Court allows constitutional challenge to new FISA law

[MNBrewer]

<http://www.salon.com/news/fisa/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2011/03/21/aclu>

"In October, 2007, candidate Barack Obama -- in response to the Bush administration's demand for a new FISA law -- emphatically vowed that he would filibuster any such bill that contained retroactive amnesty for telecoms which participated in Bush's illegal spying program. At the time, that vow was politically beneficial to Obama because he was seeking the Democratic nomination and wanted to show how resolute he was about standing up against Bush's expansions of surveillance powers and in defense of the rule of law. But in a move that shocked many people at the time -- though which turned out to be completely consistent with his character -- Obama, once he had the nomination secured in July, 2008, turned around and did exactly that which he swore he would not do: he not only voted against the filibuster of the bill containing telecom amnesty, but also voted in favor of enactment of the underlying bill."

[MannyGoldstein]

1. He had to or else Sarah Palin would be President

Why can't the purity Democrats understand that we need to do whatever the Republicans want so we can make bipartisan strides forward?

[texastoast]

2. I remember when this was a big hot issue on DU

Not so much anymore, it seems.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x710099

[MNBrewer]

3. may heat up again

[Runework]

4. Is anyone going to defend this?

hm?

[MNBrewer]

6. Defend what?

[Runework]

7. ,

defend Obama's bald-faced flip-flop

[MNBrewer]

9. I'm sure not!!!

[slipslidingaway]

5. knr nt

[rhett o rick]

8. If we dont get a progressive to defeat Pres Obama in the primaries, we are lost. nm

[slipslidingaway]

10. kick nt