Strategic mistake... so let's try to 'splain this to you

[nadinbrzezinski]

If he voted no the RIGHT would paint him as weak on terra.

If he voted yes the LEFT would accuse him of betraying the Constitution

So far so good right? He pissed on his base... and don't tell me it is raining ok.

How many of you wanna lay some moolah here that the RIGHT will now run adds about Obama being a flip flopper?

Problem with snakes, when you lay with them... you well get bitten sooner or later anyway... and the Right, them are copperheads!

And this is the classic definition of strategic mistake

How many people's money and enthusiasm did he loose?

I know that as far as my family is concerned, two

My brother in law is also gone from the enthusiasm column. Those are IRL

How many here? How many are calling local offices? How many are saying no more?

For you boosters enjoy it. You MIGHT be able to replace those volunteers, and if you do, fine for it.

But this is reality... and we will now the results of this strategic blunder by the time the FEC numbers come out for this month, or perhaps even at the booth, and the last one you should fear.Me... hope what is that? Hope of a better life is not in a politico any longer, any poltiico. Oh and don't worry won't for McCain... he is even worst... and that is the quandary, isn't it? Lesser of two evils that pervades the system.

Oh and stop telling us to post... go shoo, skat, walk some precincts... register voters, fighting with us is not gonna get you a thing here, except perhaps an ulcer.

I know that when I come back from a trip we will be walking precincts but not for no stinking presidential candidate, but for people running for the House. THey need my money and my time far more than Obama ever did.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. LOL

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Ah how typical for the team player

Hey maybe we should send the cheerleading squad as well

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. Which team are you on?

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. The Nation, which happens to be above party

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

So then you're on Obama's team.

Great to have you aboard.

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. What part of party are you missing?

I am not going to work for this candidate, sending letter explaining this to his campaign later in the day.

And also telling him to save his stamps, as anything the campaign sends will go, unopened, to the shredder

Is that clear for you?

Will work for LOCAL candidates... but no stinking presidential candidate is getting money or time from me

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

44. It's either Obama or McCain.

Anybody not supporting Obama is only paying lip service to loving the constitution.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. Here is a little book I'd like to read

It was written after the Nazi Period

It is called Moral man In an Immoral Society: A Study in Ethics and Poltics

May give you an insight into how sick our society is.

And what a moral choice actually is

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

51. Great. Go ahead and read it.

Because anybody not supporting Obama is making an immoral choice.

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. I already have, in fact making a reference to that book in the letter to Obama

I am sure he read it, kind of required readying in law school

He, assuming he gets the letter, doubt it... will get the reference

[berni_mccoy]

105. Then Why Are You Posting in GD:P? You are doing more than "not working for this candidate"

You are also undermining This Forum's Cause, You're Party's Interests, The Nation's BEST INTEREST and YOUR OWN SELF INTEREST.

[nadinbrzezinski]

106. Ah another lover of the Constitution speaks

If you are afraid that being critical of the candidate undermines him, then that candidate is far weaker than you are letting us know

Chew on that

Especially given that THE CANDIDATE said he wanted us to be critical and understood that

[berni_mccoy]

112. You are being far more than critical. And you know it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

115. Bernie we will not see eye to eye on this

the reason is quite simple

I put my country above ANY political party...

You don't

By the by there are people who agree with you fully.. As long as it my side doing it, it is perfectly alright

We are getting tired of the Lucy treatment... very tired of the Lucy treatment or keeping the powder dry

[berni_mccoy]

118. You are so far from the truth it isn't funny. And, please, don't tell me what I hold to be important

You are right about one thing. We won't see eye-to-eye.

[nadinbrzezinski]

121. Your "truth" and my "truth" are very different

Sadly I fear I am closer to the original meaning of what Jefferson meant

And Washington did warn us that parties would be the end of the Republic

She's dead..., and it was parties

[Carni]

99. Bravo!

It's nice to see that someone has the balls and brains to say it!

(God forbid should anyone actually DISCUSS THEIR ACTUAL OPINIONS on here lately)

[TwilightGardener]

2. Did your other thread on this same exact topic finally fizzle to the point

where you couldn't plausibly find a way to kick it?

[LowerManhattanite]

12. Oh, my. That left a mark. Oweeee. n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Are you having a problem with reality?

what part of people are pissed for being taken for granted are you purposely missing?

