Check in here if you are angry about Obamas position on FISA

[ooglymoogly]

Anger needs to be vented....What profiteth a man to gain the presidency and lose his soul?....and for me the soul of the democratic party is the constitution.

[scheming daemons]

1. We can't afford to apply purity tests to our candidate this time.... the stakes are too high

[ooglymoogly]

6. I fully agree...but that does not keep us from voicing our anger

over this most important issue which truly goes against the grain of democracy.

[crankychatter]

54. it's just disruption under the guise of "constructive criticism"

When do you campaign FOR the fucking candidate, eh?

[ooglymoogly]

76. Heavily. almost 24/7. Writing, calling, Standing fervently behind him during the HRC debacle

with a few hrs for sleep. To most of us here, this is the most important election since the American Revolution and contrary to what many are saying on this post this is a big mistake for him to have stumbled into and it will always be with him throughout history.

[truedelphi]

102. Thanks for your defending those of us who have these

"Anger issues."

[Runcible Spoon]

7. can we get a new word please? you and countless others have broken "purity"

sigh.

[Two Americas]

93. the ones using it are killing it

Ten years ago or so some of us joked that some day the absurd "purity" argument, used to defend and apologize for Democrats moving farther and farther to the right and to silence all dissent, would be stretched to the breaking point, by being used to call something like support for the Bill of Rights "purity." Lo and behold, here we are.

[bowens43]

9. the Constitution is NOT a purity test.

[ananda]

99. Totally agree. Separation of powers and balance of power is essential.

No president should have unitary executive power
ever.. and particularly not during a time of
corporate fascist government.

[John Q. Citizen]

14. I don't care if bush trashes the constitution, why should I care if the Dems do?

That seems to be your point.

[Two Americas]

92. purity?

The Bill of Rights?

Objections to ANY compromise could just glibly be labeled "purity" and dismissed, and that would mean that there were no place for principles of any kind ever in the party and no input to the politicians from the citizens, and that spells the death of the republic and of our representative democracy.

Beyond the moral bankruptcy of your argument, and the threat that it represents to the country, you are asking us to assume to we must choose between standing for principles and winning - that the two are oppositional to one another. I do not think that is true, and it certainly is not something we should accept as a given just because you present it as though it were. The times of the party's greatest electoral success were also the times when it took strong stands for principles and ideals. I think the choice is between both, or neither.

We do not need to choose between what is right and winning, any more than we have to choose between the Bill of Rights and security. Those are lies.

[thewiseguy]

2. How many threads are we going to have about this?

[WeDidIt]

5. One for every person still pissed off abotu teh primaires

Or more, as the case may be.

[thewiseguy]

8. I am seriously getting tired of these concerns while our focus has to be on someone else

[ooglymoogly]

19. yes these non consequential things like the shredding of the constitution. nt

[ooglymoogly]

13. An assumption based on nothing

I have been gung ho supportive of Obama since Kucinich was eliminated by corporate media.

[thewiseguy]

17. Kucinich was eliminated by himself

I watched one of his speeches at the Jefferson Dinner and he was a joke. The way he was bouncing up and down like a spring spoke volumes.

I would never see myself voting for him to be the president.

[ooglymoogly]

24. now I see where you are coming from nt

[WeDidIt]

36. Kucinich lost me entirely when he stated unequivically on Real Time

with Bill Maher that the military option would be taken completely off the table and never used.

That's a stupid stance in today's world.

[thewiseguy]

40. I am sure alot of folks on DU would support that stance

;-)

[ooglymoogly]

79. Like all your posts thewiseguy, this is preposterous. nt

[ooglymoogly]

77. I'll need proof of that as I do not believe it.

I watch Bill Mahr and I saw no such thing...and of course that would be stupid, self immolation for Kucinich.

[WeDidIt]

81. HERE'S THE PROOF

2:35 into it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3RX4DkVo4E

[ooglymoogly]

101. In that appearance he was talking about invading other countries

and taking that off the table. He clearly stated in the interview that all countries have the right to defend themselves; Both statements I am in agreement.

