovering Republican, I must show my utter contempt for the Republican Party, their neo-con fascist supporters and their Democrat accomplices. They have sunk to the level of Soviet era politburo members.

Democrats are now serving as enablers and criminal accomplices. This latest piece of Stalinist spyware, (FISA w/ex post facto, telecom immunity), authored by the Bush administration hacks and sheparded through the Congress by Steny Hoyer and the rest of the Democratic leadership is just the latest in our slide toward a police state.

For those diehard Democrats that believe Barak Obama is going to miraculously save the country and convert all the Nancy Pelosis' Steny Hoyers' and the rest into real Democrat Representatives,
there's more bad news.

Obama is reconstituting many of the Clinton admin cronies for his campaign staff and possibly his cabinet.
You remember the Clinton administration cronies dont you? The ones that brought us the Waco Massacre, numerous domestic scandals, the destruction of Yugoslavia and the resultant Bosnian Civil War. The unprovoked and illegal bombing of Kosovo using NATO as cover. The Nato/UN occupation that turned a blind eye to our friends the Kosovo Albanian Mafia's slave trading, drug and weapons smuggling and murder for the last nine years. And more!

Airstrikes on aspirin factories in Karthoum. Weekly airstrikes on Iraq civilian targets for Clinton's entire term of office causing hundreds if not thousands of civilian deaths and billions of $$ of destruction.
Mad Bomber Madeline Albright appears to be heading up Obama's campaign operation. She is (in)famous for stating that 400,000 Iraqi children's deaths as a result of the US controlled Iraq sanctions were "worth it."

I'm afraid that there is nowhere to go for either Democrats or Republicans this November without more of the same and possibly worse. Holding your nose and voting for the lesser of evils won't get it! Lesser of evils is still evil.
It looks like Bob Barr for me. I believe he is also a recovering Republican

It is long past the time to give both the House and the Senate a thorough "House Cleaning." Any Congressman or Senator (one third of the Senate is up for reelection)that has served for more than two terms should be updating their resumes. Maybe they'll find out what it feels like to be a working American in the society and the economy they have created for the rest of us.

Posted by: jsbar | June 21, 2008 10:33 PM

Obama, we want a response.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 10:14 PM

Did You Know Cindy McCain Was A Drug Addict?

Cindy McCain has one hell of a scandal in her past. In the mid-nineties she was addicted to prescription pain killers. Worse, she was stealing the drugs from the American Voluntary Medical Team, a third world relief organization she founded. Like most ridiculously rich people, she didn't have to go to jail for her crimes and was allowed to enter a rehab program rather than face criminal charges. The charity was shut down.

So when Cindy McCain says, "All I know is that I've always been proud of my country," take it with a grain of salt. She spent at least three years stoned out of her mind. It's impossible to know what she thought during that time. Was she really proud, or was she just hallucinating?

Cindy's addiction has been virtually ignored this election season. As a thought experiment, try to imagine what the reaction would be if Michelle Obama had a history with drug addiction? If Michelle Obama had stolen drugs meant for third world countries to support her own addiction?

Of course, we want to leave spouses out of politics. But if Cindy is out attacking Michelle people are going to start throwing rocks back at her glass house. She'd have to be high to think otherwise.

Posted by: Stumblefoot | June 21, 2008 10:06 PM

The only thing that is important in all of this is for Americans to clearly see that Democrats and Republicans all work for the same interest groups. The Democrats have not "caved in" to Bush; ultimately they want to do the same things he is doing for their own ends. Given the actions of Pelosi, Obama, and the Clintons (Bill Clinton lied us into war with Serbia just like W lied us into war with Iraq) it is amazing that anyone can still believe the Democrats are any more enlightened than Republicans. They all are willing to murder in the name of Democracy just like in Medieval times when people with good intentions murdered in the name of "faith"

At Least that kosovo war ended, unlike iraq, let's face it, the two party system is lost today as usual.

Posted by: jonathan34us | June 21, 2008 9:59 PM

Fret naught; The papacy/Jesuit order/tyrannical evil is, as always, in control.

Posted by: vegangilante | June 21, 2008 9:56 PM

Why does this not mention that Obama stated that he will try to have the part about immunity for the telecom companies removed from the bill?

Posted by: adl | June 21, 2008 9:54 PM

The Bob-bob, LOL! :-D

FYI- There is ZERO Maverick in O'Bomba-Nation.

Reid, and Pelosi are the ones FORCING Him to do it!

Seems now that they think THEY are about to get control, or, The Lord only knows for whatever other Reasons(Cough-Cough);

They Like the Bill NOW!

That's right-Pelosi and Reid pulled the Empty Suit's strings, and made it go along!

And so will Daschle, Kerry, Kennedy and George Soros-Whenever they want!

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 21, 2008 9:54 PM

I guess this just proves that Obama is the "Maverick" in the race. McCain follows Bush and the Republicans lead on last gasp drilling for negligible oil and Obama stands up to his Left wing on National Security! Wow! Where are the headlines??

Posted by: thebob.bob | June 21, 2008 9:45 PM

I'll bet Richard Nixon would have liked to have had "Barry" allow Wire-Taps BEFORE Nixon's Administration! ;~)

Snooping got him Impeached!

For what it is worth;

Barack O'Flip-Flopa,

Was Against Invading People's Privacy before he won the Primary, and could then be For It! ;~)

"Change",-You better "Believe" it!

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 21, 2008 9:36 PM

Posted by: tomabrahams | June 21, 2008 9:31 PM

The comments on this blog are truly amazing. It goes to show how ignorant americans are. You all do realize that most of the people that are so upset are voting for Mc Cain anyway? Obama just took away one of the talking points from the repuliblicans... that he is soft on the "evil doers". People this is politics. He can't do anything to change the current system if he is not elected. He is very smart and understands the rules of the game.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 9:11 PM

Very bad move, very sad.

This measure gets rid of civil suits so we will never know all the illegal spying that went on and it gets those who DID the spying, including Bush and Co. off the hook.

I will never vote for any Dem who voted for this-- Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rep Jane Harman, this means YOU.

Very disappointed in Obama.

I really think this is when I go independent and write in Feingold/Dodd or some such if that's legal.

Probably doesn't mater if it's legal since they won't count it, anyhow.

aargh.

Goodbye, America, is right. This country is doomed.

Posted by: Clem | June 21, 2008 9:02 PM

This is Garbage, I wish he were able to stand up for us.

Posted by: A | June 21, 2008 8:57 PM

hey, if any of ya'll actually see Obama on the campaign trail, walk closely behind him cause you could get rich from all the 'change' his dropping.

Posted by: Richard | June 21, 2008 8:56 PM

This is just terrible. I believed in Obama. And instead, he chooses to do the wrong thing just so he won't get lambasted by McCain. He doesn't seem to have the right balls to do the right thing.

Posted by: Eugenia | June 21, 2008 8:29 PM

This is so messed up.

Obama has for the moment lost my support. He could have stopped this travesty.

Posted by: Pissed off | June 21, 2008 8:10 PM

I was a supporter for Mr Obama, even overlooking gaffes before that he has made; but today with his decision to support that Abominable law, Mr Obama has lost my vote.

I will be staying home on Election Day.

Posted by: Travis | June 21, 2008 7:49 PM

There is nothing surprising about this at all. The writing was right there on the wall the whole time. All the young people he targeted could be counted on to be gullible, not bother to do any research, and to buy into the hype.
Great-we actually had a remarkably qualified candidate who has been doing good works for people in this country for 35 years.
And to all you young women who aren't bothered by the fact we have never had a women in the White House and waned to be little "Obama girls"-wake the f*ck up.

"No self respecting woman should wish, or work for, the success of a party
that ignores her."
Susan B. Anthony, 1872.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 7:32 PM

As a Ron Paul supporter, I am not surprised. For those of us in The R3VOLution - The Campaign for Liberty - McCain, Hillary, Obama, and all the other establishment candidates are the same. The fear that both parties inflict on their followers hides the fact that the two parties are essentially the same on domestic and foreign policy. Both are interventionist in foreign policy, and both will increase the power of the presidency thus further weakening our civil liberties.

There is a Republican side and a Democratic side to the same Republicratic coin.

Fight it!

Join The R3VOLution!

Posted by: David A. Singhiser | June 21, 2008 7:30 PM

It is so amazingly sad that our Government in self-righteous hypocracy is so willing to dismantle our nation's constitution, to protect nefarious behavior they engage in.

Government by the rich, for the rich, an to protect the rich. Sadly, what is left of our country after the constitution is dead.

Posted by: Woo Hoo | June 21, 2008 7:24 PM

Hey Obama voters, I hope you paid your taxes this year...John McCain appreciates your support of his campaign...that's the American way. We all pay our taxes and then support both candidates from the proceeds. Then MOVEON.ORG, etc. gives millions to advertise for the Democrat and Republican 527's place ads for the Republican. Now we have a precedent...America is writing a blank check for Obama. You see he believes in CREATIVE FINANCING...that's how he bought a 2.5 million dollar house and property for half of its value...through an Arab millionaire who loaned it to Rezkos's wife who overpaid for the adjoining property and sold it back to Obama...a "Bonehead Move", according to Obama...sounds like we have to watch every dollar coming in to make sure no more Arab money influences our election in another "Bonehead Move."

Posted by: Scott | June 21, 2008 7:16 PM

Meet the new the president, same as the old president. I was going to vote for Obama, but now there is no chance in hell.

Posted by: Patrick | June 21, 2008 7:03 PM

Sen Obama is a smart, ambitious politician who devised a winning strategy to win the nomination. Get used to it. With the media's assistance, Sen Obama was able to convince many that he was above politics. Those who were paying close attention saw thru that masquerade. We are not shocked nor will we be dissuaded from voting for him no matter what he says or does during the general campaign. He will be better than a continuation of Republican policies.

Posted by: Yellow Dog | June 21, 2008 6:55 PM

Standing in the middle here to gain votes means compromising the constitution and our rights. I thought that this was the kind of thing he was fighting against. Well, He isn't getting any more money from me.

Posted by: Erin | June 21, 2008 6:35 PM

Stop crying like little babies. Obama needs to stand in Center not as a leftist. Instead of falls tears try to image what Republicans would say if Obama opposed the Bill...I am sure we could now see out cry from Republicans how bad Obama is and so on...Mainly we need to stop old senile McShame to become next president.

Posted by: Jarda1 | June 21, 2008 6:14 PM

@Truthhurts
How is that Koolaid?

First, the whole point of the compromise on the FISA bill was to allow it pass WITH TELCO IMMUNITY, like Bush wants. So, it is not possible to be for the compromised bill, but against immunity.

Second, if Obama wanted to enforce and reaffirm FISA, he would impeach Bush, who intentionally, admittedly, and knowningly breached FISA, which is a FELONY under the FISA law itself.