Oh wait, here is your football, LUCY!!!!!!!!!!

There, better?

By the way, I am paraphrasing Hartmann, what a traitor I know... but he gets it... you really don't

[mrreowwr_kittty]

19. I'm listening to Hartmann right now.

He doesn't sound anything like you.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. Did you listen to the first hour when he was interviewing a speaker for the ACLU

who explained why they were suing?

And that is when he explained this little strategic mistake in those terms

[mrreowwr_kittty]

31. I did and I didn't hear Hartmann telling listeners to stop volunteering for Obama.

Maybe I missed that part. :shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. Neither have I... what choice you make as a voter and citizen is

up to you

My MORAL compass tells me don't work for him,

YOUR moral compass may be different

My Moral compass is guided by principles and lines a candidate should not cross and when they do, they loose my work

The constitution happens to be one of those lines

Is this clear enough for you or do you want me to fully translate it for you.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

39. Crystal clear.

And to be perfectly honest, I'm glad you're not helping Obama anymore. People like you tend to do more harm than good with voters.

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. Yeah we tend to get minorly pissed over things like oh

my civil rights

I mean they get in the way of Empire

Don't worry, I have your back... even if you obviously don't have mine

[truedelphi]

41. If the Constitution is not worth getting mad over

When someone votes to rip it apart, I do not know what is.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

62. That ship already sailed with the USA Patriot Act.

It started leaving the port when it became okay for cops to stop you to see if you're wearing a seatbelt or had a drink earlier, or for them to be able to seize your property because drugs were found there. When employers were allowed to demand a urine sample. When credit card companies track your every purchase and sell that information to other companies. You have surveillance cameras on you pretty much everywhere you go. I guarantee your grocer knows more about you than the US Gov't ever will. We have allowed these invasions of our privacy, incrementally, and usually justified by some appeal to "security". FISA schmisa.

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. Shitty talking point... this is the new talking point, isn't it

And I've been promised by many a poltiico that they'd fight to reestablish the rights lost under the USPA, which ironically did not include the Fourth

But you should realize by now that this is a sad talking point

[mrreowwr_kittty]

74. You should realize by now that you look like a privileged elitist

Yes, I used the dreaded "e" word. Pretty much the only people who care about this FISA thing are affluent liberals. Who didn't care about urine tests because they typically don't work at places that require them. Who didn't care about people losing their homes in the phony Drug War because they don't live in neighborhoods where the cops routinely kick the door in. Both of which are heinous violations of the 4th amendment. Who expect the Democratic nominee to bravely fall on his sword, in doing so handing the GOP a "national security" bludgeon to beat his corpse with, to satisfy their "principles".

[nadinbrzezinski]

79. Ah caring about the Constitution is now an ELITIST thing

care to compare notes on working for the people by the way?

Or perhaps on non existent bank accounts?

So this is the THIRD talking point

GOT IT

To add, just as shitty as the other two

[mrreowwr_kittty]

84. Selective outrage is what's elitist.

And if you don't have any money, why are you making wagers with me elsewhere on this thread?

[nadinbrzezinski]

88. I made the wager with the money I can spend

and by the way... I have been selectively outraged over the War on Drugs probably well before you were... since I got to see the failure it was from civil rights and resources spent well before most folks did.

Over Echelon, remember that one? Of course you don't

Need I mention USPA? And USPA II? Got hawaii to say not to that one by the way.

Been asking for impeachment since 2002

Sorry... you are the one who does not get it

The constitution is not selective outrage... oh I get it, it is if it is our folks doing it. THen it is A-OK

[truedelphi]

98. Like someone else said yesterday,

Why should OUR hard earned dolars go to O, now that all the telecom companies owe him??

I was SO hoping I wouldn't have to vote and hold my nose, but no-o. It somehow can not work out that way.

[LVjinx]

132. Oh, I see. it's already been trampled on, so we might as well wipe with it and flush it too. Nice.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. ORLY?

Because I seem to remember you having some particularly odd views regarding the first amendment and government censorship of videogames.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. You got the wrong person by the way

but if you care to have a discussion on how sick our society is... video games are one of the symptoms

Oh and that has nothing to do with the first amendment either

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

64. LOL

:rofl:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

3. What ads are they going to run?

Painting Obama as a flip flopper on a bill that McCain didn't even bother to vote on?

