Feingold on FISA: Elect Obama to reverse 'terrible legislation'

[LynneSin]

Source: MSNBC's Rachel Maddow

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow asked: "What if Congress had responded to Watergate by immunizing the executive branch's lawbreakers and giving Richard Nixon sweeping new powers to snoop?

"Oh, wait! They just did! They just took thirty years or so to get around to it."

H.R. 6304, updating the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, was passed by the Senate and awaits a pleased President Bush's signature Wednesday. The bill grants the executive branch virtually unchecked power to monitor Americans' electronic communications originating, or terminating, overseas, and immunizes from civil lawsuits the telecommunications companies that agreed to help the NSA eavesdrop on such communications without obtaining the proper warrants through the FISA court.

The people have a right to be disappointed in the Senate's approval of the new FISA bill, Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) told Maddow. However, the best remedy, he said, is a Democratic president, particularly a President Obama.

The legislation is a "catastrophe," Feingold lamented, and it "needs to be fixed at some point."



Read more: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Feingoldon_on_FISA_A_dark_hour_0709.html

---

Feingold was one of the biggest advocates opposing this bill and even he says we need to vote Obama to get this bill fixed.

[ellie]

1. But didn't Obama vote for it?

[LynneSin]

2. Yep and Feingold still supports him

there you go!

[tridim]

3. 3,2,1.. Until Feingold becomes a "traitor" too.

:eyes:

[LynneSin]

9. Yeah let's just toss away Wisconsin voters while we're at it

I think you need to take a deep breath - no one in the democratic party would call Russ Feingold that although I'm sure Lieberman has in his time.

[tridim]

13. I love Feingold and would never call him a traitor.

But I've been watching DU during the past few weeks and have seen things said that just blew my mind.

I'll bet money he'll be dubbed a traitor by the end of the day by some of our more "dramatic" members.

[elocs]

15. I bet you are right. "Drama" seems to be the operative word here lately.

Nothing is too dramatic, too over the top, too hyperbolic to claim here lately. Where can we possibly go from here?

[LynneSin]

16. I'm the biggest Feingold critic and even I won't go that far

I think the first step into submission to Bush was when Feingold gave him Ashcroft. We could have showed our backbones then but he thought the President should have his choice of cabinet even if this choice was radically off the charts. And Ashcroft was the architect of that Patriot Act.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

22. Well, actually, Feingold did so something that is irreversible...

and yet, he is STILL a liberal stalwart! He voted to confirm John Roberts, which for me is far worse than Obama voting for FISA. FISA can be fixed. Roberts will spend a lifetime on the SCOTUS. It's funny that we give Feingold a break but not Obama. Paul Wellstone was one of my heroes and yet he voted for the Patriot Act and for DOMA. We on the Left forgave him but cannot forgive Obama? There's still DUers running around accusing Obama of being a homophobe even while Obama is pledged to overturning DOMA and the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. The bottom line is that when good senators vote, they often do so based on a strategy. Why not get the man into office and allow him to get this FISA thing fixed once and for all? Give the guy the benefit of the doubt!

I still love Feingold but his voting record hasn't been the best, either, and yet he asks us to do what's right. Give Obama an opportunity to fix this thing and do what is right. That's all he's asking for!

Liberals and Democrats bitch way too much for me.

[LynneSin]

24. That too

But at least with Roberts he convinced Kohl to support him too

[Jackpine Radical]

29. Feingold's votes to ratify Bush appointments

were based on a principle he has long held, namely, that--barring unusual circumstances--a President is entitled to get his nominees. You can disagree with that principle, but you cannot say that Russ is acting in an unprincipled way.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

30. And you can't say the same about Obama or Wellstone, either.

Perhaps on principle he DID oppose the vote, but in a practical sense, he knows that he can do something about it...AND FISA restores oversight rather than having nothing at all.

Therefore, principle is working here, too. It's just that some people are so emotionally driven when it comes to Obama that they cannot seem to see the forrest from the trees to find the strategy behind the action.

[Kelvin Mace]

50. Nope, not going to happen

I understand what he is hoping, but I think if Obama is elected, this will be swept under the carpet and forgotten.

[readmoreoften]

48. What is he supposed to say? I don't support my party's nominee? It doesn't work that way.

This is gracious of Feingold and not much more.

