Obama Supports FISA Legislation, Angering Left: "substantive break with Party's base"

[DeepModem Mom]

WP: Obama Supports FISA Legislation, Angering Left
By Paul Kane

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) today announced his support for a sweeping intelligence surveillance law that has been heavily denounced by the liberal activists who have fueled the financial engines of his presidential campaign. In his most substantive break with the Democratic Party's base since becoming the presumptive nominee, Obama declared he will support the bill when it comes to a Senate vote, likely next week, despite misgivings about legal provisions for telecommunications corporations that cooperated with the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program of suspected terrorists.

In so doing, Obama sought to walk the fine political line between GOP accusations that he is weak on foreign policy -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) called passing the legislation a "vital national security matter" -- and alienating his base. "Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program," Obama said in a statement hours after the House approved the legislation 293-129.

This marks something of a reversal of Obama's position from an earlier version of the bill, which was approved by the Senate Feb. 12, when Obama was locked in a fight for the Democratic nomination with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.)....

Sens. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) continue to oppose the new legislation, as does Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). All Obama backers in the primary, those senior lawmakers contend that the new version of the FISA law -- crafted after four months of intense negotiations between White House aides and congressional leaders -- provides insufficient court review of the pending 40 lawsuits against the telecommunications companies alleging privacy invasion for their participation in a warrantless wiretapping program after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001....

Obama came down on the side of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who argued that a provision in the new law reaffirmed that FISA, and that act's courts, gives the final say over government spying. President Bush has argued that a war-time chief executive has powers that trump FISA. "It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance -- making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law," Obama said today....

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/20/obama_supports_fisa_legislatio.html?hpid=sec-politics

[montanacowboy]

1. Sonofabitch!

Change you can believe in

Hey Obama - who do you think has been keeping you in the long green? Progressives -

He shows his weakness by caving into the RW propaganda - he is not strong enough to stand for the Constitution and all of us who have supported him along the way.

I am disgusted and fed up. No amount of spin will change this weak cowardly capitulation.

Now Pelosi and Hoyer have what they want.

[NorthCarolina]

5. Why do some politicians feel it is too difficult a task

to sell the virtues of the Constitution to the American public? Dodd stood up for the constitution on this issue and we all cheered. Feingold stood up for the Constitution on this issue and we all cheered. Kucinich stood up for the Constitution on this issue and we all cheered. Obama chooses to come down on the Pelosi side and we all go :wtf:

[TK421]

33. Not all of us...more of what I read about this becomes increasingly disturbing to me

but, I'll cross my fingers and hope for the best, I suppose

[Larkspur]

2. This is why I am boycotting donating to Obama

And I suggest all progressives do the same for at least a month. He only seems to respond to the power of the purse.

[Diamonique]

9. That's about as dumb as voting for McCain

Now take a deep breath and repeat after me:

WE *MUST* HAVE A DEMOCRAT IN THE WHITE HOUSE IN JANUARY!!!

That is the prize we should keep our eyes on right now. We shouldn't let anything distract us from that.

Obama is smart. He's doing what he has to do to get elected. He knows what he's doing. Even if he votes against the bill, it'll still pass anyway. Remember, currently Obama is just a first-term senator.

We should support him 100% and help him get into the White House!

[Two Americas]

39. this is a representative democracy

The politicians represent us, it is not our job to represent them. You are asking us to behave and think as though we lived in a dictatorship - "we must stand behind our leader 100%" This is chilling and disturbing, and does great damage to the nominee and to the party. You must have a very low opinion of the nominee, the party, and your fellow Democrats if you think that this sort of loyalty test is helpful. Spreading this opinion and demanding that the rest of us comply weakens the effort severely.

There is no evidence that dissent hurts the party. That is right wing logic, the same logic they use to suppress dissent about the country - "it is helping our enemies" and "you are tearing America down." It does not help the Democratic party to imitate the right wingers and use their suppressive and authoritarian logic and rhetoric.

Are you sure you support Obama and the party and are solid in that support? You do not sound very confident or committed. True support and confidence would not be so intolerant and fearful of dissent, and strong people do not try to bully others.

[Larkspur]

40. Looks like Obama will cave with the other Dems on FISA

He promised to filibuster this bill and now he is going back on his word.