Nope, instead, Obama will just pat you on the head and tell you not to worry, that he is really against it, but has to move to the center to win the election, et al. I am sure when Obama becomes the 43rd King will only use these new powers against bad and evil people......

Posted by: George P. Burdell | June 21, 2008 6:13 PM

Anyone surprised? If it walks like a politician, talks like a politician, it is a politician.

As a Constitutional professor, I am sure that Obama has read Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution which says: "NO Bill of Attainder or EX POST FACTO LAW SHALL BE PASSED."

Obama has no intention of avoiding war with Iran, balancing the budget, getting us out of Iraq, kicking lobbyist out of Washington, or anything else he has promised. You have been warned!

Some Change! (Not like John McFascist is any better.)

Posted by: George P. Burdell | June 21, 2008 5:59 PM

Who wants to go to Canada?

Posted by: Neil Schettler | June 21, 2008 5:56 PM

This is not my country anymore. Obama, Bush, Cheney, McCain, traitors one and all to the Constitution, to freedom, to individuality, and to humanity.

Posted by: Milliner | June 21, 2008 5:49 PM

Man, I hope Obamam is not the Dictator Bush is.

JT
http://www.FireMe.to/udi

Posted by: JOhn thomas | June 21, 2008 5:45 PM

McCain and Obama should just run on the same ticket. When the democrats can't stand up for the 4th amendment or won't stand up for it, they should just go back to being the Democratic-Republican party.

Jefferson is rolling over in his grave.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 5:43 PM

Obama offers only false hope. How disappointing.

Posted by: John Hamilton | June 21, 2008 5:21 PM

If we really cared about protecting our Constitutiional rights, we would:

a) stop re-electing the same old weasel scoundrel one-worlder Dems and Repubs to Congress and the Senate

b) support Ron Paul for President

It's not about Party, but about USA. Unfortunately, the "divide and conquer" technique has been quite successful in giving us an entrenched "two party" system which only gives us two flavors of the same feces.

Posted by: Andrew | June 21, 2008 5:13 PM

I would bet that Obama will not be in the Senate next week debating this bill. He will find an excuse not to be there.

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people...V

Posted by: Truthhurts | June 21, 2008 5:09 PM

We're losing our rights. This is scary as hell.

Posted by: John | June 21, 2008 5:04 PM

The only thing that is important in all of this is for Americans to clearly see that Democrats and Republicans all work for the same interest groups. The Democrats have not "caved in" to Bush; ultimately they want to do the same things he is doing for their own ends. Given the actions of Pelosi, Obama, and the Clintons (Bill Clinton lied us into war with Serbia just like W lied us into war with Iraq) it is amazing that anyone can still believe the Democrats are any more enlightened than Republicans. They all are willing to murder in the name of Democracy just like in Medieval times when people with good intentions murdered in the name of "faith"

Posted by: Jay | June 21, 2008 5:03 PM

lucygirl1:

What you said is factually correct. Norm Ornstein a conservative from the American Enterprise Institute and one of the authors of the McCain Feingold said that if Obama did not reject public funding he would be committing" political malpractice". Obama made those statements at a time when he had no idea of the magnitude of the response from the population would be. Although if he used the public financing he would be receiving funds from a six times larger population pool, Obama's support is from a broader swathe than any other candidate in history,

Under the circumstances if Obama did not go back on his word he would effectively be rejecting all those who supported him. Apparently it is only Republicans that are upset on this issue as I would be were the shoe on the other foot.

I recognize you are using the tried position of a Republican troll, throw as much mud on the candidate as possible and see what sticks. But never discuss issues because if the American people knew were McCain stood he would not have a chance.

I think that you know that on taxes and spending and trade that Obama would be closer to the American people than McCain. I only bring this up to remind people what is really important.

Posted by: Gator-ron | June 21, 2008 5:02 PM

Obama Polishes His Resume
June 20, 2008

His first ad of the post-primary season puffs up his legislative accomplishments.

Obama touts his legislative accomplishments, and those claims don't stand up as well under scrutiny. I

In order to establish his bona fides as a politician who cares about working families, Obama cites his success with three relevant bills. But he doesn't mention that two of the three pieces of legislation were actually passed by the Illinois Senate, not the U.S. Senate. Obama's campaign tells us that when he says, "I passed laws moving people from welfare to work," he is referring to the bill that created Illinois' Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program in 1997.

Obama was one of five original sponsors of the bill, which set limits on public assistance and required welfare recipients to outline plans for moving into the workforce. The law that "cut taxes for working families" is a 2000 bill, on which Obama and 35 others were later added as cosponsors, instituting an earned income-tax credit for the state. Both bills affected only Illinois residents.

The only national law in Obama's ad is the one that "extended health care for wounded troops," and it's dubious whether he can claim full responsibility for that one. H.R. 4986, which became public law 110-181 in 2008, includes provisions from several Obama-sponsored bills. His ideas made it into law, but Obama was not a sponsor or cosponsor of H.R. 4986 itself.

Finally, it has always been our position that it's misleading when a member of a legislative body says that he or she "passed a law," "cut taxes" or makes any similar claim to single-handed lawmaking. It takes more than one legislator to get these things done. In addition to the sponsors and the cosponsors, sometimes dozens of them, the bill needs the support of a majority in both houses. Usually, a governor or president needs to then sign a bill into law, unless the legislature comes up with a veto-proof majority.

So for Obama to say that he "passed a law" casts him as a legislative Lone Ranger, hogging credit that properly belongs to other parties as well.

-Jess Henig, FACT CHECK.ORG

Posted by: Steve | June 21, 2008 5:01 PM

I was going to donate money to this campaign, but when I saw that this candidate backed down and sold out on the FISA legislation I took all of the money I was going to give here and donated it to the ACLU.

Senator Obama said last February, "I am proud to stand with Senator Dodd, Senator Feingold and a grassroots movement of Americans who are refusing to let President Bush put protections for special interests ahead of our security and our liberty." I made the mistake of taking him on his word, and its a mistake I won't be making again.

Mr. Obama, you have lost not only my money and quite possibly my vote, but also my respect. As a candidate for change you have proven that the only changes are going to be superficial. Real change is apparently something we're going to have to wait much longer for.

Posted by: Robert | June 21, 2008 5:01 PM

If this gets through the Senate, Obama doesn't get my vote.

Posted by: shameful | June 21, 2008 5:00 PM

Obama's spokesman, Bill Burton, back in in September, vowed that Obama would "support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies." MoveOn believes Obama should be held to his word and is thus conducting a campaign urging Obama to do what he promised -- support a filibuster to stop the enactment of telecom amnesty. You can email Burton here to demand that Obama comply with his commitment not just to vote against, but to filibuster, telecom amnesty:

bburton@barackobama.com

Incidentally, Chris Dodd made an identical promise when he was running for President, prompting the support of hundreds of thousands of new contributors, and he ought to be held to his promise as well.

Posted by: Truthhurts | June 21, 2008 4:48 PM

If anyone actually read his response, he had this too say about the new bill:

"It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses."

He supports this bill, which reepowers FISA (WHICH IS GOOD!)!!

When it goes to the Senate, he is going to remove that provision about telecom immunity.

The author of this post is being rather shady about not giving the full response that Obama gave.

Posted by: Alain B | June 21, 2008 4:46 PM


Re: Words Matter

Barack Obama's rapid ascent to the Democratic presidential nomination is nothing short of remarkable and historic. Much of this rise can be traced to the power of Barack Obama's spoken and written words. As Barack Obama said during the primaries, "Don't tell me words don't matter."

Because of his rapid ascent and the relative lack of record from which the American people can judge, the words that Barack Obama uses deserve a level of scrutiny befitting the importance that he places on them. But when examined closely, more often than not these words are empty of any meaning in the light of his record and reality.

As we scrutinize Barack Obama's words, it is increasingly difficult for those of us with the responsibility of following this year's election closely to discern what Obama truly believes at his core on the issues of great importance to the American people.

Obama's Words On Public Financing: Just yesterday, Barack Obama reversed his position on accepting general election public financing. This change in position comes after nearly two years of speaking to and signing his name to his commitment to the public financing system.

In June 2006, Barack Obama said quite clearly, "I strongly support public financing":

OBAMA: "Well, I strongly support public financing. And I know [Senator] Dick [Durbin] does too. He's going to have some things to say about it because when we were having - as you'll recall - the major debates around lobbying reform, one of the things that Dick, I think, properly pointed out was that you can change the rules on lobbying here in Washington, but if we're still getting financed primarily from individual contributions, that those with the most money are still going to have the most influence." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At Constituents Breakfast, 6/29/06)

In November 2007, Barack Obama signed his name to his commitment to accept public financing as his party's general election nominee:

QUESTION: "If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?" OBAMA: "Yes. I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests." (Sen. Barack Obama, "Presidential Candidate Questionnaire," Midwest Democracy Network, www.commoncause.org, 11/27/07)

In February 2008, Barack Obama said that he would meet and "sit down with John McCain" to discuss and negotiate public financing were he to be his party's nominee:

NBC'S TIM RUSSERT: "So you may opt out of public financing. You may break your word." Obama: "What I - what I have said is, at the point where I'm the nominee, at the point where it's appropriate, I will sit down with John McCain and make sure that we have a system that works for everybody." (Democratic Presidential Debate, Cleveland, OH, 2/26/0

Yet, in the end, Barack Obama's words were empty and he decided to break his pledge to accept public financing in the general election.

Posted by: lucygirl1 | June 21, 2008 4:38 PM

If you have so little regard for your audience that you don't sign your posts, why should we read them. You are ashamed of who you are or you are so self centered you think a signature is unnecessary.

Posted by: G8tr | June 21, 2008 4:33 PM


Obama Shmama...

The sheep just cannot get it through their heads that he is just another stuffed suit (albeit a highly dynamic speaker with a minority exterior) Washington insider who will continue the insidious demise of America as power is further consolidated in Washington and taken from the citizens...

Just another faker claiming 'change'. Garbage.

McCain is no better and likely worse, of course, since his mental faculties are questionable at best. More likely, he is fading quickly into senility.

The sad truth is that the proud and free America of yesterday is fading fast and the media will make sure the true prospective protector(s) of the people in Washington never get the real opportunity to be heard by the citizens en-masse...

The propaganda emanating from the nation's capital, and complicitly propagated by the mainstream media, continues unabated as the citizens' rights are whittled away at an alarming rate.

Obama will protect nothing of substance for America's citizens. Unfortunately, neither will any other media-annointed politician.

Very sad where America is headed, and it's happening quite quickly now. And all the while as the overwhelming majority of citizens (so easily convinced what to think by the 4th arm of government - the mainstream media) stand idly by cheering for 'change' like a troop of ignorant ostriches, heads buried underground...