[LakeSamish706]

4. Anyone with half a brain will know that the choice between Obama vs McCain...

isn't a choice. Obama wins hands down, so for those that are upset and bitching about Obama's vote on FISA (which I certainly don't like either), you have just the two choices. More of Bush or hopeful change!

[LynneSin]

7. People need to remind themselves of who they want in the White House in 2009

and remember that this voting system allows for only 2 choices in 2009

[southern_belle]

5. kick

[Ichingcarpenter]

6. kick nominated n/t

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

8. OMG FEINGOLD IS A TOOL!!111!!

WE MUST FIND SOMEONE TO RUN AGAINST HIM NOW.

[LynneSin]

10. THIS IS SERIES!!!111!!! CALL CONGRESS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!@2!111!!!

Or perhaps Feingold looks at the big picture and realizes that we can't survivew with another 4 years of McSame

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

18. I CAN'T CALL CONGRESS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!@2!111!!!

THEY'RE IN MY TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS

MONITORING MY PHONE CALLS

kthxbye

:evilgrin:

[DarthDem]

34. Hilarious

Seriously. Thanks for a really good laugh.
:)

[Danieljay]

11. Feingold is a fucking Traitor. How DARE he suggest we vote for that flip flopping centrist Obama.

The nerve.

:sarcasm:

I'm so fucking sick of these reactionary idiots. They are just pissed their candidate lost. If Obama had voted any other way, It would have been a political disaster. When he is elected President, he can make the changes needed, just as FEINGOLD suggested. Obama's vote wouldn't have made the difference between passing and not passing.

[LynneSin]

17. Obama needed to show he could go left during the primaries and....

...now that it's the general election he has to go Central. People don't realize that George Bush kept competitive enough for 2 elections (so he could steal them) but taking a hardcore turn to the center. Anyone think that Bush is a Centrist while doing his job has fucking rocks for their brain.

It's alot like the Faith-Based and Opposing that court ruling that withheld the Death Penalty for Child Rapist. Every vote that Obama makes can & will be future campaign commericial fodder. Had Obama opposed the death penalty for rapists they would have had campaign ads showing lil girls who were raped and killed. Had he denounced and insisted on closing Faith Based Charitities he would abandoned just about every Christian voter in this country (and at 75+% that's alot of voters). And if you read the history about the Telecom - they were pressured after 9/11 to do this when the country was still a believer in Bush. Him opposing it would be campaign fodder that Obama is 'Soft on Terrorists'.

Obama is merely being a Centrist which really is the way to win this country. But if we want to know how he would serve you need to go back to before he was running for office - that's the Obama we're hoping to elect

[Danieljay]

35. VERY well put, Lynne. Thank you for using reason! n/t

[Indenturedebtor]

12. I'm still voting for him but that doesn't mean that I still have to be excited about it n/t

[chill_wind]

14. Better yet--- don't ENACT it.

Our record of getting back lost civil liberties in this country, once lost or eroded hasn't been too hot.

[atreides1]

19. But What Guarantees do We Have?

Let's say that Obama wins, but then decides that the FISA law should remain as it is?

I'm sorry, but this whole idea that Obama will fix it is based on assumptions, we cannot predict what he will do. He may call for a fix of this law and the Patriot Act, he may not.

And until I see him heading in that direction, I'm not going to close my eyes or practice blind faith, I'm not to call people names just because they might be overly concerned about this.

As for those who say they won't support the candidate or who will vote for McCain, I won't crucify them either, this is still the US
and they are still entitled to their opinions even if I don't agree with them!

I will vote for him I will even try to convince others to vote for him, and I will try to explain his reasons for his evolving ideas, but I won't base anything on what may or may not happen, until there is something more solid then just wishful thinking and words.

[LynneSin]

21. Well your other option in 2009 is McCain - what Guarentees do we have with him

Not only with FISA, The Iraq War, Health Care, this economy, Choice, Civil Rights, Activist Judges and a host of other issues that piss us off too.

He may not fix it, I can't see into the future. But at least I know there's a better chance he'll get some of it right during his 4 years instead of a candidate that will get none of it right.

[Art_from_Ark]

71. I agree

Mr. Constitutional Scholar voted for this wretched piece of legislation, for crying out loud, when he could have taken a stand against it and used his legal expertise and charisma to convince his colleagues to vote against it. But he voted for it, and now we're expected to believe he will take a stand against it at a later time??? And what happens if McCain becomes the next occupant of the White House?