Obama will not get any donations from me if he goes with the Dem herd in the Senate and passes this FISA bill.

[JackORoses]

43. oh no, I guess he'll just have to depend on the 1.5 million who already donated

Quit pretending that you ever have or will make a donation.

Your concern is duly ignored...

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. Progressives are going to have to swallow down this, Iran tough talk

& Cuba so far. What's next, Social Security privatization? How did he vote on the new war funding?

[crankychatter]

28. another Green Party Recruiter gettin consigned to the Nether Realm - nt

Hasta la vista, baby.

[ananda]

4. Luckily for me..

.. I was never an Obamamaniac.

I haven't donated yet and my vote is probably
going to go for Nader if Obama doesn't stop
supporting bluedogs.

[MasonJar]

15. No votes for Nader. No votes for Nader. That is just like voting for

McCain. I am sorry, but today McCain came out saying the Roe should be overturned. He MUST NOT Be ALLOWED TO WIN. Nader is just as kookie as McCain. He refused to compromise with Al Gore and look what that cost us. Nader is culpable because you see Bush and Gore are not alike. The Dems are not like the GOPers, who are evil doers and crooks and liars.

[KittyWampus]

24. please leave DU then.

[crankychatter]

29. *poof* - don't let the door hit you in the ass

[ProSense]

6. "This marks something of a reversal of Obama's position from an earlier version of the bill" What BS

How does Obama making a statement on a new version of the bill, and opposing retroactive immunity, constitute a reversal of his position?

From the aritcle in the OP:

Sens. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) continue to oppose the new legislation, as does Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).

Well, here is what Leahy said.

[Benhurst]

7. "So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge

that as president, I will carefully monitor the program."

We are supposed to be a nation of laws, Senator, not men.

As a Harvard Law School graduate, you should know that.

[Catherina]

8. Barack. I hope you are reading the papers this week-end. n/t

[anonymous171]

10. Oh well. You can never count on some people sometimes. That's why dems have moved rightward.

One mistake and suddenly the left is in outrage and votes nader. No wonder dems prefer to appeal to indies/moderates.

[Maven]

17. So wait a minute

You're actually suggesting that the blame for Dems moving right lies with those who object when they capitulate to the right?

Are you serious?

[BlueJac]

11. We alway get taken for granted.....

This always happens, they throw us under the bus they rode in on!

[Evergreen Emerald]

12. I will carefully monitor the program," Obama said in a statement...

The President is NOT to have the power to decide if the Fourth Amendment is violated. He is doing the same thing Bush is--taking power from the three branches and giving it to one.

That is not acceptable.

[KoKo]

13. Well....best I can say about this is that Headlines like This will win him the election....

but will he lose his soul and the reason folks supported him. Many on the Left who came out early and supported him like MoveOn.org and the "Nation" magazine...plus KOS and other bloggers. These folks were the ones that convinced many of us that Obama was not John Kerry...that he would stand up and fight back hard against what Bush/Cheney have done. We've had four more years of misery and now an imploding economy since the '04 Election and now we have "the Left" (those who stand up for the Constitution, Civil Liberties and are against Torture) once more viewed as something Democratic need to be ashamed of and distance themselves from once they've won a nomination.

[slipslidingaway]

14. From Move On

http://pol.moveon.org/immunity/080621obama.html

Of course this still ignores the rest of the bill.

"...It's either that he "chickened out" or -- as Yale Law Professor Jack Balkin asserts and Digby wonders -- Obama believes he will be President and wants these extreme powers for himself, no doubt, he believes, because he'll exercise them magnanimously, for our Own Good. Whatever the motives -- and I don't know (or much care) what they are -- Obama has embraced a bill that is not only redolent of many of the excesses of Bush's executive power theories and surveillance state expansions, but worse, has done so by embracing the underlying rationale of "Be-scared-and-give-up-your-rights." Note that the very first line of Obama's statement warns us that we face what he calls "grave threats," and that therefore, we must accept that our Leader needs more unlimited power, and the best we can do is trust that he will use it for our Good..."


I posted the Balkin piece here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3495818&mesg_id=3495818


"So, let's sum up: Congress gives the President new powers that Obama can use. Great. (This is change we can believe in). Obama doesn't have to expend any political capital to get these new powers. Also great. Finally, Obama can score points with his base by criticizing the retroactive immunity provisions, which is less important to him going forward than the new powers. Just dandy.