[Connie_Corleone]

7. Exactly.

Obama can just put out an ad about "protecting America", blah blah blah and that McCain didn't even show up to vote to "protect America".

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. As I said, wanna bet some money on this?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

16. Sure.

Who's going to run the ads? Republicans? Are they going to criticize Obama for voting for a bill that every one of their Senators voted for? The ACLU? Are they going to form a 527 to run ads against Obama, who has an 86% rating with their organization, so he can be defeated by McCain, who has a 0%?

How would an ad go that criticizes Obama for this vote? Cue the ominous music: "Barack Obama - he FLIP FLOPPED! He said he was FOR stripping telcoms of immunity before he said he was FOR it...oh wait...but he VOTED for the bill WITH immunity. Which Republicans wanted but...now it's BAD because Obama did it...Never mind. Obama, can we trust him????"

I don't even see how an ad is possible. :shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Given McCain took credit for the GI Bill... it is easy

You see run some sound of Obama promising to fillibuster this bill back in January, or February and then go for the vote

He is weak since he does what his advisors tell him, aka a flip flopper

And this is the most obvious variation on it

[mrreowwr_kittty]

28. You already lost the ad at the word "filibuster"

I have a background in marketing and advertising and I can tell you there's no way in hell will there will be an ad about this. Senatorial procedures are not understood by the average voter and I guarantee that at least 8 out 10 Americans have no earthly idea what a filibuster is.

OTOH, had Obama voted against the bill it would be a very simple matter to put up ad painting him as a weakling who won't let our brave law enforcement personnel go after Mooslim terraists.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. As I said, care to wager? The flip flop add is coming

[mrreowwr_kittty]

46. There could be an ad, but it would be a really shitty and ineffective one.

Care to wager how many people you can stop at your local mall who know what a filibuster is?

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. THey don't know what the fourth amendment is either,

hell they don't know who the presnit is at times either

Care to tell me the add will not be made? I don't believe you... copperheads always byte

[mrreowwr_kittty]

66. I doubt one will be made about his Yes vote.

Had he voted No I think the chances an ad would be made would go up exponentially. Again, his vote could be painted in a way that would be easy for people to understand and he would have made a clearer target because he would have voted opposite of all the Republicans.

[nadinbrzezinski]

67. As I said care to lay some money that the so called immunization didn't happen?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

78. Sure. $100. If there's not an ad about this by September I win.

I win, you give $100 to Obama. You win, I give $100 to the candidate of your choice. Deal?

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. My budget is fifteen bucks\month

sorry... after all I am such an elitist that I'm swimming in moolah, but you are on

[mrreowwr_kittty]

86. Fine. $15 it is then. nt

[Cant trust em]

9. They don't need to run any ads. CNN is doing it for them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. And CNN is now part of the right wing noise machine

gee when did they start? Yesterday?

I want my bet money

:-)

[Cant trust em]

17. You won't be getting any money from me.

I don't bet against locks.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. Smart man...

:-)

[Carni]

100. MSNBC was on top of it this morning also

Maybe we can get another email campaign going to let MSNBC know that Pat Buchanan and Joe Scarborough are biased Republicans!?!?!

oh wait, I forgot, they disclaim that openly... so I doubt that will get them off the air, OR get them to shut up about flip flopping (what to do then?!)

What a surprise though that the MSM are doing this flip flopper stuff about Obama eh?

I would have NEVER seen that coming!

Thank goodness he has been so loyal to his core base, or this kind of thing could cause problems!

[Cant trust em]

102. The MSM calling a democrat a flip flopper?

Unheard of. There is no precedent for this at all.

[Carni]

107. I was shocked and appalled!

Really we need to organize an email campaign to let MSNBC know that they have republicans on their airwaves...I don't think they know!

[nadinbrzezinski]

108. But, but, but I thought the meme was not going to come

I read it here on DU

:sarcasm:

[Carni]

117. That 15 bucks you made was too easy!

Why...there ought to be a law!

[nadinbrzezinski]

122. Nah Candidate Lumpkin

but she will not admit to it... and argue that this is not an add

(never mind it is coming)

[LVjinx]

133. "Obama voted yes on a warrentless wiretapping bill even John McCain thought was excessive..."

I can see that commercial very easily. Oh, you thought they'd stick with the truth?