[radfringe]

20. Jan 21 2009 and FISA

If mccain wins - nothing will happen to reverse/curb FISA, it will most likely be made even more invasive

If Obama wins - FISA "may" be brought back under control -- BUT don't go looking for any criminal prosecutions. We will be told that we have to put it behind us and move forward. we are being served crap on a plate.

[LynneSin]

23. You're right but - there's so much more going on that FISA

And personally on January 29th, 2009, FISA is the least of my worries with Barack in office. I'd rather he focus on more pressing things like this damn war!

[MadHound]

25. Sorry, but that's faulty logic

Akin to fighting for peace and fucking for virginity. Elect a man to repair the Constitution, even though the man you're electing helped shred the Constitution. Hmmm:crazy:

Obama could have just as easily voted against this bill, and frankly it would have cost him little or nothing politically. Instead he decides to shred the Constitution in a vain attempt to pick up some RWer votes. Can't hang with him on this one.

If Obama was truly concerned about the Constitution and this bill, he would have voted against it. Instead, he showed that he was simply another politician, willing to sell out the Constitution in his own pursuit of political power.

[LynneSin]

26. No matter who you vote for it's going to be Obama or McCain in 2009

and if you live in a state that is a 'swing state' do you really want to make it happen that it's McCain?

[MadHound]

28. And that's supposed to brighten my day, motivate me, or energize me?

Sorry, but from where I sit, it seems we have two candidates willing to sell out on the Constitution, two candidates willing to break down the wall between church and state, two candidates willing to put corporations ahead of people. Ooo, what a choice this is. Nader's comment about not a dime's worth of difference is becoming more and more of a reality:shrug:

I'm fed up with this good cop/bad cop dog and pony show that is being put on by the two major parties. We have been screwed, blued and tatooed by both major parties over the past few years, and it is time that we the people took the power back from them and invest it elsewhere, into more trustworthy hands. Will that happen this year, no. But more and more people are waking up to the reality of the two party/same corporate master system of government that we live under, and sooner than you think, we will be taking back our government of the people and by the people for the people.

Continuing to participate in a crooked game that insures that no matter who wins, we the people lose is not something that I want to do. I may work for down-ticket Dems this year, but as far as supporting Obama at this point, no. I value the Constitution much more than a political candidate.

[LynneSin]

31. The concept of having four more years of McSame sure as hell motivates me

I'd rather have a president that does a few things right then one who won't do any.

[MadHound]

44. I'd rather have an intact Constitution

Sorry, but the shredding of the Constitution isn't "change we can count on", it is more of the same old shit we've been going through for the past seven years.

[LynneSin]

45. Wait, and how will that happen if we get McCain in office

what little of it that's left after Bush used 8 years to wipe his ass with it would be totally destroyed by McCain. At least with Obama we have a chance to restore it.

And don't give me this "Oh we have other candidates we could vote for" bullshit. In 2009 it will be McCain or Obama, or system does not support any other way and personally I'd like to save whatever is left of the Constitution and have a president that might restore some of it.

[MadHound]

49. So basically you're saying that we're faced with the this choice

Either McCain and continue to get screwed, or Obama, and get a kinder, gentler screwing. Hmm, either way apparently the Constitution is gone, right? Sorry, but I think I'll look for another way out. If Obama wants my vote, he has to earn it. So far, he's failing, miserably.

I can accept many things in a candidate, shredding the Constitution isn't one of them. Nice to see that you're not so ethical, but I have this nagging little thing called a conscience that I simply can't turn off.

[LynneSin]

54. Well option 3 - move to another country

Serioiusly and as I posted on another thread I started. We could join up with all the other progressive internet communities and form one giant "Let's get the 3rd party candidate" elected. com and we'll still either have Obama or McCain in the White House.

I'm not giving Obama a free pass if he gets elected. I plan to be here on DU continuing to fight for democracy. But it'll be a hell of alot better to do it with someone like Obama than someone like McCain.

And who said I wasn't ethical? It's called practical. It's called understanding this fucked up electorial system that made sense 200+ years ago but not today. And it's the grim reality that no matter how high on your horse you decide to sit you'll still either have Obama or McCain as your president in 2008.