Posted by: They're All the Same | June 21, 2008 4:32 PM

Didn't read most of the comments, but most of you seem to be bashing Obama. I don't really care either way, but usually when you're trying to put a political opponent down, you don't say he's like your candidate

Posted by: JC | June 21, 2008 4:30 PM

Seems the cowards are out now or maybe it is the same person attack Obama and don't sign your post. The first time I thought it was an error on your part, now I know better.

Posted by: G8tr | June 21, 2008 4:30 PM

Obama's Words On Iraq: Throughout the primaries, Barack Obama has been determined to withdraw from Iraq regardless of the consequences or the facts on the ground. This week, Barack Obama talked with the Iraqi Foreign Minister. According to The Washington Post, the Foreign Minister left the conversation "reassured" and thinking "that Mr. Obama might not differ all that much from Mr. McCain."

The ABC News headline captures this perplexing issue clearly: "Obama and Iraqi Foreign Minister have Different Memories of their Conversation." In our foreign policy, we cannot afford a president whose public words are discounted by allies and enemies alike.

Obama's Words On Jerusalem: For weeks, debate has swirled around Barack Obama's use of the word "undivided" in his speech before the Annual AIPAC Policy Conference. In the end, the American people are left with a confused position that is constantly being reinterpreted by advisors because "undivided" was nothing more than an empty word with great symbolism but no weight.

Before the Annual AIPAC Policy Conference, Barack Obama clearly said that Jerusalem should be the "undivided" capital of Israel. Barack Obama and his advisers knew what this word would mean to his audience.

OBAMA: "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At The Annual AIPAC Policy Conference, Arlington, VA, 6/4/0

Yet, only a day later, Barack Obama said the future of Jerusalem would have to be negotiated by Israel and the Palestinians. Barack Obama was no longer prepared to say that Jerusalem should be undivided.

CNN'S CANDY CROWLEY: "I want to ask you about something you said in AIPAC yesterday. You said that Jerusalem must remain undivided. Do Palestinians have no claim to Jerusalem in the future?" OBAMA: "Well, obviously, it's going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues." (CNN's "The Situation Room," 6/5/0

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 4:28 PM

LOL, Angering the left?! Plenty of people, right/left/independent are outraged by this. Obama, we hope you realize how much you owe your campaign to the faith that the Internet communities have in you. Now is not the time to lose it.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 4:27 PM

Quoting an editorial in a newspaper is quoting someone else's opinion. It is no more authoritative and it implies you have a low regard for your own opinion. Why don't you sign you posts?

Posted by: G8tr | June 21, 2008 4:26 PM


Obama's Words On His Tax Hikes: Barack Obama has made tax increases a centerpiece of his economic agenda. However, when asked by CNBC's John Harwood if he would be willing to hold off on raising taxes if he thought they might harm the economy, Barack Obama said:

OBAMA: "Some of those, you could possibly defer. But I think the basic principle of restoring fairness to our economy and encouraging bottom-up economic growth is important." (CNBC, 6/9/0

This is a tacit acknowledgment that his tax increases would hurt the economy and American workers. Likewise, Barack Obama consistently attacks John McCain for favoring "tax breaks to corporations." Yet, he recently told The Wall Street Journal that he too was considering cutting corporate taxes. Just last month, Barack Obama called corporate tax cuts "the exact wrong prescription for America." On one day, Barack Obama took two positions on one issue, again leaving observers and voters unsure of what he really believes.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 4:26 PM

NBC'S TIM RUSSERT: "A simple question. Will you as president say to Canada and Mexico, this [NAFTA] has not worked for us, we are out?" OBAMA: "I will make sure that we renegotiate in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about, and I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced." (Sen. Barack Obama, MSNBC Democrat Presidential Debate, Cleveland, OH, 2/26/0

However, in the general election, Barack Obama is backing off these words which were pretty clear. Now, Barack Obama says his words are not to be believed if they are "overheated and amplified."

"In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee backed off his harshest attacks on the free trade agreement and indicated he didn't want to unilaterally reopen negotiations on NAFTA. 'Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified,' he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA 'devastating' and 'a big mistake,' despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy." (Nina Easton, "Obama: NAFTA Not So Bad After All," Fortune, 6/18/0

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 4:21 PM

Do not make a judgement about Obama made on the basis of one politically expedient decision. It is the totality of the man and the political environment that lead to this position.
=============================

Lets look at the totality of Obama.

Wright: Never heard hate-filled sermons > he is like an uncle, I cannot disown > I now disown

Rezko > This is not the man I know

Ayers > This is not the man I know, First fundraiser

Trinity > They are my family > I am resigning from my church

Priest > This is not the man I know

I will accept public financing > I will not take public financing

Jeruselum should be the capital of Israel > Palestians mad, so they now need to work it out

and on and on and on it goes Obama is king of the flip flopper

Posted by: Truthhurts | June 21, 2008 4:21 PM

Obama did not reject a debate with McCain that is a mischaracterization of his response. He wanted several forms of debate including a Lincoln Douglas type debate, a town hall debate and the regular type of debate. McCain refused that and had no counter proposal. Your confusion on this matter comes from the fact that not everything has to be McCain's way or no way. Just like Bush.

Posted by: G8tr | June 21, 2008 4:19 PM

Obama was against this bill during the primaries and now supports the bill because he is arrogant and believes people have no choice but to vote for him now. He even created a new seal with his name and web site on it. Obama knows no shame and its time people wake-up and send him back to Il as the junior senator. Just blike Obama changes his mind with the wind, Young voters, you too can change your mind and not support Obama. Put America first above Obama's blind ambition.

Posted by: Truthurts | June 21, 2008 4:15 PM

However, Barack Obama has rejected each and every offer to raise the dialogue in this campaign. As the St. Petersburg Times wrote today, Barack Obama's words come down to "cynical political calculations," not the new politics he promised:

"Avoiding town hall meetings and rejecting public campaign financing may be predictable strategies for minimizing one of McCain's greatest strengths and exploiting one of his key weaknesses. But they pull Obama down into the cynical political calculations he pledged to rise above." (Editorial, "Obama's Big Words Ring Hollow," St. Petersburg Times, 6/20/0

Obama's Words On The 2005 Energy Bill: As part of his standard stump speech, Barack Obama criticizes the Bush-Cheney energy policy. However, not spoken is the fact that he voted for the Bush-Cheney energy policy in 2005.

On the campaign trail, Barack Obama has criticized the Bush-Cheney energy bill:

OBAMA: "When Bush assigned Cheney to create energy policy, he met with the environmental groups once, the renewable energy groups once, he met with the oil and gas companies 40 times. Washington has become so dominated by the powerful, by the well-connected, that the voices of the American people are no longer heard." (Barack Obama, Remarks, Detroit, MI, 6/16/0

This is good rhetoric but it does not match the record. The energy policy that he assails for being a Bush-Cheney creation for the benefit of the oil companies is the very same energy policy he voted for in the 2005 Energy Bill. Again, Barack Obama's words on energy are empty and actually contrary to his own public record.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 4:13 PM

Do not make a judgement about Obama made on the basis of one politically expedient decision. It is the totality of the man and the political environment that lead to this position. Four years from now after an Obama presidency the fear level in the populous will be less because the president will treat terrorism as a threat we can deal with without being hysterical. Obama might not have to make this bad decision because the fear level will have subsided.

On civil liberties Obama is not perfect but he is as good as we could get. The person who suggested that Clinton would have been better is delusional. She took the position that you always have to be tough and its us against them which is more of the adversarial position of McCain-Bush.

If we want to make progress you have to make compromises. Compromises are not fun when you know you are right. Obama has wisdom and I do not believe he will compromise unless it is necessary. Yes I believe he will make other decisions that are equally wrong. He said he was not a perfect man.

Posted by: Gator-ron | June 21, 2008 4:13 PM

ObamaDude wrote:
Obama will come out so forcibly against this bill that it will fail in the senate and McCain will have to withdraw. Obama is our true leader!
-------------------
So much for your prediction of Obama coming out forcibly against this bill that it will fail in the senate. Once a politician, always a politician. Obama had to move to the center to get votes, so like Pelosi, he knows blacks and young voters will follow him to the gates of hell and enter if asked.

Obama 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... I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives - and the liberty - of the American people"

Once a bill becomes law, even a bad bill, it is rarely revisited and changed soon afterwards. This bill is explosive, so don't expect Congress to revisit this issue anytime soon. Our civil liberties were stolen by politicians that only care about being re-elected.

Posted by: Hillary 2008 | June 21, 2008 4:08 PM

OBAMA: "I am happy to have a debate with John McCain and George Bush about foreign policy. If John McCain wants to meet me anywhere, anytime, to have a debate about our respective policies in Iraq, Iran, the Middle East or around the world, that is a conversation I am happy to have. Because I believe that there is no separation between John McCain and George Bush when it comes to our Middle East policy and I think their policy has failed." (Barack Obama, Media Availability, Watertown, SD, 5/16/0

However, Barack Obama has rejected each and every offer to raise the dialogue in this campaign. As the St. Petersburg Times wrote today, Barack Obama's words come down to "cynical political calculations," not the new politics he promised:

"Avoiding town hall meetings and rejecting public campaign financing may be predictable strategies for minimizing one of McCain's greatest strengths and exploiting one of his key weaknesses. But they pull Obama down into the cynical political calculations he pledged to rise above." (Editorial, "Obama's Big Words Ring Hollow," St. Petersburg Times, 6/20/0

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 4:04 PM

The Democrat's and Republican's want their conventions financed, so they had to pass this bill now. The word is that the conventions in Denver and St. Paul, Minn., will be financed overwhelmingly by private money from some of the nation's largest corporations, which include AT&T. In exchange, they were promised access to the nation's most powerful politicians. Bought and paid for!

Obama had a choice to either agree with Pelosi and party leadership intimately involved in this legislation, and look like an ordinary politician, or he can prove he is an agent for change by taking a bold stand against this bill. Publicly attack what is wrong with bill, condemn it, speak against it in the Senate, vote against it, and campaign against it during the campaign. I guess the question is, Does he have the courage to challenge Pelosi and his own party? So far, he has agreed with Pelosi and like McCain look like an ordinary sellout of American rights. Obama and McCain have sold out America.

What does Obama gain by supporting this bill now, and then reviewing it later?
Who is he pandering to? Those supporting Obama will witness his first test as your nominee when this bill goes before the Senate. The Senate needs to block this. Obama can comment on it now if he wants to, but when it gets to the Senate, he needs to say something. Let's see him put words into action and start the change he's been preaching.

Benjamin Franklin: "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither."

Posted by: Truthhurts | June 21, 2008 4:03 PM

For those angry at Obama about this FISA decision please read this post with an open mind. I am an Obama supporter who is angered by his decision. On an ideological, moral, ethical or whatever basis he has it wrong.