[bowens43]

18. this pisses me off and it has nothing to do with the primaries.

the attitude I see from some of my fellow Obama supporters is very much like the attitude I see in those who frequent hillaryis44. The issues don't matter, only candidate matters.

This is probably one of the most important issues we have faced in decades and Obama is on the wrong side of it. I find it hugely disappointing and I will voice my concern.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

84. Yes, your right the issues do matter, and a lot of them are more important then telecom immunity

[crankychatter]

55. They won't stop bashing Obama

ever

[ooglymoogly]

65. What a fucking bunch of BS

Obama is on the wrong side of this very important issue and it is painful to all of us who have bee supporting him non stop from the time he was one of the last two standing. We are not a bunch of dumb sheep.

[earth mom]

82. As many as it takes to get people to wake the hell up!

:grr:

[natrat]

85. sweep it under the rug-who cares about warrantless spying and all it entails

they probably have a fat file on him and he has no choice but the point is there should be no file

[kentuck]

3. I understand his position.

If he could only get 15 of his fellow Senators to vote with him, what would that say about his influence in his Party? Naturally, he would want to be with the majority of the Party, but unfortunately, the majority of our Party is brain dead.

[bowens43]

11. I understand his position too

and it sucks

[Catherina]

16. If Obama and his brilliant oratory and skills of persuasion can't get enough Democrats now

when THEY know how much is at stake and how angry people are, what makes you think he'll ever get them?

I've been turning this thing over for almost a week, listening to all the arguments and still and can't understand or justify his position. It's frankly inexcusable.

[atreides1]

33. So

If as you state:

"Naturally, he would want to be with the majority of the Party, but unfortunately, the majority of our Party is brain dead."




Would that not make Senator Obama brain dead as well, or does he get a free pass because he's the nominee?

And can real principles be frittered away so easily for such a crass and pandering reason, if so were they real in the first place?

[Benhurst]

4. The Constitution be damned.

What's a little treason among friends?

[European Socialist]

10. I have to keep reminding myself he is married to Michelle and...

he was against the Iraq War.

[John Q. Citizen]

12. I am not angry, I'm disappointed and I intend to organize against Barack's Repo position.

It's my constitution.

I am the change I seek.

[Marrah_G]

15. He's doing what he feels necessary to win

Everyone should expect for him to do or say things that will irritate you.

If he did not say things to irritate you........he would lose the race.

That is the reality of the situation.

When you get upset just think: McCain is fucking scary and should never have control of the worlds biggest military.

[ooglymoogly]

22. yes but this is much bigger than that

saying things to irritate us is one thing which I can accept. Supporting the shredding of the constitution is quite another.

[Democrat 4 Ever]

28. So when Obama said he was for change he had his fingers crossed? He meant to keep

the political expedient flip flopping on a case by case basis? Obama wasn't my first choice, hell he wasn't my fourth or fifth choice but I have swallow my disappointment and will vote for him. He is 10 times better than McCain but he will always be a second or third tier candidate to me. This is a perfect example.

He is doing exactly as I thought he would all along. He is not about change, it is just a catchy notion for the peons.

If he doesn't reconsider his position on FISA pronto he is no better than McCain when it comes to saying and doing anything to get elected. FISA isn't just a bridge to nowhere or a few extra billions in military contracts - this is the bedrock of our entire government and he is willing to pander for a few votes.

[DevonRex]

29. I can't get over people thinking he can change EVERYTHING

before he gets elected. Even when he IS president he won't be able to do that.

Right now he's just a candidate trying to be electable. And that means appealing to centrists. He has said he doesn't want immunity. But he cannot afford to look weak on terrorism. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

I think Reid should have scheduled the vote for when Obama is out of the country.

[ooglymoogly]

74. or not at all until the new congress is sworn in.