It should now be clear why the Obama campaign has taken the position it has taken. And given what I have just said, Obama's supporters should be pressing him less on the immunity provisions and more on the first part of the bill which completely rewrites FISA. Because, if he becomes president, he'll be the one applying and enforcing its provisions..."

[KoKo]

16. And, Move On.org did what Obama asked ...so this is significant......

reading it. "Move On. org" was one of the VERY FIRST to PULL their MILLIONS of Viewers to Support OBAMA.

If they are concerned...that's important. :shrug:

[slipslidingaway]

20. Yes and no, that is why I also posted the Balkin piece, another

snip below. They are focusing on one aspect and while that may be important we should not lose sight of the balance of the bill as mentioned in the article below. Obama says he will monitor the program to ensure it does not violate our rights???

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 IMO.

:shrug:


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.

Part II, by contrast, is the part that everyone has gotten up in arms about. It creates effective immunity for telecom companies. It makes perfect sense for Obama to criticize this part of the bill. That's because he doesn't need it as much as he needs the first part, and his base really really dislikes it. True, it might be nice to have retroactive immunity for the players who he will be working with in the future. But remember, he expects to be President, and he figures that his OLC and Justice Department can offer sufficient assurances of legality going forward based on the changes in the first part of the bill.

So, let's sum up: Congress gives the President new powers that Obama can use. Great. (This is change we can believe in). Obama doesn't have to expend any political capital to get these new powers. Also great. Finally, Obama can score points with his base by criticizing the retroactive immunity provisions, which is less important to him going forward than the new powers. Just dandy.

[goldcanyonaz]

19. Actually it is not how he wins the election, if the progressives stay home he will lose

[blonndee]

25. Aren't you afraid he will IMPOLDE!! and become CARTER!!!1!

You have been SO concerned...I can't imagine how you must be feeling right now.

[populistdriven]

18. McCain didn't love America, until he was tortured into it. There are no atheists in foxholes eith

Its the general election stupid, lets save these battles for after Obama is in the WH.

[slipslidingaway]

21. Would you be comfortable giving these powers to McCain? n/t

[populistdriven]

26. precisely why we need to support obama

I have nothing against bashing the main dems in congress who support it

[slipslidingaway]

31. Why should we put our trust in one man? ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6395387&mesg_id=6395387

[populistdriven]

34. because i am not voting green

[slipslidingaway]

36. Dean, Turley and others have all said this infringes on our

4th amendment rights.

That appears to be just fine with so many people.

Obama says he will monitor the program to protect our liberties, IMO that is how we get into trouble.


"...In 1799, Thomas Jefferson echoed that: "Free government is founded in jealousy, not confidence . . . . Let no more be heard of confidence in men, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitutions."

[populistdriven]

37. and they all say that McCain as the 3rd term of bush would be a disaster

[styersc]

22. And so it begins.

Ever wonder how the DLC was created?

Dems wanted to win elections by attracting centrists.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

23. Ya'll can do whatever the fuck you want to do.

I can't afford John McSame and neither can you! x(

[northzax]

27. wait, why did progressives support him again?

right, because he opposed the war. Nothing else in his record demonstrates a particular progressiveness. Anyone who thought they were getting a real progressive was, well, blinded by that one issue. That was the primaries, this is the real world. He will do many things that will piss progressives off. But hey, mama always told me to dance with the girl I took to prom. So time to dance, kiddies.

[seaglass]

41. He was against the war when he had no accountability, that's EASY.

Now he's accountable and this is HARD. Let's see what he's got.

[JoFerret]

30. Move on folks

politics as usual.

Give Obama a break. And keep working for victory across the board in November.

[Clintonista2]

32. FINALLY! THE VOICE OF REASON!

Who gives a fuck about rights. Its about being politically smart.

:eyes:

[JoFerret]

35. Next up

A sense of proportion.

Tone of civility may take a little longer.

[uponit7771]

42. This move doesn't seem 'smart' at all, he could've picked another subject like nuke power or somethi

...something to piss progressives off.

[gulfcoastliberal]

38. There's absolutely no compelling reason to give bush what he wants on a silver platter.

Absolutely none!