Obama is trying to create a country that is more collaborative than adversarial. Where compromise and achieving partial objectives is better than adversarial where it is all or none. We have been functioning in an adversarial environment since Reagen I believe. For Obama to transform the political environment he must first become elected. To do that he has to assuage the fears of Americans would have been misguided by the Cheney/Bush/McCain world view. Many of these same people would vote for Obama based on a number of other issues but because of their terrorism fears would give in to McCain fear mongering.

I believe this was a strategic move to help Obama deal with McCain fear mongering. These fear ridden people are not concerned about the constitution or rights, they are concerned about Muslims blowing up our cities and I do not know what else. If it were not for this fear they would vote for Obama. Obama sends to them the message that he understands their concerns and he will protect them.

Obama is wrong on this issue but think of it this way, who would you want as the head of the executive branch, Obama who supports the supreme court decision on habeas corpus or McCain who opposed it? Democracies are not a perfect form of government and we are currently experiencing one of its weaknesses. What I believe you will see in an Obama presidency is a strengthening of constitutional rights on a whole, but you only get it if he is elected. Protesting to him is an appropriate response, being angry and disappointed is a natural response, I am. Don't drag him down, tough; that's the job of Republican trolls.

Posted by: Gator-ron | June 21, 2008 3:47 PM

My God , I have nevers seen so much animosity and virtiurs comments in my life. Its like there a bunch of people waiting for Obama to make a mistake and they jump on the fence. You cannot tell Hill Supporters with Repubs apart. I really have to read hard to find out if they are Democrates at all. Why dont you scream at pelosi.

Obama said he is not going to be perfect. and he is not, but atlease he is open about it and his reasons.

All other countries have to do the same, in Germany the government made a similar bill and politicians criticized it and there was a compromise like this and the opposition is going to watch that the powers are not abused. If America is going to ask all those Europeans to give and exchange data they have to show they are serious too.

In Europe there was also fears about Big brothers and Politicians who moved to the center we criticized.

Now there is scandal some telecommunication company is in court caught abusing those powers by spying on some Big Financial companies, and journalists their corruption.

Here the Telecommunications company have to keep the information all citizens and anyone with Internet for 6 months then its destroyed.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 3:43 PM

You all had a chance to vote for Ron Paul. You BLEW IT in favor of typical politicking. You had the chance to support a candidate who didnt need to brag about opposing the Iraq war even considering he ACTUALLY VOTED against it.

You're not going to reposition the new status-quo Bush has established if you dont grow a pair of balls!

Posted by: Silus | June 21, 2008 3:35 PM

:-D

Barack Insane's O'Bombing! :)

Posted by: RAT-The | June 21, 2008 3:32 PM

But wait, he would strip the immunity for telecoms. He's back to being a democrat stooge for the lawyers. All is well.

Posted by: v racer | June 21, 2008 2:56 PM

This kind of question is the exact reason why in recent decades Governors have been much more sucessful at winning the Presidency.

Legislators are in the business of compromise. It is the only way to accomplish anything. Unfortunately many of these compromises and procedural manuveurs are easily attacked as something nefarious in a political campaign even when the legislator's motives were good or when he was up against incredible odds.

In this particular compromise Senator Obama chose reestablishing FISA as the law of the land --which worked so effectively until Bush decided he wanted absolute authority--was more important than being able to punish phone companies for their participation in the process. I think having been forced to decide between these two issues Obama made the right choice. With his vote he will help knock back one of the Bush Administrations key attempts at creating a President with absolute power.

Posted by: cmb | June 21, 2008 2:39 PM

OK Obama supporters. 18 million of us saw this coming. An ambitious dirty backdoor Chicago politician taking you for a ride. He and Axelrod did their homework-young people are a demographic that won't do their own research, are susceptible to hype and can be effectively targeted and marketed through my space, text messaging and facebook. All you can do now is plan for a backlash.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 2:32 PM

This is the letter I sent to Sen. Obama. I sent similar ones to Sens. Reid and Clinton.

If you care about this issue let your voices be heard!


Sen. Obama,
I have been a supporter of your presidential campaign spiritually and financially since the beginning. This is why I am so disappointed that the candidate that I hoped would embody a real change in our body politic has decided to support the House's capitulation on FISA.

It is particularly disheartening given your education as a constitutional lawyer who I am sure understands the importance of the issue.

This bill codifies the destruction of our constitutional rights by the Bush administration and forgives their telco cronies. Giving a legal pass to these illegal policies is not "Change we can believe in". I expected better from you than bowing to the right on such a fundamental principal.

Respectfully,
Terence

Posted by: Terence | June 21, 2008 2:32 PM

what... you think he wants to end up like Kennedy? Unless you people have not figured it out... the fascists can call in a sitting president, put 'em under oath and impeach them. Non-fascists cannot call in an assistant to the Prez, forget about an oath. But what the fascists did to the constitution can only be repaired when the Executive branch is re-alligned.

--[][]-[]-----[][][]----[]------[][][][][]------------[]--[]
[]----[]--[][]------[][][][]-------[]-----[][][]----[]----[]
-[]---[][]--[]-----OBAMA-LEAHY '08---[]--[]----[][][][]--[]
[]---[][]-----[][]------[][][]-----[][]-----[][][][][]------[]
[][][]-----[][][][][][]-----[][]----[][][]-----[]-----[][][][]----[]


Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | June 21, 2008 2:29 PM

Well we Hill voters already knew this about NObama. But hey..who cares. NObama will lose to McCain in Nov. (another thing we already knew)...so the threat of an egomaniac, arrogant, racist, elitist with questionable alliances Obama as President is a non-issue. We had a chance for real change with Hill, the Obamabots blindness cost us the chance for a great problem solving president.

Posted by: Sal | June 21, 2008 2:16 PM

Obama missed the February vote on that FISA bill as he campaigned in the "Potomac Primaries,"

WRONG. Obama showed up and voted. Clinton was absent.

Senate Roll Call vote Feb 12

*

Posted by: the farmer | June 21, 2008 1:34 PM

Obama approved this because it's about National Sercurity. WATCH WHAT YOU SAY about business, politics, and otherwise. Big Brother is listening!

No Business Ideas should be in your email or spoken on the phone.

If Obama Wins he will use this program to steal Americans ideas and innovations so Blacks can finally have a Fortune 500 Company. Affirmative Action Fortune 500 Companies are coming if this Nazi wins...

I never ever had an Obatomy

Posted by: Not An Idiot | June 21, 2008 1:33 PM

Echo 21... You think that we are stupid, You are the one who dont listen, who can not read between lines in Obamas speaches. "give me Your vote and by by!!!
He is about Himself ,just like Michelle, . Now all those 20 yesrs in Trinity Church and other dirty things from His pass, are proving, that He is who He is ...He hates white and people of other color, he p[robably hateblack, but He loves those with deep packets!!!Go to Chicago black communities, take a good look how those black people live there. He dont care about them, he is ashame of them, he refuse to show muslim woman in his rally in Michigan...He will be taking a big money from corrupted politicians and corparations, as he is doing all His life, and last PRIMARIES, accusing Hillary for taking money from lobbiests(She never denial)He is the one who got so rich, and give so little!!! Dont count ON HIM> He didnt win yet, DNC should remove Him from their list for Presidential candidates and take Hillary all the way.
Hope, voters will didnt give Pelosi another chance and Haward Dean must go!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 1:29 PM


I'll knock Big Brother on his a$$!

- Little Brother

Posted by: Not an Idiot | June 21, 2008 1:27 PM

ALL this blah blah blah - I must oppose based on today's one issue but will I be back tomorrow on the next one issue. Its just pitiful to watch people pretend so hard.

The only Obama that can win is the one that shows himself to be flexible regarding liberal dogma and who appeals to those in the center who are not one issue voters

Posted by: nclwtk | June 21, 2008 1:19 PM

Why You people are angry at OBAMA??? OU ARE SO NAIVE AND WITH NO COMMON SENCE AT THAT TIME, NOW YOU ARE WAKING UP, IT IS TO LATE, OR MAYBE NOT. IMPEACH HIM NOW You are the one who choose someone, who intentionaly didnt vote for FISA,who open doors for those dirty politicians from most corrupted in USA, Government of Illinois , starting from Rezko and others.He didn vote intentionaly, just as He did 130 times in Illinois and voteD "maybe". He could not say NO to FISA, because He would never have chance to win fight with Hillary!!! She would be OUR candidate for Presidency, not Obama. Using excuse "busy with election" no time FOR voting ...
He did this intentionaly. His record in Illinois about witch Edwards was commenting in one of =debates= 130 times "maybe".Obama People boo His oponents!!! for that. No one would listen, because His empty speaches were more important!!!
So, now You can blame only Your self. Hillary was so right , telling US about the real Obama, but no one was listening. Obama told You to hate Hillary, so You people did what He as You for, we will be paying a big price for You, those who now are opening Your eyes.
It is time for a new movement to get Hillary back , and relese Obama, move DNC back to DC, relase Dean,. Pelosi is in this mass together with Obama, She lies in 2006 election and She is lying as Obama does. Well educated people in cities and ignorant Young people , will get hit a big time and very quick , because Obama wont do nothing for them, all He need it is their vote!!!He start changing , and this just started.....
His primery promises are empty , very ampty...
Our democracy, freedom will go down faster then by Pr.Bush 8 years in White House!
Iraq withdraw is done, He will never finish this occupation, because His bpdies from Oil comopanies are supporting Him a big time, and He is one of them, just like His cusin Chaney(?)...maybe this is family bussiness after all???

Sorry for my english...

Posted by: babinuta48 | June 21, 2008 1:07 PM

This is what worries me about Obama. He never would say what he was in favor of and now he is showing us that he isn't so liberal after all.
Why would he support a bill his party objects to so completely? Where is his reasoning? He has sold us down the river.
Never trust a candidate who won't tell you where he stands on the issues.
No, I won't vote for McCain because he has said where he stands on issues important to me.
But what has happened to Obama the liberal everyone thought they were voting for? Well, he never said how he stood on FISA and we let him get away with it because of "hope" and "unity".
Prepare for more and more disappointment with this candidate.

Posted by: Betty Louann | June 21, 2008 12:55 PM

There is a Political Home Page that outlines Positions on the Issues, in a very clear, and articulate manner. The Site requires no registration to inspect, and I feel that anyone who has NOT bothered to read first-hand, the Candidate's "Issues", should really question what they THINK they actually know, and WHY they think they should blindly be involved in Politics or Political discussions.

Only a truly foolish, or self-serving person, would NOT want to be informed about the people trying to lead this Nation.

It is NOT too late to try to hire a good man.

Ahem, mittromney.com

Go there, or be Square!