Reid, Pelosi and Hoyer and a few others have been trying to sneak this through for several months without getting their hands dirty or get noticed doing it.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

30. Yep. Surprise! He's a politician!

[Catherina]

37. Marrah

Is he seriously doing what is necessary to win? We fought like cats and dogs over Obama/Clinton. Some people may never be on speaking terms again but it's like living in upside-down world to see strong former HRC supporters like you giving him the benefit of the doubt on something that galls strong Obama supporters like me.

What does Obama have to win by doing this? By doing this, he's deflating the enthusiasm of all the little worker ants on the ground who believed this was about change. I'm specifically speaking of people like me, the same ones Markos talked about

At stake for Obama in the FISA vote is the intensity of support for Obama, Moulitsas said. “I don’t want to hear him talk about leadership. I don’t want to hear him talk about defending the Constitution. I want to see him do it,” he said. “If he does, it will increase the intensity and level of support he gets from base Democrats. If he doesn’t, we may worry he is just another one of these spineless Democrats who are more afraid of controversy in doing the right thing than they are in actually doing the right thing.”...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6412774

It's not good to have a disillusioned activist base when you're counting on them to do the work for you

And there's more. Plouffe boasted that Obama's campaign will not have only an edge in volume (more volunteers, more organizers, more door-knocking, more phone-banking, more precinct work, more advertising); it will have an advantage in quality. There's a "persuasion army" working on behalf of Obama, he said. He pointed to polls showing that Obama supporters and Democrats are far more enthusiastic about this election than McCain supporters and Republicans. Consequently, Obama persuaders--supporters who volunteer or merely talk up Obama among friends and relatives--are likely to do a better job than McCain persuaders. This is "a hard thing to quantify," Plouffe remarked. But he added, "we think it means a lot."

It was an impressive performance: more cash, more volunteers, more ads, more opportunities to go on offense, more enthusiasm, more...everything.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6412961

Plouffe's 'persuasion army'

One of the most interesting elements of David Plouffe's briefing to reporters yesterday was his assertion that beyond the campaign's quantifiable edge over McCain in terms of money and volunteers, Obama will rely on a "persuasion army" of supporters to win friends and neighbors over to Obama's side.

It's a truism of politics and organizing that people are more likely to be persuaded by people they know than by television advertising, and kind of politics that, as Plouffe noted, "the Bush people by and large did very well."

He described the late days of the race: "There’s ads flying, people are getting 10 mail pieces a day they're getting robocalls," along with other paid and free media.

Obama would rel, he said, on "that human interaction between a family member or neighbor or colleague... helping them react to news," he said.

Obama's volunteers, he said, would be ready -- presumably through some sort of email talking points -- to respond when a neighbor said "You know, I’m leaning toward Obama but then I saw something on the news that really concerned me."

Plouffe stressed the importance of voters' being persuaded by people they know, people who look and talk like them, and suggested a well-organized ground-level effort, relying heavily on independents and Republicans whose support for Obama will strike their neighbors as unusual (rather than the usual local activist suspects) could compensate for what is perhaps Obama's greatest weakness: The lingering, inchoate doubts among some voters.

"It’s more important with a candidate like Barack Obama, who people don’t have a decades-long relationship with," he said. "They may need reassurance."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6412988

This was the dumbest time to deflate the netroot and FOR WHAT? Obama is skirting a very dangerous line here and killing the golden activist goose in favor of the lame ABB machine that didn't work so well the first time.

What got Obama where he is was the genuine sincerity of supporters who were willing to fight family, friends and the right wing for someone who fights for what we believe in. Exchanging that passion for the listless, status-quo ABB machine is a mis-step of the highest order imo. Speaking only for me, I've gone from enthusiastic support to wondering if I even care to fight for him anymore. Is it worth losing so much passion right before the General when most Democrats just spent 8 years getting beat up by Bush and many of us were already disillusioned with some things that happened during the Clinton years?

When I get upset and think of McCain as you suggested, it reinforces my vote but it doesn't recapture the passion or enthusiasm where I honestly believed the convincing arguments I made to real life friends and co-workers.

FISA and other constitution-related promises were one of my selling points. I don't ever see myself going back to the enthusiasm in the following thread. What has Obama gained in the exchange? What are we really gaining?