And I'll tell you this much - if McCain gets into office I will be pissed at anyone who voted 3rd party because damnit, John Paul Stevens and Ruth Ginsberg are not getting any younger and I don't want McCain replacing them. Fuck with anything you like but don't fuck with my Supreme Court. You think the Constitition is geing shredded now? Wait til we have Stevens or Ginsburg replaced with another Scalia, Thomas or Alito. Because that's what you're going to get with McCain. Worst case with Obama is we'll get an O'Connor or Kennedy that really were the last moderate justices appointed to the Supreme Court.

[MadHound]

55. Oh now that's enticing

Getting SC justices that are of the caliber of O'Connor:eyes:

So in order to get these wonderful "moderate" judges, you're willing to forego your civil rights and the Constitution? Wow, talk about cheap.

Sorry, but no matter how you spin it, Obama participated in killing the Constitution yesterday. That may not mean much to you, but to many people, both on the right and the left, that means quite a bit. The thing is, we've been settling for so much crap for so long, just to say that we've got a win, that we've now sunk to an all time low, trading the Constitution for an Obama win:crazy:

I think that the time has come to transcend party politics, and work on getting our country back. I'm not doing that on DU, I'm doing that in the real world. But frankly, if that means taking on Obama and the rest of the Democratic party, so be it. This is my country too, and damnit, I'm tired of living under the two party/same corporate master system of government.

You don't like that, oh well. I don't like people who are willing to bargain our Constitution away from the chance of some Pyhrric political "victory"

[LynneSin]

56. No, you didn't read what I said

I said WORST case we could end up with an O'Connor or Kennedy. Outside of the notorious Bush V. Gore, O'Connor has always been on the moderate side and has been 100% on the side of choice. I was comparing that to the WORST choice we could get with McCain as president which would be another Alito, Scalia or Thomas. I never said that's what we would get I said that's the WORST we could get.

Ride your high horse because clearly you prefer suffering under 4 more years of McCain. And go ahead and judge the rest of us as people who are non-caring about the constitution, or our rights or whatever. Just like your comment about what I said about the Supreme Court justices, you do the same thing with the rest of us here - you JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS and make ASSUMPTIONS and frankly I'm a bit sick and tired of that.

To be honest, there would be no candidate that would make you happy on the dem ticket and I'm assuming you'd rather just wallow in self-pity than take the necessary steps to start our country back on the right direction. Is Obama the best choice? Who knows, if you use my standards or yours then probably not. But if you use the standard of what is the best choice to turn this country around and get it in the right direction then it's a resounding hell yes.

But go ahead and be selfish, you claim it's about the constitution but your options help elect republicans in a shitty system that allows for no other choice other than "A" or "B". (and even then some of those "A" may get swapped to "B"). So at this point, Obama is clearly the best choice and the one that not only I will happily pull the lever for but do my best to help get elected not just here but in RL, where I have spent countless hours for the last 20 years getting democrats elected. Then after the election I'll do the OTHER thing I have spent countless hours doing in RL - protesting the shit those people I got elected do.

Go ahead, judge me if it makes you feel better but from the replies I've read I'm glad to know there is more sanity that understands thew all our backs are up against than insanity of blindly chasing windmills.

[MadHound]

62. No, I'm not in favor of McCain

But hey, if it makes you happy to think that, by all means.

But really I'm trying to help break this country out of this binary, black, white, Democrat, Republican mode of thinking. Most political experts agree that the parties have drawn increasingly closer together, while the rest of the political spectrum is ignored. Now we're seeing bipartisan shredding of the Constitution. Is this a good thing? Are you really willing to accept the loss of your civil rights in exchange for such a "win". I'm not, but it's a sad commentary on our society that a lot of people are.

I don't think that you're stupid. Misguided, overzealous perhaps, yes, but not stupid. Please, try to step out of the binary thinking that you're engaged in, and realize that outside those parameters there is a solution that we can all agree on. Until then, we'll have to agree to disagree.

[LynneSin]

78. Anything else you'd like to assume about me - you really should stop that!

We have 4 months until the election and a shithole of a country that we're living in thanks to 8 years of the Bush Regime. We have an electorial process that was designed for the technology (or extreme lack of it) of 200+ years ago but not designed for today.