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 21, 2008 12:03 PM

I was an Obama supporter and I regret my support. I will write in Hillary Clinton in the GE ballot. What the heck, if we are electing a dirty politician, at least we should have a competent one. I urge other ex-Obama supporters do the same.

Posted by: Ooops | June 21, 2008 11:56 AM

Just think of "Barry",

as the illegitimate "Big Brother",

You NEVER wanted! :-(

Posted by: RAT-The | June 21, 2008 11:49 AM

I am saddened by all the comments disparaging Obama supporters and Obama himself, as if this is some ghastly, horrible thing. Please try to be even-headed and realize what is really going on. Rest assured that many if not most other governments are doing the same type of thing - or would be if they had the capability - and probably do it in a much worse way. We are talking about newer technology that enables the filtering and caching of information such that when the need arises to locate a certain portion of information it will be available. We are talking about technicians with probably some of the most boring jobs in the world who have to sit all day and go through mostly superfluous data to find some particular thing they are looking for, and all the people who have to program and maintain such systems. It is not glorious work and probably not too fun, but there is probably no way that this country could afford not to do it because of the nature of the world and competing governments and other powerful international organizations.

And, quite frankly, if you sit down and actually think about it for a minute, 99% of most people's communication is drivel as far as they would be concerned. I don't think they are going to be data-warehousing the content and cross-referencing it to, for example, give an unfair competitive edge to businesses they are affiliated with by knowing what other businesses are doing. This is strictly related to matters of security and mostly involves installing equipment at telcos that is needed to process incomprehensibly large data streams.

If you really need to talk about LSD and cannabis transactions with your buddies I'm pretty sure its not too hard to find discreet ways of doing it that will not trigger the monitors, provided that they even care in the least about it which I can pretty much assure you they don't.

Posted by: F. in Cali | June 21, 2008 11:41 AM

Obama continues to disappoint.

Obama breaks his promise to accept public funds for his campaign. Obama sets a very bad precedent for campaign funding, opening the door to endless money and influence. NO Presidential candidate since 1976 when the public campaign finance system was established in response to the aftermath of the Watergate scandals and corruption has any candidate refused to accept the the public monies. The Democrats should be ashamed. Follow the money trail and you will find the answers you seek about Obama. One of his major funders has been George Soros, a global multi-billionare who is a socialist. Hey Obama supporters, do you support socialism? Educate yourselves!

Obama has decided to support FISA. Of course the Democratic "leadership" continues to cave.

Obama arrogantly decides to announce he's moving the DNC operations from Washington DC (where they always remain NO matter who is President) to Chicago, arguably the most toxic political sewer in the country where Obama swims with the rats who inhabit it.

Obama holds a rally in Detroit, Michigan where his supporters rudely and loudly continually boo Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (a Hillary supporter who now supports Obama) as she attempts to speak. This has been all too typical behavior of Obama supporters. At this same rally, Obama campaign organizers force Muslim women to move away from the stage and camera shots since they were wearing "scarves". They rightly complained.

Obama's campaign announced that former Hillary Clinton manager Patti Solis Doyle would be the new Chief of Staff to the VP. Interesting, since NO VP has been selected as of yet, and Ms. Doyle was fired by Hillary, apparently they are not on speaking terms, and Ms. Doyle has been accused of shutting down the Iowa Caucus campaign office for two whole days just prior to the Iowa caucus to "watch videos". Does THIS sound like a campaign manager who wanted to win Iowa for Hillary? This same Ms.Doyle has been a close friend of Obama's campaign manager David Axelrod for over twenty years and Doyle herself spent much time in Chicago, the most toxic political sewer in the nation. Do you smell a rat??????????? Is this the ultimate stick in the eye to Hillary and her supporters that Hillary will NOT be VP?????? I hope Hillary is NOT the VP, it will make it all the easier for Hillary supporters to VOTE NO ON OBAMA!

Obama is unqualified to be President. Put your country first and party second and vote for John McCain.

The Democratic party MUST be held accountable for their failure to denounce the rampant sexism, racism, classism and voter disenfranchisement continually interjected into this 2008 campaign debacle by Barack Obama, his campaignn and nasty supporters. To vote for Obama is to condone what they have done. The DNC has been complicit in disenfranchising voters.

The Democratic party understands two things, money and votes. WE have the power to with hold BOTH. Do so.

Obama is NOT the change we've been hoping for. There is some merit to the case for letting the GOP clean up their own mess, in Iraq, the budget deficit, etc. Let them.

Let's raise a glass to what will hopefully be the total political implosion of Barack Obama BEFORE he's actually nominated at the END of August in Denver at the DNC convention! It's an eternity until then in politics, anything can and most likely will happen....Hopefully, the Dems will have to come crawling back to Hillary. If not, it's Hillary 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

visit womenforfairpolitics.com

*You must do the thing which you think you cannot do* Eleanor Roosevelt

*No self respecting woman should wish for the success of a party that ignores her sex* Susan B. Anthony 1872

Posted by: KJ | June 21, 2008 11:36 AM


Benjamin Franklin: "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither."

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 11:29 AM

Now remember your civics lessons, you don't need "immunity" for doing legal things like following the law and Constitution, you do need it however for doing ILLEGAL things!! So that tells us what about the imperial BUSH's last six years of ignoring the very Courts and laws that were set up for the very purpose of complying with the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution--you know this country's founding document that you and I and George all have a duty to uphold and honor for our very liberty? I still believe we need to uphold it!! So why is six years of illegality alright???? Ben Franklin, where are you when we need you and your wisdom: Those who would give up a little liberty for a little security, will soon have neither.

Posted by: benighse | June 21, 2008 10:57 AM

Hobama is a disaster and it makes me truly sick now.

Posted by: Afi K. James | June 21, 2008 10:41 AM

In the final days of the Bush Facist Regime, if there is NO ACCOUNTABILITY, the precedent will be set for the next president, whether he be Obama or McCain, to continue the dictatorship. We need truth and justice now. And you know, I usually find the comments of the readers here to be more refreshing and full of truth that that of the authors...however I still can find "truth refreshment" at NO LIES RADIO 24*7...
http://noliesradio.org

Posted by: Allan Rees | June 21, 2008 10:39 AM

Hi, www.empirepage.com!
Very interesting site! Thank you for this source!
Cheers,
Sintia.

Posted by: Puteshestviy.Net | June 21, 2008 10:22 AM

Obama is always in a catch 22 with the "American" public..he is damned either way.. I have never witnessed a candidate so scrutined like Obama. I'm sure that if they could get in his bathroom there would be controversy about the tissue that he uses. give it a break..

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 10:10 AM

I'm glad to see Obama supporting this bill. It's good to know he has a brain and isn't just a liberal robot. He has plenty of political capital to spare so he can make choices like this and still get the liberal vote, the Democrat vote, and the change vote.

Posted by: Harrold | June 21, 2008 9:59 AM

Evil, Obama administration will be!

He has already changed the president seal of the US to put his name and logo on it, and he is on his way of moving the DNC and eventually the nation's capital to Chicago so Rezko & Co. can run the nation more efficiently.

Posted by: God Father | June 21, 2008 9:14 AM

The position ennunciated by Obama is not surprising. Virtually any Democratic candidate would have had to move to the center after the primaries.
And Obama is hardly alone. The House is dominated by Democrats, but the bill still passed comfortably. That means a lot of Dems voted to stay tough and safe on the terrorist issue in an election year. And as we all know rule one in politics is to get elected or re-elected.
Liberal true believers will no doubt complain. But they can hardly say Obama's shift to the center was unexpected.

Posted by: Barton Keyes | June 21, 2008 9:10 AM

We need a third box to check in this election, "None of the above".

Pitiful state we are in right now. Neither leader of the parties seems to have the brains of an ant.

Posted by: Drust | June 21, 2008 8:55 AM

When the interests of corporations dictate public policy at the national level, that society is fascist. Look up the meaning of the word before you label me. Zeig heil, commrades. Du bist ein Amerikan.

Posted by: madisonhack | June 21, 2008 8:50 AM

Obama lost my vote and my donations. I donated twice to the campaign before he showed his true colors. I guess AIPAC and Bilderberger got to him.

Bob Barr, has a ring to it.

Posted by: Voting Independent | June 21, 2008 8:47 AM

Geez....Stupid progressives. If they were going to nominate a centrist, they should have gone for the one with more experience.

Posted by: patty in PA | June 21, 2008 7:58 AM

Hello! Once he is President, he can change/reverse amnesty to phone companies and there is a loophole to prosecute illegal and unwarranted wiretapping! Wake up people! This is a good move.

Posted by: grace | June 21, 2008 3:49 AM
*****************
Grace - HE can't do anything without Congress. Honest, if he wins, he'll be President, not GOD.

Posted by: Echo21 | June 21, 2008 7:48 AM

The Bus Driver Strikes....Again!
( a "piece of work" in progress)

This time it's the 4th Amendment of the
Constitution that has been thrown under the bus with his support of the FISA Bill; Thursday it was his WRITTEN pledge two years ago to take public financing that was thrown under the bus. Both join a crowded road of victims including his "typical
white person" grandma, all those "bitter and frustrated folks who cling to their guns & religion", his hate-filled,looney spiritual advisors,Wright & Fleger, his
militant Black Liberation Church of 23 years with its Black Supremist agenda, and its Black Supremicist congregants, and his
jailed, convicted of 16 felonies mentor &
benefactor,REZKO!

New Politics R US!

New Ways Of Doing Things R Us!

Change You Can Believe In R Us!

All are empty slogans from a ruthlessly ambitious typical Chicago machine politician dapperly dressed in an empty suit,
standing for NOTHING, without conviction,
and, as a typical Marxist/Socialist, for whom the ends justify the means.

Obama- "Yes We Can"?

OR

"SLASH & BURN"?

Posted by: concerned | June 21, 2008 7:39 AM

By the Constitution, a Search Warrant is required to avoid any kind of abuse.

Now, having high-authority with power to eavesdrop at will is added burden of abuse because now it's even beyond than of the town priest who knows the sins, interests, crimes, and indiscretions of all who dwell there.

So now, why is it that legislators are extending the abuse?

Have they been eavesdropped, without admitting it, by those in power?

Very very bad.

Posted by: El Mugroso | June 21, 2008 7:25 AM

Wide publicity should be given to each one of the crooked Congressmen (and Senators) who voted in favor of the FISA bill. What hypocrites! Does not the Bill of Rights specifically protect us against INREASONABLE searches? And is WARRANTLESS wiretapping anything but UNWARRANTED? Its meaning is in that word itself.

Posted by: alzach01 | June 21, 2008 7:21 AM

When this country was founded, an angry public told the founding fathers "No Bill of Rights, no Constitution". Today, there will be some complaints on sites like this and then by November most of the complainers will calm down and vote for Obama. If the Democratic base really cared about civil liberties, Obama's nomination could still be stopped. The Democratic Congress failed to honor their campaign pledge to get the country out of Iraq and more Democrats will be elected to the next Congress. Democracy is failing because the public does not care enough to save it.