[dailykoff]

4. That's how it looks to me.

That's how it's looked since he made his statement, and there's already been lots of evidence to suggest you are correct. :shrug:

[LWolf]

5. The "right" is going to hit him no matter what he does.

Why throw your base under the bus to appease them?

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Exactomundo

[blondeatlast]

6. When you can stop being condescending, I'll pay attention to you

Last week you "got out the crayons," this week "I'll try to 'splain this to you."

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. Well team players that only care about the football need this to be explained

this way

We just got played, LUCY comes to mind

[Joe Fields]

20. nadin, did you ever think....

that you would have to explain the importance of speaking out and standing up for your constitutional rights, or the dangers of lockstep cheerleading to a group of liberal democrats? It is truly mindboggling.

On a personal note, I liked your "get out the crayons" post. It was apropos, considering the influx of so many newly minted young and inexperienced DUers.


Joe

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Never in my mind Joe, never in my life did I think I'd have to 'splain this

to centrists. Lets be real here, the liberal democrats I know are pissed over this.

And thanks... the crayons didn't work though...

[Joe Fields]

29. true about the centrists. I forgot to put quotes around "liberal."

[blondeatlast]

92. I'm a centrist, how, exactly? since you are so good at "'splainin 'n all."

I've had my boots on the ground fighting for universal single payer healthcare for 15 years; same for battling the poison of NCLB, but okay, since you say it, I'm a centrist.

I'll wear it now as a badge of honor.

[DaDooRonRon]

101. Interesting

You say this:

"I've had my boots on the ground fighting for universal single payer healthcare for 15 years"

yet actively support someone who has NO desire to bring it to fruition. I mean, you must know that there are candidates out there who make universal single payer a major part of their platform, but you won't go anywhere near them.

It's all about "winning", isn't it?

Oh I know, you'll "hold his feet to the fire" for universal health care, just like you held Pelosi's feet to the fire for impeachment, and like you held the Democratic Senate's feet to the fire when it came to SC justices.

Really, aren't you just a wee bit tired of getting played for a sucker ALL THE TIME??

[dflprincess]

70. And did you ever think you'd see posts here

where "Liberal" and "Left" are used as derogatory terms?

It amazes me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

91. Hey 30 years of propaganda have born fruit

[Carni]

103. Esp since as recently as a month ago...

Some OTHER candidates (AND THEIR SUPPORTERS) were accused by these same people, of being DINOS and "just like Bush" not really liberals -- DLC --- bla bla bla bla ad nauseum...now all of a sudden they're all *centrists* who actually wanted a more right leaning candidate all along. Whatever....

[LVjinx]

134. There's been some serious misrepresentation going on here, for sure.

[bunnies]

24. I'm really beginning to enjoy these virtual tantrums.

Id like to see a bit more condescension though. Oh and a bit more drama too. Keep up the good work. :thumbsup:

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. I am sure you will enjoy loosing the rest of your rights

care to tell me what else you are willing to loose?

[bunnies]

32. Those rights have been gone since the patriot act.

Im sure you're aware of that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. Unlike your assumptions I read the USPA, it is in my drive

I fought against it, continue to fight against it, and this is a FURTHER expansion of that

This talking point sucked yesterday and it still sucks

So you saying that since they are already gone, what's a little more damage gonna do?

See the problem?

[bunnies]

59. The bottom line is...

I am confident that Obama, a constitutional scholar, will fully review all these programs after he is elected and has access to all the information. Until that time, freaking out does no good.

[nadinbrzezinski]

69. I am not... at this point I don't think any

politician will do that

Human nature mostly

So hope, if you care to have it, is your prerogative. I don't

US
RIP
1787-2000

[bunnies]

77. Wouldnt it be nice to be pleasantly surprised

by a politician for once? I believe his AG will be very busy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. Don't count on it

Serious

Empires will do what empires will do... and the logic will be similar to 1992 and all that we need to move forward to heal melarkey

[bunnies]

87. Well. I dont expect him to go after the Bush cabal personally.

But I do expect him to overturn any unconstitutional laws, as promised.

Personally, I think just about the entire administration should be in prison. But I'm realistic about the chance of that happening. Zero.

[DaDooRonRon]

90. You mean he isn't a constitutional scholar NOW?

He only becomes one AFTER he gets elected?

I was under the assumption that he was one now, and hence knew of the unconstitutionality of said programs before he voted on them.