DENVER - Maybe it’s his background teaching constitutional law.

If elected president, Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama said one of the first things he wants to do is ensure the constitutionality of all the laws and executive orders passed while Republican President George W. Bush has been in office.

Those that don’t pass muster will be overturned, he said.

...

“I would call my attorney general in and review every single executive order issued by George Bush and overturn those laws or executive decisions that I feel violate the constitution,” said Obama

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6162011&mesg_id=6162011

[Marrah_G]

43. I'll explain further

I don't agree with Obama.

I understand why he is doing what he is doing. I don't like it, but I understand it. Further more I expected it.

If we were not in such a precarious position as a country I would put up a much bigger fuss.

But the reality is that we either tolerate his positions (we can still make our unhappiness known to his campaign) or we take a stand and risk a Mccain Presidency.

I won't risk a McCain presidency.

I could say " I told you so", I could bitch and gripe about Obama. But that would do nothing to further our common goals and would simply drive the wedges deeper.

He is our Nominee, for better or worse.

People turned him into someone who transcended politics in their own mind and when the illusion was turned of they were disappointed by reality.

I say to them. Deal with the reality and embrace it for the next few months. He isn't perfect. He isn't my choice, but the other choice is McCain.

And that my friend is fucking scary.

On a more personal note: I know how much you admire Obama and this has to hurt a bit. It sucks when people we respect behave in ways we have a hard time swallowing. I never had the passion for him that you did/do, but I can empathize with you.

[Catherina]

51. If we were not in such a precarious position as a country I would put up a much bigger fuss too

A much, much bigger fuss. But they've got my female balls in a visegrip and they know it as well as I do. I'm frankly furious. Thank you for not bitching and griping; it's one of the things I long respected and admired about you. Thanks too for carrying more of the burden and giving people like me time to put it down for a while and think about things. I knew he'd be far from perfect and there are core issues of much more personally important to me that FISA that I gave him a big pass on but none of them had such a deep effect because it doesn't make sense and just reminds me of my mother's warning about demagogues.

He's our nominee and I'm not removing his sticker from my car. Thanks for the grace you've handled this with. How bloody funny to end up in the same unenthusiastic boat with people like you carrying part of my load. Marrah, you're simply marvelous. :hug:

[Marrah_G]

53. You would do the same if the situation was reversed

Just keep the goal line in your view and keep on moving forward. Now the bitching and griping can be sent directly to Obama's office. He need to know that his supporters are pissed and perhaps that will change his mind on some of these things.

The death penalty thing caught me by surprise. Fisa I expected.

:hug: It is going to be a long 4 months.

[Catherina]

57. If you can do it, I certainly can. What a bizzaro world where HRC supporters

are in the supportive and consoling mode. After this election, I'm retiring from politics. Hopes dashed again. Quicker than Clinton ever dashed them. I expected the DP. He talked about it in his book. It was FISA I didn't expecte from a constitutional expert.

I've contacted them several times and am keeping it up but their answer is total silence which is as discouraging as the blind enabling on our end.

:hug: Marrah. It's going to be long. I'll be leaving DU soon by the way. I thought about things long and hard last night and since my enthusiasm has chilled, I'll be more effective increasing my volunteer hours for destitute women and children. I can only take so much concern trolling and so many angry cries to just shut up and trust a politician. I'll post a goodbye thread before leaving or PM the people whose sincerity on both sides really touched me. :hug:

[Marrah_G]

58. Cath- stick around on some of the group forums and share your stories

[Catherina]

59. I thought of that but this place is an addictive time zapper

I know myself, if I hang around here, I'll peek at the other forums and get dragged back in. Next thing you know, I'll be up until 2 am arguing for a subtler form of neoliberalism when really the whole thing just makes me sick.



I'll exchange e-mails with you and several other people to stay in touch :hug:

[Marrah_G]

60. I'd like that

[Catherina]

62. See post 61. I answered in the wrong place, sorry! nt/

[Catherina]

61. Me too. You've been a peach. I feel like I made some real friends among

all the fine people who genuinely care. It's too bad it's not in physical life because that would be such a blast!