Posted by: Desertstraw | June 21, 2008 5:29 AM

I would never vote for McCain, but I'm disappointed that Obama doesn't have the courage other Dems have to stand up against the FISA bill. It's bad enough to have a leaderless, gutless Congress and now it seems Obama fits right in. No wonder their approval ratings are lower even than George Bush's.

Posted by: Disappointed Dem | June 21, 2008 4:30 AM

By the way, unless you're a neo-con , what Obama and the Dem House did today was NOT a "good move"!

Posted by: KDelphi | June 21, 2008 4:20 AM

I think a lot of people are sick of the ends justifying the means. That's why Bush's approval ratings are bunk. And that's why Obama looked so good standing next to a Clinton. Now to hear any Obama supporter touting this as a good move, that the ends justify the means, is ludicrous. Also, has Obama now stated that as president he would renege on telecom immunity? Can I get that in writing?

Is is a stretch to expect more from a candidate who's claiming to be above the fray? My support for Obama was never set in stone, and was certainly never unquestioning. That would be foolish.

Posted by: JohnGalt1 | June 21, 2008 4:01 AM

Hello! Once he is President, he can change/reverse amnesty to phone companies and there is a loophole to prosecute illegal and unwarranted wiretapping! Wake up people! This is a good move.

Posted by: grace | June 21, 2008 3:49 AM

"Rest assured that many if not most other governments are doing the same type of thing - or would be if they had the capability - and probably do it in a much worse way."

That's ranks as one of the dumbest lines posted. And there's a lot of rubbish posted on these boards.

It reminds me of on of the the current administration's many excuses as to why we invaded Iraq: all other countries' intelligence agencies thought Saddam had WMD too.

And which countries were you referring to? China, Russia, the police state of Britain, or any of the other European countries selling out their sovereignty in the name of the EU?

Maybe it's just me, but the appealing thing about America is that heretofore it was like no other country.

What a shame.

And to all you gloating Clinton supporters, it's disturbing to see you snickering about Obama's supporters disappointment. What you should be fearing is the dismantling of your rights--something your candidate was also on board with.

Posted by: JohnGalt1 | June 21, 2008 3:44 AM

So, who's this Bob Barr character?

Posted by: JohnGalt1 | June 21, 2008 3:23 AM

I am saddened by all the comments disparaging Obama supporters and Obama himself, as if this is some ghastly, horrible thing. Please try to be even-headed and realize what is really going on. Rest assured that many if not most other governments are doing the same type of thing - or would be if they had the capability - and probably do it in a much worse way. We are talking about newer technology that enables the filtering and caching of information such that when the need arises to locate a certain portion of information it will be available. We are talking about technicians with probably some of the most boring jobs in the world who have to sit all day and go through mostly superfluous data to find some particular thing they are looking for, and all the people who have to program and maintain such systems. It is not glorious work and probably not too fun, but there is probably no way that this country could afford not to do it because of the nature of the world and competing governments and other powerful international organizations.

And, quite frankly, if you sit down and actually think about it for a minute, 99% of most people's communication is drivel as far as they would be concerned. I don't think they are going to be data-warehousing the content and cross-referencing it to, for example, give an unfair competitive edge to businesses they are affiliated with by knowing what other businesses are doing. This is strictly related to matters of security and mostly involves installing equipment at telcos that is needed to process incomprehensibly large data streams.

If you really need to talk about LSD and cannabis transactions with your buddies I'm pretty sure its not too hard to find discreet ways of doing it that will not trigger the monitors, provided that they even care in the least about it which I can pretty much assure you they don't.

Posted by: F. in Cali | June 21, 2008 3:23 AM

I am saddened by all the comments disparaging Obama supporters and Obama himself, as if this is some ghastly, horrible thing. Please try to be even-headed and realize what is really going on. Rest assured that many if not most other governments are doing the same type of thing - or would be if they had the capability - and probably do it in a much worse way. We are talking about newer technology that enables the filtering and caching of information such that when the need arises to locate a certain portion of information it will be available. We are talking about technicians with probably some of the most boring jobs in the world who have to sit all day and go through mostly superfluous data to find some particular thing they are looking for, and all the people who have to program and maintain such systems. It is not glorious work and probably not too fun, but there is probably no way that this country could afford not to do it because of the nature of the world and competing governments and other powerful international organizations.

And, quite frankly, if you sit down and actually think about it for a minute, 99% of most people's communication is drivel as far as they would be concerned. I don't think they are going to be data-warehousing the content and cross-referencing it to, for example, give an unfair competitive edge to businesses they are affiliated with by knowing what other businesses are doing. This is strictly related to matters of security and mostly involves installing equipment at telcos that is needed to process incomprehensibly large data streams.

If you really need to talk about LSD and cannabis transactions with your buddies I'm pretty sure its not too hard to find discreet ways of doing it that will not trigger the monitors, provided that they even care in the least about it which I can pretty much assure you they don't.

Posted by: F. in Cali | June 21, 2008 3:23 AM

don't forget about increasing his ties with Clinton and possibly being convinced to have her as his VP

Posted by: sad to see this | June 21, 2008 2:34 AM

obama disappointed me by supporting Israel unconditionally, supporting their military exercises and the protection from the so called "Iranian threat", and now this.

Posted by: sad to see this | June 21, 2008 2:32 AM

Wake up people this is America moving closer to a police state. Fascism is here in America and will only get much more worse!

We continue to send the same Douchebag's back to Congress only for them to continue to screw the American citizens over. Once again the American citizens have just been bent over, one more time to take it up their A**!

"Those who would trade their freedom for their protection deserve neither"-Benjamin Franklin

This illegal intrusions on our Constitutionally protected rights. Are the majority of American's really this ignorant? Our founding fathers of this country would all be calling us weaklings and COWARDS for not standing up and fighting this.

Posted by: Ashamed | June 21, 2008 2:14 AM

Well, well well, and well. Looks like your boy is like most of the rest of em. Hillary still has time until August.

Posted by: a | June 21, 2008 1:58 AM

I don't think we should have seen anything different out of Clinton, and it's pretty much an expected development from anybody who has a serious chance of becoming President of the US.

What's going on is that the government now has the technology to spy on everybody. In fact, using the technology requires spying on everybody. First developed as "Total Information Awareness" and then later perfected with "Carnivore" and others, spying using these systems is quite an indiscriminate act. It starts with traffic analysis. Of all traffic, yours, mine, everybody's. Computers doing the traffic analysis do the initial listening, for key words and phrases.

You eavesdrop before you even know on whom you're eavesdropping. Warrants become quaint when technology has rendered you effectively omniscient. If it became widely known, the public would go through the roof. Politically speaking, would that matter? Probably not, but a lot more people would start routinely using heavy encryption.

Nobody who learns of this wants to take responsibility for throwing away the capability. The capability requires the discrete cooperation of the telcos, and the public has to stay in the dark, ergo immunity for the telcos. The suits against the government will be easily set aside by assertion of national security privilege.

So now the telcos have immunity and the unknown program can be continued when somebody deems it needed. If it's not in fact continuing right now. We have no way to know.

There's just one flaw in the happy ending. The US Constitution forbids ex post facto grants of immunity. Of course, since practically all standing has been eliminated, the thing may never wind up in court. No doubt the lights are burning over at the ACLU, God bless 'em.

Posted by: fzdybel | June 21, 2008 1:52 AM

Doesn't the President put his hand on the Bible at swearing in saying his duty is to protect the Constitution? So in saying he will vote for this compromise which other constitutional lawyers have said will gut the 4th ammendment, signify that he doesn't deserve to take that oath or if he does will be lieing on the Bible before he even gets the job? He is nothing more than a politician who will say or do anything to get to where he wants to go and to h*ll with everybody else. I guess he feels he should already be coronated since he has his own Presidential seal logo now. WEho was it that first mentionned arrogant and elitist? I think they were right on!

Posted by: Anne | June 21, 2008 1:38 AM

OK, Folks-And Dimocrats;

Here is your reality check, and WAKE-UP Call!

WHAT, would the Leaders of the Dimocrat Socialist World Labor Party do;

IF, they had control, and did not have to deal with Bush?

In other words:

WHAT, would Teddy Kennedy, Tom Daschle, Howling Dean, San Fran Nan, Harry Reid, John Kerry and their Money Bags supporter/owner George Soros ACTUALLY assume they could SHOVE DOWN YOUR THROATS, if, they felt THEY COULD?


Golly Gee Tennessee, I guess they really are all LAWYERS after all!

BOHICA! The phrase would definitely be: BOHICA! :-(

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 21, 2008 1:01 AM

Obama's support of Bush's FISA amendments logically follows from his previous support of Bush's threats to attack Iran to stop a nuclear weapons program that all 16 US intelligence agences have just told us does not exist, his support of Bush's unconditional backing of whatever Israel wants from the Palestinians, and his support of Bush's opposition to every democratically elected leftist government in Latin America. McCain may be Tweedledum, but Obama is Tweedledee. For this Tweedledee, impeachment is "off the table" for political reasons regardless of whether the impeachable offense is waging a criminally agressive war, detaining accused "terrorists" for years without a trial or even charges, or torturing detainees in violation of our Constitution, our statutes and our treaty obligations. And this man taught constitutional law? No doubt he team-taught with John Yoo. They are two of a kind -- selfish, egotistical and without a shred of moral integrity. Our "democracy" is not only sick, it is dead.

Posted by: richard young | June 21, 2008 12:57 AM

First the public financing switch and now it is ok to grant retroactive immunity to the telecoms.
Well, Obama is now making a mad dash to the center---What's the word I'm looking for to describe this---Clintonian? Yes, I believe that is it.
How's this feel all you Obama supporters?
Come to find out your hero is no better than the Clintons you could not stand. I guess it is time to remove those rose colored glasses now.

Posted by: canaldoc | June 21, 2008 12:56 AM

This decision from Obama was unexpected.

Posted by: Alan | June 20, 2008 7:04
___________________________

Only if you are new to politics AND you have partaken of the Obamanut Kool-Aid on a regular basis.

That you have described his treason in a neutral term as "unexpected" shows, perhaps, maybe, the Kool-Aid is wearing off.

Anyone who has taken the trouble to look at Obama's brief political career would not be surprised by this gutless move.

Obama stands for one thing and one thing only: he stands for Obama, the rest of us are destined for a view of the underside of his egomaniacal driven bus. He is the most dangerous man in the world today.

Posted by: jmcauli1 | June 21, 2008 12:33 AM

HEY OBABABOTS


THIS IS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR AND SENT YOUR MONEY IT TO


"CHANGE" AND HE CAN DO IT TO YOU IN A HEART BEAT


WHAT WAY IS THE WIND BLOWING TODAY ??


WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING IN FROM TODAY ??


WHAT IS THE MOST VALUABLE THING OBAMA CAN DO FOR HIMSELF TODAY ???


WAKE UP KOOK AID KIDS


OBAMA CARES ABOUT OBAMA


DON'T WORRY ABOUT "SPECIAL INTERSTS"

YOU HAVE NO CONTROL OVER OBAMA'S SELF INTERESTS


WHY SHOULD YOU?


REZKO DIDN'T. REV WRIGHT DIDN'T.

HIS POLITICAL, BANKROLLER. HIS SPIRITUAL MENTOR

BOTH OF TWENTY YEARS


WHY SHOULD YOU THE PEOPLE AND YOUR PRIVACY AND SECURITY MATTER?


THEY DON'T.


OBAMA IS ME ME MAN


FIGURE IT OUT.


NOT TOO LATE FOR SOMEONE YOU CAN TRUST


Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 12:28 AM


OBAMA IS "REVERSAL MAN"


PEOPLE BETTER FIGURE THIS GUY OUT SOON !!!


HE DOES EVERYTHING TOTALLY BASED ON THE POLITICS OF NOW


WHATEVER GETS HIM AHEAD


OBAMA IS A POLITICAL "BEING"


GET IT KOOL AID KIDS


THIS GUY SAYS YES TO ANYTHING THAT IS VALUABLE TO HIM TODAY


FRICK TOMORROW


HE CAN ALWAYS "CHANGE" HIS MIND AND SCREW YOU !

WITHOUT MISSING A BEAT


Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 12:24 AM

If you want to realized your true potential, you must learn the art of the dark side. Ha ha ha ha....

Posted by: Anakin | June 21, 2008 12:20 AM

Just a typical politian who will do anything for political expediancy

Posted by: John | June 21, 2008 12:12 AM

Snicker-Snicker!


Hee-heee!


Snicker...


The Dims are STUCK with him! LMFAO! :-D

Hee-Heee!

Posted by: RAT-The | June 21, 2008 12:04 AM

Hey buddy, can you spare some change?

Posted by: John | June 21, 2008 12:01 AM

It is delusional to believe Obama will reverse himself on anything resembling his capitulations on FISA and Impeachment -- on the Senate floor or after he is in the Oval Office.

To do that, he would have to throw X, Y, Z under the bus, as he did with A, B, C. Then he'd have to pretend that he rarely visited that country club, even though he is on the membership roll. Then there is history to be rewritten. He's already had to go through that a few times.

Thanks, Howard Dean. Yeah, he's still here. Stuck with him a couple more years. What a squandered opportunity you muddle headed jerk.

Posted by: old91A10 | June 20, 2008 11:58 PM

This piece of s*hit never had respect from me from the start.

Obama is a hopeless human being.

Vote constitution party.

Posted by: Afi K. James | June 20, 2008 11:57 PM

My email response to Obama's latest fundraising email:

I want my money back that I donated to you.

Thanks for caving to Republicans and supporting this FISA "compromise." I thought you taught the constitution and were going to protect it?

I am not even going to vote for you in the general election anymore, I regret spending many days volunteering for you, I regret waiting 8 hours in the February cold to be first in line to hear you speak, and I am going to throw out the sweater and stickers I have with your name on it.

The hope for change you once inspired is completely gone - you are just like all the other pathetic, unprincipled, weak, capitulating, gutless, spineless Democrats. Enjoy your move to the republican center now that you're the nominee. You have lost me as a supporter and probably even as a Democrat.

Shawn

Posted by: Shawn | June 20, 2008 11:56 PM

There goes my "hope" for change. I have no faith in the democratic party anymore to do anything significant on a national level.

Posted by: Shawn | June 20, 2008 11:47 PM

What the f-ck, man? Now, we officially have no choice.

Posted by: fbutler1 | June 20, 2008 11:42 PM

Coward.

Posted by: Steve Real | June 20, 2008 11:39 PM

Nooooooooooooooooo Obama!!
Not you,
Do not give i to the center and far right.
Not you
I like you left and far left
Not you
I like civil liberties and Freedom
Not you
Please Obama!!!

Posted by: Misty | June 20, 2008 11:38 PM

WHAM BLAM!! I nevah shut up! Always gotta a zinger. Gots to be funnayyy. Why I doos my Ali G impersonation while posting?

OBAMA IS 15 points ahead of MCCAIN!!

WHOOOOOOOOOEEEEEEEHH! IZA...

Oh, wait...sh*t...

Posted by: Rat_the :The Movie | June 20, 2008 11:32 PM

The Democrat's and Republican's want their conventions financed, so they had to pass this bill now. The word is that the conventions in Denver and St. Paul, Minn., will be financed overwhelmingly by private money from some of the nation's largest corporations, which include AT&T. In exchange, they were promised access to the nation's most powerful politicians. Bought and paid for!

Posted by: Realitycheck | June 20, 2008 11:31 PM

F@#! moving to the center. You need to stand up for the Constitution. We have been led into a situation where the government can spy on us at will. And once again, no one will be accountable. The republicans are cowards!!! Whatever happened to give me liberty or give me death? Pelosi shows absolutely no leadership. I thought we might actually get a leader in Obama with courage and integrity. If he votes for this bill with the immunity still in it, then he will show neither.

Posted by: dc voter | June 20, 2008 11:26 PM

Bummer. I was a conservative Republican supporting Obama partly because of Bush-McCain's crazy idea of fighting for our liberties/Constitution by stripping us of our liberties, violating our Constitution. And now that Obama supports this where do I turn to?

Posted by: Cindy | June 20, 2008 11:25 PM

Obama had a choice to either agree with Pelosi and party leadership intimately involved in this legislation, and look like an ordinary politician, or he can prove he is an agent for change by taking a bold stand against this bill. Publicly attack what is wrong with bill, condemn it, speak against it in the Senate, vote against it, and campaign against it during the campaign. I guess the question is, Does he have the courage to challenge Pelosi and his own party? So far, he has agreed with Pelosi and like McCain look like an ordinary sellout of American rights. Obama and McCain have sold out America.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 11:16 PM

The money I've contributed to Obama's campaign is gone. The money I would have continued sending him will now go to the ACLU.

This legislation will be challenged in the courts, based on its unconstitutionality. Congress cannot pass a bill making exceptions to the 4th amendment, nor can it pass ex post facto laws. And as we have seen with the Military Commissions Act, the Supreme Court may very well not like Congress trying to sidestep the judiciary on a constitutional matter.

It ain't over.

Posted by: Bill | June 20, 2008 11:10 PM

I'm just appalled at Obama's vote on this issue! Is anyone willing to resurrect the Clinton campaign and raise some hell at the convention?

I'm thinking i'm can't vote for anyone who won't promise to pursue war crime charges against this admiistration and the Democrats who supported it!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 11:06 PM

Obama has grown some cajones...and actually is smartening up about national security. The ultra left liberal jerks that think BERKELEY is the center of the universe are having cows right about now - and good for them.

Obama rocks, go for it Obama. I'm sending you more money now that I am more comfortable with your not pandering to the ultra left losers.

Posted by: Tole U. So | June 20, 2008 11:03 PM

Ahem.

Cough-Cough!

BWAHaHaHaHAAAAHaHaHaHaHaaaaaHAAAA!!!!!


LOL! :-D

Seems, there is a "Dimocrat" born every minute as well! Wait, it was the same birth! ;~)

Posted by: RAT-The | June 20, 2008 11:01 PM

Not only is this a blow to our civil liberties, it's a new weapon in the Repub arsenal. As Scarborough talked about it this morning, he repeatedly emphasized how the Dem's had caved. He might as well have called them lily-livered wussies. And did you see the smirk on W's face when he made the announcement this morning? This is no way to encourage turnout in November.

Posted by: Hillary 2008 | June 20, 2008 10:55 PM

If Obama doesn't take a leadership position in the Senate next week to defeat this assault on the Constitution, I will not contribute another dime to his campaign. As an expert on the Constitution, Obama should know better. If he cannot or will not stand up and articulate what this FISA legislation means to the rule of law, my vote will be in question as well. Bob Barr will start to look better and better.

Posted by: Realitycheck | June 20, 2008 10:52 PM

James Hetfield for President!

Posted by: Upset Democrat | June 20, 2008 10:52 PM

Obama, at heart, is a lawyer and an opportunistic one at that. So, why would Barack seek to shrink the Presidential Powers that Bush/Cheney have worked so hard to expand. Obama=Bush.

Posted by: David | June 20, 2008 10:48 PM

Cluck-Cluck-Squuuaawk!

Squawwk-Squaawk! Change!

Change-Change-Change-Change! Squuuawwk!

What me Change! Change-Change!

Barry wants to Change-Change!

Squawk-Hee-hee-Squawk-Squawk!

Watch me Change!

Town Hall? P'cuuck, Cluck-Cluck!

No-Change! ;~)

Posted by: RAT-The | June 20, 2008 10:47 PM

Sen. Obama has disappointed this supporter of his election efforts on two counts: (1) his intention to vote in favor of this legislation, and (2) despite his pledge to throw lobbyists out of the Obama White House, he went to address the AIPAC--the most influential lobbying group in this country.

Is Obama going to be part of "more of the same"?

Posted by: An Academic | June 20, 2008 10:42 PM

Really sad. I thought/hoped he was bettr than that. At least when I disagree with McCain, I think he's doing it because he really disagrees with me. Obama is doing it because he's posturing, not out of principle.

Posted by: Gunner | June 20, 2008 10:41 PM

"It's all about electability and moving to the center. Or, this could just be election talk and he could migrate back left once he wins...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | June 20, 2008 7:37 PM"

-------------------------------------------

Matt,

You need to stop drinking the kool-aid and get a realization check-up. Your mman is no different than McCain when it comes to not protecting your civil liberties.

Posted by: Hillary 2008 | June 20, 2008 10:41 PM

I can't believe this crap. I'm really disappointed in Obama for this apparent compromise. Say it ain't so!

Posted by: Upset Democrat | June 20, 2008 10:41 PM


this ends-justify-means business is becoming severely worn out. obviously the 'gaming' is resulting in losing. "... and that's why i'm running for president of the united states of america." doesn't there still have to be a country??? i hope obama puts a real 'lefty' on the ticket soon, just to show how he's merely a moderate in a fascist sea.

Posted by: 11minutes2go | June 20, 2008 10:39 PM

Ohhh, LOL! :-D

I guess tomorrow we all get to find out if "Barry" can cut Puppet Master San Fran Nan's String, and do the Politically expedient disclaimer(Again!), or if Ninny Peloser OWNS the Boy!


Can the Bus of O'Bomba, run over a Speaker? ;~)

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 20, 2008 10:38 PM

Obama's first pay back to Pelosi, Hoyer, and Reid.

