back in February and that was when the fight to defeat this should have begun.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00015Obama did not speak on the floor that day, although he was there to vote on all the amendments. If he had made it an issue the media might have covered his speech that night and Senator Clinton could have done the same thing.
And as I've said over the past few days, and to a lesser degree back in February, if our party really wanted to defeat this bill, or strip the immunity clause, they could have rallied support from the American people in their travels across the country and interviews in the media.
To come in at the 11th hour and say 'I'll try' knowing full well 67 senators voted against removing the immunity clause in February is a little late.
:shrug:
Here is a list of all the speakers that day, you can see the video and read the remarks by clicking on any name.
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congress/?q=node/69850&date=2008-2-12&hors=sAlso we should not just focus on the immunity clause and ignore the rest of the bill.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-obama-kinda-likes-fisa-bill-but-he.html"...Most Americans don't realize that the FISA compromise comes in two parts. The first part greatly alters FISA by expanding the executive's ability to wiretap and engage in much broader searches of communications than were permissible under the law before. It essentially gives congressional blessing to some but not all of what the executive was doing under President Bush. President Obama will like having Congress authorize these new powers. He'll like it just fine. People aren't paying as much attention to this part of the bill. But they should, because it will define the law of surveillance going forward. It is where your civil liberties will be defined for the next decade..."
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-obama-kinda-likes-fisa-bill-but-he.html