[ooglymoogly]

66. Nail on head argument. thanx nt

[dionysus]

50. ding ding ding, thank you!

[JuniperLea]

75. I agree... however...

I think it's very disappointing to be put in the same old position yet again this election: Voting for the lesser of two evils.

I understand the political posturing, I just thought his whole campaign was based on hope and change... there's no change here, and it puts the smackdown on my hope.

[Marrah_G]

96. That is the problem with that particular slogan

It means nothing until there is action behind it. More often then not, people expectations are far higher then any result.

[Two Americas]

94. don't say that

That is the worst indictment of our candidate I have read yet - "he's doing what he feels necessary to win." I certainly hope not. That is the main indictment from the right wingers of our party - "they don't stand for anything and just say whatever they need to say to win."

You don't change where you stand to "win." That does not work. You lose your moral compass, and you lose elections that way.

Then you say "when you get upset just think: McCain is fucking scary and should never have control of the worlds biggest military." That sounds to me like "when you are tempted to do any thinking for yourself, don't - imagine McCain and be afraid."

This is becoming some sort of dark nightmare of moral depravity.

[Marrah_G]

95. It's an indictment of ALL politicians

You might not like it, I might not like it, but it is reality.

So is the reality of just how much damage McCain would probably do in control of our military.

[Two Americas]

104. reality

Are we truly basing what we do and think on the reality, or is the reality we see a product of what we have been doing and thinking?

"Some Men see things as they are and ask 'Why?'
I dream of things as they never were and ask, 'Why not?'"

Robert F. Kennedy

[Lorien]

98. So, McCain panders to his base, while Obama panders to McCain's base?

doesn't make much sense to me. We need our candidate to make a strong case for the democratic platform, otherwise the people won't see any point in voting for a Democrat.

[Two Americas]

105. bingo

When do the Republicans ever pander to the left or move their party to the left? They don't need to. We are all busy chasing the right, so there are no voices from the left that the public hears for all practical purposes.

People keep saying that we have to move to the right because "that is the reality." No. The political reality is the way that it is because we keep moving to the right.

When did liberals stop seeing themselves as causative agents and become so confused about cause and effect?

Visualizing and self-actualizing and believing are not what I mean when I say being causative agents, by the way.

[Blue_In_AK]

20. Political expedience rules the day

as always. It's naive to put too much faith in any politician. I have no doubts that Obama will be a much better president than ** has been and a much better president than John McCain would be, but I'm not expecting any miracles. Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed.

[Radical Activist]

21. Am I angry that he supports removing immunity from the bill?

No.

[ooglymoogly]

35. and yet he says he will support the bill even with immunity. nt

[Radical Activist]

44. Then it sounds like a good strategy is to get other Senators to vote against immunity.

Then maybe we can accomplish something more than pissing and moaning about Obama.

[Orangepeel]

23. I'm against immunity for the telcoms, but I don't think that it has anything to do with my soul

I understand that people want to sue the telcoms because the discovery process could expose the bush administration, but that's a practical issue, not a constitutional one.

[ooglymoogly]

27. My main thrust here is the soul of the democratic party which imo is the constitution nt

[Orangepeel]

31. I don't think that telcom immunity is a constitutional issue

I don't think they should have immunity and I understand that giving them immunity might make it harder to uncover possible violations of the constitution (although, with the SCOTUS we have, they won't find that there are any in any regard, should it go that far, which it won't).

But I don't believe that the constitution prohibits Congress from granting immunity to corporations who agree to potentially unconstitutional requests by the federal government.

on edit: they shouldn't do it and I greatly appreciate the efforts of those that tried to stop immunity. But I don't see the constitutional violation in that particular part of the bill, which is what everybody is all up in arms about.

[psychmommy]

25. i am disappointed.

but i am still a strong supporter. i will email and let then know how i feel. disappointed vented. my senators were looking out for mt rights though.