We have short term and long term. Short term is getting a democrat in the White House and that option is Obama. Now he already has an uphill battle with unfortunately the #1 issue with Obama is that he is of a skin color that certain people won't vote for anyways (but then again they're redneck assholes they may not have voted for Hillary or a pasty old white man who has a "D" next to him). The last thing we need to do is find more ways to alienate voters in the next 4 months that could ultimately could lead us to McCain. And we know damn well that as long as McCain stays within a few points he can steal the damn thing too.

I see FISA as one issue that is completely separate from another issue of getting Obama in the White House. And personally I think our debate on FISA and getting this bill reversed should be debated in GD, an area where we can discuss the other shortfallings of the democratic party as a whole (Mind you I realize this one is in LBN, but trust me there are enough "OOO Obama is bad he voted for FISA" in GDP.) You claim I have little care about the constitution or that perhaps I'm just misguded over-zealous but guess what - YOU ARE ASSUMING AGAIN and you really should stop that because personally it does make you look stupid and btw, that wasn't an assumption.

I started this thread because I felt that Feingold, a major opponent of the FISA bill came out with what had to be said - don't let this bill drag down Obama and his chances to get elected (Ok that's not exactly what Feingold said but pretty much his purpose). But yet we're doing that all over the place on DU and not realizing that basically we're shooting ourselves in the foot. We're the ones that are impacting Obama on this FISA issue, not MSM, not Fox News, not anyone else. We're forming circular firing squads everytime we find something that makes Obama 'a little bit electable in our eyes'. We are the beautiful woman who stands in front of the mirror everyday who says "I'm not Pretty, I'm too Fat, I'm Ugly" and eventually we talk ourselves into becoming what we believe.

You want to bitch about FISA bitch and I'll even join in with you. But this is not a Presidential race issue, this is a democratic party issue. We here at DU (and I mean everyone) needs to talk about how we are going to fight these and just as Feingold said, the first thing we need to do is get Obama elected. If you're calling me misguided and over-zealous then you're calling Russ Feingold, liberal senator who was a major opponent against that FISA bill, the same exact thing. Because both of us are saying that we need to continue the fight with FISA AND we need to get Obama elected.

[Danieljay]

67. Amen, Sister. n/t

[Danieljay]

36. Get the fuck over yourself and vote for Obama. You really think by not supporting him

you are making a difference? Come on.

He is doing what he has to do as a politician to get elected, fix the fuck-ups of the past 8 years and move this country ultimately in the direction that you and I BOTH want to see.

McCain wont even come close to and could be the beginning of the end for everyone.

[Lorentz]

39. Anyone who doesn't vote for Obama is selfish and doesn't care about this country's direction.

They are only seeking attention by pretending to be keyboard revolutionaries. Their self-indulgent and ignorant attitude of not voting for Obama as "punishment" and/or "principle" will end with President John McCain. No two ways about it.

[MadHound]

42. Anybody who is willing to accept the shredding of our Constitution

In exchange for getting "their" candidate getting elected doesn't deserve to be called either a Democrat or an American. Sorry, but I don't do bargains with my civil rights, and the fact that you are just goes to show what a weak, sorry sycophant you are.

People like you are sad, willing to accept anything just so you can say a Democrat won. How fucking pathetic is that. You are willing to be a sheep, bargaining away our rights in exchange for a Pyrrhic victory since though Obama might win, your civil rights will be gone.

How low this party has fallen, when it is willing to accept the shredding of the Constitution, willing to back a candidate who fails to uphold their sworn oath to defend the Constitution, all for some ultimately meaningless win.

[Lorentz]

59. In 2008, if a Democrat doesn't win, then a Republican will.

That's the reality. Not Obama = McCain. There are only two candidates. One is offering us permanent tax cuts to the wealthy, 100 years of war and a draft if/when WWIII starts. The other is pledging to remove us from Iraq, tax the wealthy, and give the middle class a break.

Out of curiosity: what are you going to do to remedy this dreadful "shredding" of the Constitution? What is your solution that will ensure the shredding doesn't continue past January 2009? Post on a message board about how stupid everyone is (but you, of course) for supporting Obama?

[MadHound]

61. Well one thing is not engaging in short term thinking, like you're doing

For you and others, it is all about win, win win at all costs for 2009. You're willing to throw away long term gains, like our Constitution, all for a short term gain, winning in the fall. Yet what are you getting with that victory? Apparently yet another president who is willing to shred the Constitution for political gain.

