Didn't Obama say...

[AntiFascist]

that, although he supports the current FISA bill in the Senate, he would also support the efforts of those senators who are trying to remove telecom immunity (Title II) from the bill? If so, why is MSNBC ignoring this? Maybe he should quickly reconfirm this...quickly, he only has until 11am tomorrow!

[Donnachaidh]

1. you mean he didn't rush back to filibuster the thing?

:sarcasm:

Yup.

His *efforts* make for good soundbites, but not much else.

[AntiFascist]

2. I thought I heard (please correct me if I'm wrong)...

there would be 3 amendments to the bill to be voted on. If so, I'm sure it would mean a lot to Dodd, et al, to have Obama speak out and stress the Constitutional importance of the proposed amendment, while he could continue to stress that he supports the essence of the bill without the immunity.

[az chela]

14. I love your picture.That is so damn true it should be in

every paper and web site

[AntiFascist]

16. I borrowed it from this 'Voices' poster:

[Mojorabbit]

3. The whole bill is bad

the telecom immumity provision is just the icing on the cake.

[AntiFascist]

4. I disagree, the telecom immunity provision sets a dangerous precedent...

Title I even with its faults is an improvement over previous FISA bills, but Title II (telecom immunity) overrides the rule of law, basically, setting a dangerous precedent.

[Mojorabbit]

17. I'll go with J. Turley

and the myriad of groups including the ACLU that say otherwise. They say this expands govts ability to spy on us. It may give some congressional oversight but that is little consolation.

[AntiFascist]

18. On Countdown J. Turley also indicated that the situation is hopeless...

I don't think the situation is that hopeless if the bill can still be amended, and given Sen. Dodd's powerful words on the Senate floor today speaking out against the immunity provision. Words may be just words, but what he had to say is very hard to argue against.

[The_Casual_Observer]

5. Time will tell.

[EbenezerMcIntosh]

6. We are out of time.

NT

[The_Casual_Observer]

7. What choice do we have?

[Breeze54]

8. No we aren't! - There is still time to call your Senators to vote 'NO' on Retroactive immunity!

There's still time for more calls to be made!!

Click here to make FREE CALL to your Senators!

Tell them to Vote 'NO!' on Retrocarive Immunity

Tell them to support Feingold/Dodd Amendment!
http://tools.advomatic.com/7/fisa

[EbenezerMcIntosh]

9. I stand corrected.

[AntiFascist]

10. Wait, maybe that's part of the problem...

Voting No on the entire Bill would make the Democrats look weak on terrorism, once again. Voting Yes on the amendment to remove telecom immunity from the bill would make them look like they are upholding the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and rule of law.

By the way, in case anyone is unaware, Obama is not only an attorney but also a Constitutional expert.

[Breeze54]

11. That's what I meant.... Retroactive immunity but the whole bill is BS!!!

:grr:

[EbenezerMcIntosh]

12. Obama is not a Constitutional expert.

Obama is a political creature running for office and stepping through political land mines in an attempt to get elected. He is not a man of principle.

Translation: He either says nothing or waffles.

Question: What fucking terrorism? The one seven years ago? We have terrorized hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis.

Statement: The only terrorist with any significant power in this world is the United States Of America controlled by the dictatorship of Bush, and Obama is doing nothing about it. He keeps voting to fund the war and he doesn't give a damn about the Bill Of Rights.

Bush belongs in fucking jail and I will NEVER vote for Obama until he agrees with me.

[AntiFascist]

13. You are entitled to your opinion which I'm sure many share...

I'm talking about what can be realistically achieved by the Senate where fear of Terror rules the day.

By the way, Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School after graduating from Harvard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_Obama

[lonestarnot]

15. Yes he did, so he needs to think of some action to justify gutting the 4th Amendment.