[Teaser]

26. Don't care too much

I expected it.

[CrispyQ]

32. By moving right to romance undecided voters he is losing the democratic base.

This argument that he's doing what he has to to win but will change when he's in office is bullshit. If he won't defend the Constitution as a senator, why should I believe he will do so as president?

We were pelosied in '06 & I fear we're going to be pelosied again. Obama is hanging onto my vote by a slender thread.

[zulchzulu]

34. I think you need to understand the position fully before condemning it

Some don't like FISA at all. But since 1978, FISA has been enacted and yes, with a warrant, eavesdropping has occurred. We can discuss how that is bad (I'm no big fan...), but FISA was at least a way for Presidents to have to go through legal means to investigate. Obama is for fighting to take telecom immunity from the new legislation.

Read this analysis:
http://donklephant.com/2008/06/25/obama-explains-fisa-position/

[Zodiak]

38. But the new bill makes the FISA court moot

Because even if FISA rules against the warrant, the eavesdropping can still go on during the appellate process and all of the information gleaned during that time can be used as evidence.

THIS is why the bill is unconstitutional.

That, and it requires that the eavesdropping program that is run by the executive branch is reviewed by the executive branch; a clear conflict of interest and a violation of the separation of powers (also unconstitutional).

[emilyg]

39. kick

[thewiseguy]

41. Kick for what?

Alot of ex Hillary supporters are loving what they are seeing on DU these days. Very sad.

[Marrah_G]

45. Are we really? I know I am not loving it.

You mistake Hillary supporters for Obama haters. I do not want to see him lose support because the other option is McCain and THAT is fucking scary.

[thewiseguy]

46. Never said all

Or maybe they were pretending to support Hillary anyway.

[emilyg]

80. You're jumping to conclusions - that's sad.

[Zodiak]

42. I am angry about it, yes

It is a stupid position, and one with very little evidence that he would suffer if he votes the right way.

The "ten Democrats" in the house did not present evidence that they would lose their seats. We only have their assertions, and they didn't even identify themselves.

We have no evidence also, that the American people will not vote for Obama if he takes a stand here. We only assume so because so many Dems have been painted as traitors in the past.

Personally, I think the trap is going along with the DLC and the Republicans on this one, not the other way around. There is a reason Americans in the vast majority think this country is going in the shitter, and it doesn't all have to do with the price of gas. Whether Obama votes for FISA or not, he will be painted as a traitor by the Republicans.

Kerry learned this...all too late. When he said he would vote for the Iraq war all over again, he made the exact same mistake. Do not sell off the big issues when you are running to the center. Sell off the little ones.....the Constitution is not a little issue.

The Republicans who have crossed the aisle for Obama are small government Republicans. We will lose their support as well as the netroots. Not the votes of the netroots, but the enthusiasm. So this is a lose/lose for Obama.

I do not see this as Constitutional rights vs. winning as so many here wish to frame it. I see this as getting Obama to blink to close the enthusiasm and fundraising gap vs. grandpa, and by golly, Obama is falling for it.

[ooglymoogly]

67. This is the kind of debate I was hoping for. nt

[Zodiak]

72. Nobody else does, however

I made an OP with this argument complete with evidence and it sank like a stone....twice.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6414567&mesg_id=6414567

[Abacus]

47. Reserving judgement

Let's see what he does after the election.

[depakid]

48. Can't say I'm surprised

It's pretty much in line with everything else he's done throughout his short US Senate career.

[TexanDem]

49. I've been giving him a margin on this, but it's getting harder to defend

[JerseygirlCT]

52. I'm not at all happy about it. nt

[styersc]

56. Two weeks ago had you told me that the Dem candidate for the

Whitehouse was stainding with the GOP President and the current GOP nominee for the same office, I would have called you a liar!!!!

What makes it worse is that it is very likely Obama does not even feel this way, but is flushing Democratic principles to win votes. If we are going to support gutless poll watchers who sell us out for popularity then we have become the GOP.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Butch350]

64. No!

I don't expect a candidate to completely comply with my ideals on policies 100% - and it would be foolish to expect that.