Posted by: old91A10 | June 20, 2008 10:37 PM

I recommend reading Dan Froomkin's column, "Follow the Leader," which was in "Washington Post" today, for best perspective on this issue. Barack is disappointing some of his supporters, including myself, by supporting this bill, demanded by Bush and approved by his regime. His flip flop on campaign financing is less important than caving in, along with most Democrats, to the Bush administration, again. I thought he was supposed to be a constitutional lawyer with a keen appreciation for civil liberties.

In any event, Barack is still far better than electing McCain for a virtual third Bush-Cheney term of war, helping the wealthy and corporations, neglecting needs of most people in our country.

Posted by: Independent | June 20, 2008 10:37 PM

I am shocked that so many Obama supporters are just now realizing their prophet will do anything to get votes. Obama and McCain along with Pelosi are American traitors for taking away our civil liberties. It is time to start a grassroots campaign to support a third party candidate and remove everyone that supported this bill come November

Posted by: Hillary 2008 | June 20, 2008 10:34 PM

BLANCHE LINCOLN for VP

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 10:23 PM

If Obama goes along with this then it
truly sends a message of more of the same nobody gets it. McCain is for it and so is Obama?! Obama just lost my vote and money

Posted by: The Dude | June 20, 2008 10:20 PM

Astounding. Ooo... He angers the Obamotized "leftovers." My god it should be abundantly clear America is a done deal, and we've been socially engineered into such a level of malignant narcissism that we really don't give a crap what happens anyway.

What a joke. We get ourselves all worked-up--for fifteen seconds or less--as if anything we could do individually would be able to ensure that our Bill of Rights won't by used for ass wipe. Ha, ha, ha...

Don't forget to switch off the lights and put down the toilet seat when you head for the FEMA camp. Have a nice vacation!

Posted by: RGW | June 20, 2008 10:08 PM

One flip flop you should not have done. Sorry Obama, you lost me.

Posted by: cestfini | June 20, 2008 10:08 PM

Dispicable!

Barr '08

Posted by: LittleBarr | June 20, 2008 10:03 PM

Wow. Obama really wussed out on this one. Sorry, but he's an unprincipled opportunist.
More worried about what John McCain and others might say about him than he is about my Constitutional rights. He's hardly the man Hillary could have been in standing up to the fascist right. So far, Obama has yet to earn my vote, and his position on wiretapping will make it even harder to make me not stay home and sit this one out.

Posted by: Rick Friedman, Los Angeles CA | June 20, 2008 10:02 PM

From looking over most of the posts, any information on Obama that casts him in a negative light is silly, unimportant and not legitimate as it doesn't get the "Great Leader" elected.

Posted by: Lynn E | June 20, 2008 10:02 PM

He is certainly doing nothing to earn my vote.

Posted by: Independent writing in HRC | June 20, 2008 9:57 PM

Posted by: Echo21 | June 20, 2008 9:55 PM

So are you all FINALLY starting to get it? He's obviously appeasing someone he needs. However, don't dispair. He could flip flop back the other way tomorrow when it's time to pander to the left again. He stands for nothing but his ambition.

Posted by: Disgusted | June 20, 2008 9:55 PM

No - wait wait - I got it - this is "silly season"!! Why is the Post reporting on this?

Posted by: Echo21 | June 20, 2008 9:54 PM

I'm sure its all the fault of a passionate aide.

Posted by: Echo21 | June 20, 2008 9:53 PM

I was really trying to develop some trust with him...but never mind!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 9:50 PM

ANY spying on Americans outside of the Judiciary system is inexcusable, Mr. Obama. I want a refund -- absolutely despicable.

Posted by: Eric | June 20, 2008 9:45 PM

The only thing the democrats are good at is Protecting G.W. Bush from the Constitution.

The democrats', Oath of Office, "I will subvert the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to Please the Emperor of these United States, Long Live the Emperor."

Posted by: Stephen F. Kislock III | June 20, 2008 9:45 PM

Macghill-Read my Lips!

NO Congressmen in the White House!

We DESPERATELY need Beltway Outsiders!

Business and Economy Wise, Outsiders!

O'Cain will STILL be in the Senate, along with half of Billary! :-(

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 20, 2008 9:42 PM

great onE!!!!

please visit these website: http://www.newsendorser.com

Posted by: newsendorser | June 20, 2008 9:38 PM

Hope, CHANGE! Oh, wait...

You want real change, America? Kick all the bums out and...

Vote Libertarian! Vote Bob Barr!

Posted by: MacGhil | June 20, 2008 9:37 PM

LOL @ all your overwrought commentary.

Posted by: Fromage | June 20, 2008 9:34 PM

I have worked passionately for many months securing votes for Obama. He has shown himself to be a traitor to the Constitution and the People with this position.

Goodbye, turncoat. May you rot in hell with the Dick Cheney.

Where are you, Ralph?

Posted by: Norm
**********************
sure you have...and the Oscar goes to...

Posted by: 2008 | June 20, 2008 9:31 PM

Instead of griping, if you are a true supporter tell him on his site. If his campaign is based on communicating with the voters then don't we have the obligation to tell him when we think he is wrong! By the way, as anyone read his full statements and THE ACTUAL BILL!!! I am for the Constition and all, but sometimes a law or right needs to be amended when circumstances warrant it. The ones that stand out for me are: Slavery, Voting Rights, Civil Rights and Abortion.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 9:25 PM

Obama is the most arrogant dude to come out of Chicago. Already he's got his own presidential seal. My, what audacity! Already, what an ego. I say NO to Obama come November.

Posted by: Say No to Obama | June 20, 2008 9:13 PM

What the Obama campaign did to Hillary was vicious and downright mean. The bastard. He managed to annoy this Democrat.

Posted by: Say No to Obama | June 20, 2008 9:07 PM

I've been a strong Obama supporter. I am still one, but not as strong for this and other mistakes. Retroactive immunity is capitulation We the People absolutely cannot afford. The "Obama Presidential Seal" puts Obama's ego front and center. What a distasteful miscalculation. Obama is a hard core politician, and he has really disappointed this supporter. But it all boils down to this: We the People have to take our Constitution back, and the key to that is Congress, not the Presidency. The election of 2008 must be the election of 1800 de ja vous all over again (Google "Alien and Sedition Acts". It was 1800 the last time the American People got mad enough to gut Congress for messing with basic liberites. That particular bit of history must repeat itself in 1800. The People must strike the fear of God into every politician, both sides of the ailse, Captiol Hill and Whitehouse. We gotta stop all this partisan nonsense, and think CONSTITUTION, which is a strictly nonpartisan set of rules.

Posted by: Ed | June 20, 2008 9:05 PM

Think OUTSIDE the Box(Beltway).

Paging: Mitt Romney...

Mitt Romney..., You are urgently needed at the White House!

Paging: Beltway Outsiders-For some "Change" we can TRUST in! ;~)

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 20, 2008 9:02 PM

And David Bowie plays in the background...


"Cha-Cha-Cha-Cha-CHANGES!, Turn, and face the...." :-(

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 20, 2008 8:58 PM

I have worked passionately for many months securing votes for Obama. He has shown himself to be a traitor to the Constitution and the People with this position.

Goodbye, turncoat. May you rot in hell with the Dick Cheney.

Where are you, Ralph?

Posted by: Norm | June 20, 2008 8:45 PM

I am also very disappointed that he voted for this bill I don't understand what he was possibly be thinking letting the telecomm companies have blanket immunity from past wire tapping as well as letting some democrats and republicans off the hook for the illegal wiretapping. Don't understand this move I feel as a Obama supporter he has made some bad decisions since he has become the nominee. Where is the hope he is talking about when you can bail Washington and big business out of explaining and forcing them to take accountability for the invasion of privacy used whenever no matter whom it hurts. This bill hurts every American and proves again that Washington doesn't care about the people. Very disappointed in Obama supported him whole heartedly but am having serious reservations about continuing to do so.

Posted by: karen | June 20, 2008 8:26 PM

Hey obamalites where's Mr.Hope now? What a joke. This Country is finished.

Posted by: Business as Usual | June 20, 2008 8:12 PM

This decision from Obama was unexpected.

Posted by: Alan | June 20, 2008 7:04 PM
************
Where have you been? WHAT does this guy stand for? REALLY stand for? And will you bank on it?

BTW - if anyone is interested, have you seen his new Seal of Obama? NYT has a blog on it.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/the-great-seal-of-obamaland/#comment-1140313

Posted by: Echo21 | June 20, 2008 7:52 PM

"It's all about electability and moving to the center. Or, this could just be election talk and he could migrate back left once he wins...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | June 20, 2008 7:37 PM"

-------------------------------------------


Obama apologetics aren't just silly, they're pathetic. Do you honestly believe that the man can do absolutely no wrong?

Posted by: Kippy | June 20, 2008 7:47 PM

We are leaderless, but we are not powerless. If our leaders will not do the right thing, we must remove our leaders. The only question is can we afford to wait until November to do it?

We can no longer stand by as our constitutional rights are suspended by illegal bills passed by crooks masquerading as Senators and Congressmen. We know the President is a moron, we expect this sort of thing from him, he has the track record of a 4 year old sniffing glue. Where is the backbone, where is the spine in Congress? Who will speak for us, before we are silenced? Who?

Posted by: gwando | June 20, 2008 7:41 PM

It's all about electability and moving to the center. Or, this could just be election talk and he could migrate back left once he wins...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | June 20, 2008 7:37 PM

Why isn't this on the front page? Why is the only election coverage that's on the front page right now a story about Blmoomberg making positive remarks about Obama? An article about Obama AND McCain supporting this abomination of a bill is FAR MORE RELEVANT than a speech by Michael Bloomberg!

Posted by: Tirade | June 20, 2008 7:33 PM


As a Democrat who votes I am disappointed in Obama's about face on this issue. House
Speaker Pelosi has been too eager to placate this Bush administration. I am
truly disappointed in her leadership on this and many other issues.

Posted by: aliceropchan@gmail.com | June 20, 2008 7:25 PM

Bad move, Obama.

True Patriots are against FISA.

The Terrorists & GOP win everytime that american rights are removed.

Posted by: Franky | June 20, 2008 7:10 PM

This decision from Obama was unexpected.

Posted by: Alan | June 20, 2008 7:04 PM

In his statement he notes "It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses."

Posted by: phi | June 20, 2008 7:03 PM

Do you see this!?!?!?

He's proving himself a national threat!

(52 Sundays x 20 Years = 1,040 Wright Sermons!)

Winning the Democrats the election was supposed to be like winning the special olympics! You can't lose! Until Now!

HAHAHAHAHA!

This is amazing!

McCain 08' "Long Term Change and Safety for All"

Posted by: Never had an Obatomy | June 20, 2008 6:57 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company