I was also under the assumption that he had access to all the information, because if he didn't well then being a constitutional scholar and all he certainly wouldn't have voted on something without knowing everything about it, would he?

Perhaps you'd like to reconsider your confidence. :)

P.S. Please let me know when the exact time to "freak out" is, as well as an indicator of how much of the Constitution has to be shredded before this freaking out will be allowed to occur.

[bunnies]

110. Thats dumb.

He doesnt have all the info on the wiretapping program. Very few Senators do. He is JUST a Senator now you realize.

As I stated. He has promised to have his AG review the constitutionality of all Bush's programs. He can not do that as a Senator. What part of that dont you understand?

[DaDooRonRon]

119. What part of real life don't you get?

He "promises", he "promises."

Let's all tap dance through life on "promises."

He PROMISED public financing, he PROMISED FISA, he PROMISED no lobbyists. The fact that K Street is now changing over to Democratic lobbyists is not a coincidence.

All I'm asking is that you look at what he DOES - not what he SAYS.

He is as compromised as one can be, yet you still look at everything he does and wish it away by saying he'll "promise." He watches the Constitution go up in a wisp of smoke and "promises" he'll do better. He continually votes to fund an illegal war and "promises" to do better. He rattles the saber on Iran and kowtows to AIPAC but "promises" he'll do right by the little people.

The only folks he'll keeps promise to are those ($$$) who bankroll him (start with Open Secrets and go from there - and let's not forget his meeting with all of Clinton's big money people). I am flabbergasted by those who continually give him a pass based on "promises."

[bunnies]

120. Your motivations are clear.

Have you ever posted one single positive thing about Obama or are you just another one of those "under the radar" types? :shrug:

[DaDooRonRon]

38. Well, everything, as long as "we" "win"

That is first and foremost.

This piddly constitutional stuff (hereafter referred to as PCS) can and will be addressed at the appropriate time.

Now is not the time, for our "team" is ahead and we MUST ignore the PCS until victory is assured.

At which time, of course, we will already have lost said rights, but dammit, we "won."

I just don't understand why you can't seem to grasp such a simple concept. :)

[calimary]

26. Yes, he's damned no matter what.

So I think, if it were me, I'd rather be damned by my opponents, who will lambaste me ANYWAY, no matter what I do or say or how I vote. They'll ALWAYS find something to criticize, regardless what I do, so I would probably decide to stick with "them what brung me to the dance" as the GREAT Molly Ivins once said. I wish Obama would have done the same thing. 'Cause they're going to attack him ANYWAY. Why not show some guts - straight in their faces?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6479824

[HCE SuiGeneris]

47. Obama has chosen to secure the crossover voters with this move.

I would guess that the campaign carefully weighed the prospective outcomes for a vote of yes, or no. As he was unable to stop the bill's passage, he focused on the General Election and chose the path that would increase the odds of him attaining the Presidency.

It is exactly a choice of enhancing his odds of winning the GE. He is a politician and a tactician. We need to support that goal; for if we do not, McCain will finish the destruction of this nation.

Just my 2 cents...

[calimary]

61. Yeah, I think that's what he was after, too.

Even so, I still would have liked him to take a stand. I'd have liked a bunch of them to take a stand.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6479824

I wrote in there the reminder about dubya campaigning in 2004 with "you may not agree with me but you know where I stand". At the same time, btw, he and everybody else on his team were feasting on John Kerry's "I voted for it before I voted against it" blunder.

Stand FIRM. Stand FIRM on SOMETHING.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

82. I agree, our spineless Representatives in Congress and in the Senate

own this. It is yet another compromise... the destruction of our rights and liberties is rampant. However, in my eyes, the ONLY way to remedy the travesties of the past 8 years (or 40 years) is to relegate the Repukes to the scrap heap. Obama MUST win the GE, and then he must lead with strength, conviction and morality.

I know we all feel adrift at sea right now. It is maddening and debilitating after the amount of injustice perpetrated against us. Obama will have an angry populace with which to contend. My only goal at this point is to provide him a chance to show us his strength and ability. That cannot occur if we do not assure his election in the GE.

It IS more compromise... but I see no other possible solution without a mass upheaval of the populace, and a violent overthrow of the current regime.