We have absolutely got to stop thinking in two and four year increments, with the goal always being that mythical win. We're not stopping to think what that win gains for us. Instead, we need to form long term plans and long term coalitions that can make the voice of we the people heard. That's what I'm working on.

But hey, go ahead and vote for Sock Puppet A, let's see where it gets you. Just don't complain when your Constitutional rights disappear down the rabbit hole.

[Lorentz]

63. "Yet what are you getting with that victory?"

The Supreme Court for the next generation. But that's just short-term thinking, I guess.

[MadHound]

74. Hmm, a shredded Constitution in exchange for slightly more moderate SC justices

Let me get back to you on that one.

[LynneSin]

43. In a nutshell - yep, that's about it.

Look, I hate the electorial process as much as the next person but this is what we have. And no matter who you vote for in 2008, in 2009 it will either be John McCain or Barack Obama in the White House.

Now, if I have someone who say, lives in Massachusetts where you're pretty much guarenteed to go Obama, I guess I wouldn't bitch as much. But no matter what someone claims that "Oh I have to vote my conscious" crap ultimately you're either helping to put Obama in the White House or McCain. All those other candidates line up to see what the can spoil to make that final choice.

If I want a candidate that matches my ideologies 100% then I should have run for office. Everyone else is a compromise.

[MadHound]

47. I'm not looking for somebody that I agree with 100%

And that is rather naive and presumptuous of you to think so. However I am looking for somebody who will, despite our differences elsewhere, uphold and defend the Constitution and our civil rights. With this FISA vote, along with his support for more faith based funding, Obama has clearly signaled that he is not that person. After all, didn't our Constitution get shredded enough under Bush, do we really want it shredded more?

[LynneSin]

57. I suppose replying to you enough times, assuming is something you get use to

since you've assumed a hell of alot about me.

[Danieljay]

66. Umm, just who might that be that actually stands a chance in this election? Please tell us. n/t

[Barrymores Ghost]

69. I've got a gr8t idea!!!1!!. Vote 4 Nader!

That'll get u EVERYTHING u want, and MORE! Seriesly, dood! He'z teh reel deel!!!!!!1!!1

[MadHound]

41. Ooo, aren't you the polite one

Get the fuck over your own self and stop treating my vote, my decision like I actually owe it to somebody. What a fucking arrogant prick you are.

So it is OK with you that he's helped shred the Constitution, that he's willing to further erode the wall between church and state, all to get elected? Is that the change you want to see? Sounds like more of the same ol' same ol' to me.

Sorry pal, but nobody owns my vote except myself, and if somebody wants it, they have to earn it. I realize that earning peoples' votes is a quaint old fashioned notion to some, but hey, there it is. Shredding the Constitution is not the way to earn my vote, no matter if the candidate has a D or R behind their name.

[Pastiche423]

52. I agree w/what you have posted on this thread

When given the chance to prove he stands for HOPE and CHANGE, he failed miserably for all of the world to see.

Yet many people on this thread believe he's going to fix what he, himself, helped to break.

:crazy:

[MadHound]

53. Thank you,

It amazes me how many people are willing to give away the Constitution and their rights, all in the name of "winning"

And yes, the logic of Obama fixing what he helped break is quite loony. Frankly I think he, along with the Democratic leadership, are actually looking forward to using all these bright new shiny toys that Bushco has been playing with for the past few years.

But hey, what do I know, I'm a loony lefty, one of those strange people who believes in retaining our Constitution and our civil rights at all costs. I know, I know,:crazy:

[Danieljay]

65. NO one is giving away the constitution except for Bush, and then McCain when all you whiners throw

your vote away.

[MadHound]

75. Then what would you term Obama's FISA vote?

What do you think of his breaking down the wall between church and state via increased faith based funding? Shred, rip, that's the sounds I hear coming out of Obama's camp.

[Danieljay]

64. then keep your fucking vote, and then feel free to keep your mouth shut if McCain wins, Pal.

No one is shredding the constitution. This was a political move and if its illegal it will be turned over by the courts if President Obama doesn't initiate the change when he is elected, no thanks to you.