What's so special about FISA anyway? Your government has been keeping tabs on all of you for years now anyway.

If you have a SS# then you have no rights and no privacy.

[shadowknows69]

68. Don't like it but I understand it

It's insurance against the "Weak on security" attacks.

[rodeodance]

69. k and rec

[mrreowwr_kittty]

70. I can't figure out why he's doing it. Telcom immunity is not even popular with voters!

[ima_sinnic]

71. I'll still vote for him, as I always vote for the D, but now I am just apathetic

I was for Kucinich, then I was for Edwards. I saw how the media chose our candidates, and I got behind Obama as the lesser of two evils. I was actually quite excited about him for a while and considered him brilliant. I did send some money to his campaign, but now I don't feel so inspired. I'll vote for him, but my ardent enthusiasm is just not there any longer. Apparently he's a lot less concerned about the Constitution than he made himself out to be. He can give a good speech, and will help our image in the world, but I don't think the deep changes that are needed in this country will happen in my lifetime (I'm 62). I'll be saving my money for gas and such instead of donating it to his campaign.

[KoKo]

73. It worries me that FISA CAVE...might mean he will CAVE on Mainstream Media at FCC

It seems our Dems going back to Clinton's first term, never understood the impact of "Hate RW RADIO" and how it was used and the "Corporate Owned Cables" both of which Americans both Poor (radio) and Rich (Cable) get their NEWS FROM!

They are either living in "bubbles" where they aren't subjected to what passes for "news" on these "outlets" these days...or they are complicit.

I'm kind of going for the worst scenario..."They are Complicit" and that's why they really DISS our NET ROOTS every CHANCE THEY GET!

[highplainsdem]

78. K & R

[earth mom]

83. It's unethical and an outrage. Obama should do the right thing here period.

I am LIVID. :grr:

[Kermitt Gribble]

86. After reading many of the posts here today,

you'd think it was "just a God-damned piece of paper". What a shame. Unbelievable how many here are willing to just toss this issue aside.

[Stop Cornyn]

87. "Innoculation against an October surprise" is disheartening. Wish I lived in a country where Edwards

or Kucinich could win. Will settle for a country where Obama beats McBush.

[kentuck]

88. He ran left in the primary and is running to the center in the general...

Everybody said that was what he was going to do? Why are we so surprised??

[Solon]

89. More like he ran to the center in the primary, and is now running to the right...

during the General. Frankly, I'm not surprised, I wasn't one of the deluded fools who thought he was a liberal in the first place, but it doesn't mean I'm happy about it either.

[Marrah_G]

97. Bingo

I just keep telling myself, he is far better then McCain.

[Lorien]

100. Sadly, I'm right there with you

he's charismatic, and we've been needed that, but his positions will alienate many mainstream democrats and others who are sick and tired of the neo-con agenda. I fear that he's snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. :-(

[Hoof Hearted]

90. Check.

[dailykoff]

91. Really angry. I thought he was better than the Clintons and now

its turning out he wants to be married to them. And of course, the Clintons want to be part of the Bush family, so we're really in pickle now. :mad:

[mtnsnake]

103. It didn't take long for you faux Obama supporters to turn on him like a junkyard dog

How predictable.

[RoyGBiv]

106. No, I'm not angry about his stance ...

I am, however, disgusted by attempts by some to explain away the actual effects of the FISA bill.

If Obama is wrong, he's wrong, or if I disagree with him, I do. I don't expect to agree with my candidate on every issue, even very important issues like this.

But I will not countenance attempts by those who wish to stick their heads in the sand by using some ignorant argument that amounts to suggesting the reason we shouldn't be mad at him is because the bill isn't so bad. As concluded by the editors of the Harvard Law Review, the bill "eviscerates" accountability and the legal protections citizens had under the previous version of FISA from government surveillance. I'm not going to complain about Obama taking a practical political stance on the matter. I will, however, not shut about about those who try to claim the bill itself isn't a civil rights killer.