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. Truman's truism comes to mind actually

and I hope it does not become reality

[HCE SuiGeneris]

27. Yes, don't waste your time to elect the Democratic Presidential candidate.

Very rational. :eyes:

Obama could not have stopped this bill's passage, and your histrionics attacking him is not productive. The amount of condescension you are showing to other Democrats here is also unhelpful. Go build something, or go beat the crap out of a heavy bag. Your normally lucid intellect needs a break from here.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

35. I don't think a lot of these people were ever helping him.

Furthermore, if these people behave in public anything like they do here, I'd rather they not be knocking on doors.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. A real leader leads.. a politician doesn't

We were expecting a real leader

[HCE SuiGeneris]

68. A real leader knows how to attain the greatest impact. He cannot attain the greatest

impact without first ascending to the Presidency.

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. Ah the second talking point

got it

On add, this was exactly what we were told before the 2006 midterms

Tell me how has that worked so far?

[HCE SuiGeneris]

89. Provide your solution.

[nadinbrzezinski]

94. For starters the Senator should have voted NAY

that is the starters... he will get bitten regardless.

You see some folks get it, some don't

[HCE SuiGeneris]

97. Your righteous, holier-than-thou BS is getting tiring.

What you DON'T get, is that your advocating to not support Obama is against your interests. That you would rather wrap yourself in your poutrage (you mistakenly call it morals and principles) and sacrifice the nation to further rule from the repukes, only shows me that you are selfish and childish. You provide no solutions, just whining. That is defeatist and will only get you more of the same.

Now, do you GET IT?

[nadinbrzezinski]

109. Not giving money is not doing doing what you are claiming it does

I gave, I foolishly hoped

he is another politician, actions speak louder than words

I am making the moral choice

I know that is difficult to understand but hey, whatever.

And god forbid somebody say that the SENATOR MADE A STRATEGIC MISTAKE and that his taking of people for granted may not be the brightest of ideas

Hey Lucy, catch the ball... will you let me kick it this time

Promise I will

Sure she will

[LVjinx]

135. For a Bush Despiser, you don't seem to mind that he got everything he could have wanted in this bill

[Egnever]

33. You couldnt explain to a bear how to shit in the woods

I don't think I have seen you be right yet on even one of your splainin threads

[blondeatlast]

40. ...

:applause:

[Joe Fields]

49. She has shown an astute grasp of politics and governance.

All you seem to show are insults.

[Egnever]

54. Where?

I have yet to see it. In fact she has been shown to be full of nothing but condescension time and again in the splainin threads.

You have clearly designated yourself the official cheering squad though so cheer the fuck on! I thought you were leaving BTW what happened to that?

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. What are you doing here anyway? Shouldn't you be out there doing some

REAL WORK, in GOTV efforts?

That is where the work happens, not here BOY

[Egnever]

75. Yes yes I noticed you are working your ass off to elect Obama

Any more lectures you feel the need to get off your chest I got all day to sit here in a pissing contest with you. The fact that you come unarmed makes it all the more fun.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

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

[Egnever]

95. WTF you doing here then?

Shouldnt you be out working your ass off for lumpkin? OR are you one of those do as I say not as I do people.

You make this too easy BTW

[nadinbrzezinski]

111. Gave money and will work for him

but you are the one insulting people

So again go out there, pound some pavement... go do it. NOW!

All this fighting people on a web board will get you absolutely nothing at the end of the day

[Egnever]

116. I am the one insulting people?

Says the one who thinks its their duty to supply wisdom to the poor ignorant masses on a message board.

Again you have yet to get anything right. You make this too easy. Gave money... Wooohooo! Real effort there sport get back to me with your calls for action when you have done more than run your mouth.

[nadinbrzezinski]

123. Ah you are the one making it too easy7

regardless PLONK

there is a limit on how much BLIND loyalty I can take... don't care who is the object of admiration

[Egnever]

126. The expected respons from someone with no grounds to stand on.

When people dont cower in front of your supposed wisdom your fold like a house of cards.

[johnlal]

55. Obama doesn't need you.

I'm sure whatever void you leave in his Campaign will be made up by a healthy contribution from AT&T and its employees. Let THEM fund his campaign.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. THey already have in fact

Open Secrets has the data already up

[LVjinx]

136. Yes, they'll get around to showing their appreciation, I'm sure.

[wuushew]

72. The number of possible options is three not two

In addition to yes or no, there is always the option of not voting.