[Barrymores Ghost]

68. Leave the simpering douche-bag be...

He's not going to make or break the election, and his bloviating self-importance and smug, self-righteous and uninformed pseudo-indignation is nothing more than a desperate cry for attention from a pouting, petulant pissant. His "candidate" is Ralph-fucking-Nader, once a champion of Average Americans, Nader is nothing but an egomaniacal, dried-up has-been whose only audience these days is made of patchouli-stinking morans and monied Republicans hoping to throw another election by using him to siphon off votes from a Democrat.

I wouldn't cross the street to piss on that idiot MadHound if he were on fire. Fuck him. Let him stew in his own juices if he wants. It's all just fucking bluster, anyway. He'll pull the lever for Obama when the time comes. If he doesn't, then he's an imbecile, a traitor and a fucktard -- all rolled into one lumpy mass of fetid cat shit. He'll have to live with that fact.

Fortunately, none of us needs to smell him.

[MadHound]

77. Hmmm, where have I read such vulgar, inane screeds before?

Oh, yeah, FR, that's where.

A shame when a supposedly intelligent, liberal person is reduced to vulgar screeds against others around here because you are lacking in intelligence, perception, and are blinded by lockstep thinking.

[Barrymores Ghost]

83. Eh? Hmmm...sounded like a touched nerve, twanging in the breeze. n/t

[MadHound]

76. You are naive, aren't you

Yes, it was a political move, but do you think that the Supreme Court will overturn it? This Supreme Court:rofl: Do you think that Obmama will overturn it, if so, then why didn't he just vote against it now? After all, it isn't like he won't have the same political considerations once he's in office.

Sorry, but our Fourth Amendment is gone, and Obama participated in killing it. There is no way you can spin that, and the fact that you're willing to except that from a candidate and still vote for him simply goes to show how low the standards for presidential candidate have sunk around here and around the country.

[humbled_opinion]

73. Move the country in the right direction?

You hope... no one can know a mans soul....and the bottom line is there was no reason to back this flawed legislation.... It is supported by maybe a third of the country tops...

What we don't know is how easily Obama may be swayed by the right wing corporate media whores....

scenario, i.e., shortly after his election if he enacts changes to Bush policies i.e., Fisa, Homeland Security, Iraq, etc and there is even the smallest of Radical Islamic terror attacks in America the GOP is going to go full bore with impeachment proceedings, investigations, who knew what when how and how did changes effect blah, blah, blah...

This is a no win situation for Obama and thats when all the underhanded dealings will start protecting legacy's is a MotherF'er....

[mac56]

46. "Nader's comment about not a dime's worth of difference is becoming more and more of a reality."

Joking, of course (?).

Honestly, you see that little difference between Obama and McSame?

[MadHound]

51. When I see two candidates willing to shred the Constitution for their own gain

It is really hard to vote for either one of them. I can accept many things from a candidate, shredding the Constitution isn't one of them.

And no, I'm not joking. I could go into a long screed about how the two parties have become more and more alike, how we're now essentially living under a two party/same corporate master system of government now, but you probably wouldn't listen to some anonymous internet poster. Therefore I suggest that you go read Kevin Phillips "Wealth and Democracy" and "American Theocracy", along with some Zinn and Chomsky, then make up your own mind.

[Barrymores Ghost]

70. Wow. You've said "shred the Constitution," like, 50 fucking times in this thread...

...you are single-handedly rendering the phrase a tired cliche...do you know that?

Hmmmm...I'll bet you dress like one, too.

[Lorentz]

82. Everytime he says "shred the constitution"...

... we have to take a drink.

[davekriss]

60. Lynne, expect to see a mess more undervotes this year (nt)

[LynneSin]

80. I'm hoping the Ohio thing will be resolved

Since repukes Robert Taft and Kenneth Blackwell were corrupt and made it a point to have a high number of undervotes in urban areas like Cleveland. Rolling Stone had a story from RFK Jr. about how there were polling places in downtown Cleveland in predominantly minority populated areas that had the same number of voting machines as suburbian & rural areas. This kind of setup ensured that there were long lines in Cleveland and plenty of undervotes that could be discarded since ultimately provisional votes were given out at closing time for all the folks standing in line.

I really hope the new Ohio Secretary of State is cleaning up the mess that Kenneth Blackwell created. And what's sad is that Kenneth Blackwell is African-American and yet was happy to sell out his heritage to help elect men who would do all they can to keep the inequality between whites and minorities.