Use whatever excuse works best, be it campaign fatigue or a mild case of stomache flu. Explaining away a non-vote is much easier than an affirmative vote.

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. I know people are having a problem with folks with PRINCIPLES

and who put their nation about a party

The founders were right, the death would come from parties

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[nadinbrzezinski]

85. Oh sorry, we should all fall on our knees and thank the gods

when they cave in... and for being taken for granted

By the way, shouldn't you be out there doing some GOTV?

[MGKrebs]

93. Voting NO actually means less oversight and control.

The old bill made no provisions for data mining, globalized communication infrastructure, and other things that would either have NO oversight at all or we would have taken some of those automated tools out of the hands of law enforcement.

Voting YES was probably the lesser of two evils.

[vaberella]

104. Your logic is falling on deaf ears here.

This thread is the second thread by the OP within the same time frame to promote the same idea when the first one died.

I haven't read one post where the OP uses EXACT language from the bill to defend his view, just regurgitating the same nonsense.

I'm letting it go because the haters want to hate without educating themselves and they claim to be progressives. Progressives with no clout when they can't use the EXACT language of the bill to defend themselves.

[nadinbrzezinski]

113. I could post you all the links to the bill you want

It has been done,

It's fallen on deaf ears

It does not matter WHO points the problems with this

But hey, here you got a ball, LUCY will let you kick it again

And you know what? Was listening to Hartman talking to them traitors at the ACLU who apparently also have it wrong

Oh here it is :sarcasm:

[vaberella]

125. I asked for it because I'd appreciate it.

I haven't read anyone giving the reasons WITH the EXACT langauge from the bill. I have read many claims and detailed claims, but none pointing to the language so I can understand their perspective. I read the bill and maybe it's hard for me, but a lot of the claims don't seem to add up. So when I asked for the help, I wasn't joking.

If you have the links---pointing out EXACT langauge as seen in the bill that would be great. I have seen many posts FOR the bill (despite it's problems---which none have denied) using the EXACT language and pointing exactly where to read the statements.

Making a claim without pointing out where it affects the claim doesn't make a sound argument since evidence contrary is readily available.

If you have it, I readily await. I have asked several posters who have the same arguments as you and none gave me the language. I'd be glad to recieve it, thanks in advance.

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. If you read the bill look at the section on civil liabilities

which are gone

And also look at the section speaking of Americans talking withy people outside the country

By the way now they can listen to every conversation I have with mom legally

That is where the language is

[depakid]

96. As to contributions, since he's backed out of public financing

the corporate coffers are now wide open.

Won't put boots on the ground, but it will buy media time.

[nadinbrzezinski]

114. Check on Open Secrets, he got quite a bit from telecoms as well

So did Jay Jockefeller and several other of the YEAH column

So you are right, the coffers are now fully open

[Umbram]

124. I enjoy your consistency.

Nearly every one of your OP's promises to educate everyone else with a pompous header and is then immediately followed by a very, very shallow "analysis" in the form of an unmedicated A.D.D. stream of consciousness.

Thank you.

[nadinbrzezinski]

127. Thank you... I guess you can take it any way you want

[flpoljunkie]

129. McCain has ONE thing going for him--he leads Obama 53-33 on who's best to handle terrorism

As Gail Collins said in her column this morning, Barack Obama is an "extremely intelligent politician."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/opinion/10collins.htm ...

Barack Obama must be seen by our relatively uninformed electorate as being able to keep us safe. If he had voted against the FISA bill, he would have opened himself up for an immediate and sustained assault from the Repigs. It's the only thing McCain polls better on than Obama--and the difference is not inconsiderable, but a very real--20 points.

[nadinbrzezinski]

130. He is going to be attacked anyways

[flpoljunkie]

131. He would also lose if he'd voted against the FISA bill. The Repigs know how to play the terror card.

[onetwo]

137. Repubs will call him a flip-flopper because you called him a flip-flopper.

Obama promised to filibuster any FISA legislation that included retroactive immunity for the telecoms.

He voted "Yes" for a compromise bill that, although imperfect, is improved over previous revisions.

He voted to strip out Title II (the immunity BS) as promised. Unfortunately, filibuster does not work unless you have the 40+ votes to prevent cloture. Dodd and friends didn't come close to achieving this level of support.

There was no flip-flop.