[davekriss]

84. Undervotes mean...

..., as I understand it, the Presidential selection is left blank while the voter votes for all other candidates down ticket (conversely, overvoting means there is arguably two candidates selected for one position). When I say expect undervoting I mean a number of left-progressives may decide to punish Obama for his rightward lurch (or perhaps a newly gained visibility into his consistent right-center political personality), while voting strongly Democratic down-ticket, hopefully pushing Congress to veto-proof majorities.

Given the performance of the Democratic Party on everything from the IWR to, now, FISA, even a veto-proof majority won't mean much if large numbers of DINO's choose to preserve and enhance the Bush legacies.

I so disagree with people who believe the way to win is to put on a Republican suit. Why vote for a "Republican" Democrat when you can vote for the real thing, an actual Repiublican? I think a leftward lurch would result in landslide victories for the Democratic Party.

(On edit, fixed spelling.)

[DeepModem Mom]

27. K&R

[dflprincess]

32. A thread that takes a closer look at Feingold's statement

and his use of the words "should & hope". He never said he thinks Obama will fix it - only that he should and Feingold hopes he will.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6481274

I imagine Feingold was just being the good party guy with his statement - I'd love to know what he really thinks about this.

[mzmolly]

33. I agree with Feingold on all counts.

eom

[depakid]

37. It would be more perasuasive if Obama could in fact "fix it"

but with all the DINO's in Congress, that's not going to happen.

Indeed, if Obama does manage to get elected, I expect the right wing enablers to behave more or less like Congress did under Jimmy Carter.

[Art_from_Ark]

72. The Congress under Jimmy Carter wasn't so bad

There were still quite a few liberal/progressive icons around back then. But a lot of them got the sack with the Reagan landslide in '80, and even though the Democrats retained nominal control of the House (they lost the Senate outright), there were enough "blue dog Democrats" (they were called "boll weevils" back then) to help give Reagan most of the crappy legislation he wanted.

[daggahead]

38. I'm more optimistic ...

Do you think that overturning this travesty would even have a chance if McCain is president? If I recall, there are at least 3 Supremes that tend to vote against fascism (most of the time) that are nearing their expiration dates. Obama would at least appoint judges that would equal their position on the political spectrum (I hope). If the ACLU is able to take their case to the Supreme Court to get the 4th Amendment restored in full, then let's hope it will not be in a court that has a 90% corporate-approved bench.

[Ian David]

40. Can Obama Fix It?

Yes He Can!

[0rganism]

58. IMHO, Obama is the ONLY one of the D turncoats who gets a pass

He actually has a legitimate excuse: he has to play "moderate man" for the next 4 months.

If a dozen of those other cowards had held firm, the bill would be safely stuck in filibuster limbo, and Obama would have been in the clear to pull the senators in swing states along on his coattails. One I can't forgive is Sheldon Whitehouse. WTF? There was a guy with NOTHING to lose, no upcoming election to worry about, nothing major on the line, and hell, even his Republican predecessor Chaffee wouldn't have voted for this terrible piece of anti-constitutional trash legislation. That guy is on my permanent shit-list.

[LynneSin]

79. Personally I think FISA and Obama's campaign are 2 separate issues

Because we need to continue fighting to get the truth out there for FISA but to me that is a completely different issue that getting Barack Obama elected. The whole purpose of this thread was to point out that Russ Feingold, who is the one of the leaders of getting FISA bill defeated, feels the same way that many of us DUers feel. We're never ever going to get FISA to light if we put anyone else in the white house other than Barack Obama (and of course the only other choice is McCain).

I think this whole FISA debate is a General Discussion debate - another shortfalling of the Democratic Party that we need to continue fighting. It is NOT a debate for getting the White House back in democratic hands.

[mmonk]

81. The problem arises in the logic that may seem twisted to some.

I wouldn't mention the FISA bill and Obama at the same time or in the same conversation. It's like saying the way to fix it is by electing someone who voted for it.

[Fumesucker]

85. Obama might be able to fix FISA..

Whether he will or not is another story.

Telecom immunity, on the other hand, is a done deal.

We now will never know what really happened to make Ashcroft et al threaten resignation.

And if *Ashcroft* threatened resignation, it must have been truly horrendous.

THAT is what the FISA bill and Obama's vote for it were all about, covering up wrongdoing by the Bushies.