What's the point of getting all a twitter about Obama and FISA before it even hits the Senate floor?

I mean, Jesus, give the man a chance.

Let's hear him out.

And, FYI, a whole bunch of "congress critters" just voted for it today. Your representative very well may have been among them.

Many Democratic Senators, other than Obama, are sure to vote for it.

Any comments on them? Criticisms?

No?

By the way, Olbermann had a fascinating segment on this tonight.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x149885

:shrug:

When I clicked on it, to start the video, it showed the Youtube "loading" graphic, and then, after a few minutes, it said "Sorry, video is no longer available". But then, I tried it again, and was able to watch it.

Now that I saw it, it leaves me with the impression that Obama likes throwing away 4th Amendment rights while hoping to prosecute these telecoms for violating the previous law. Now I'm even more confused.

He has too much respect for our constitution to just let this slide. He has a plan how to deal with this.

I'd like to hear what that plan is before I start criticizing him.

Look, you do Obama no favors by being a follower. He made, at the very least, a gaffe today, and should be called on it.

The Senate did not vote today, nor did they discuss this bill.

yes, the vote isn't until next week, but its enough that he said that, for that alone he deserves criticism.

If you want to express your opinion to Obama on how he should vote, now would be the time:

With all due respect, Obama is not my Senator.

I also noticed that a lot of PA Dem House members voted "aye" today. Curiously, the ones in swing districts. I guess that I should be contacting them as well.

and wouldn't listen anyways. There hasn't been a bill that violates our civil rights in some manner that she hasn't voted for already. She'll vote for this one as well.

You can bitch up and down a message board, but you can't spare 5 minutes for something you seem to be passionate about?

My call won't even be useless, it's my voice. Put up or shut up, Solon.

Kristi..thanks.

mixed up:blush: Now I know what you were talking about:)

Presumptive Democratic Presidential Nominee

Leader of the Democratic Party

This is political strategy, which happens in politics. However, Obama, as leader of the Democratic Party, needs to know where the public stands on this issue. As a the potential next President of the United States, his words and opinion will carry weight - even with some Blue Dogs.

I interpret his statement differently. I hear him saying that he wants to be able to compromise on the bill (which he doesn't really want, but politically he has to say)...BUT...there are elements that he currently finds unacceptable.

So he has given himself an out, without looking like he's unwilling to compromise.

Honestly, if there is vitriol to be freely dispensed, why isn't Pelosi the target?

constantly, there are calls for her to be removed as Speaker of the House, etc. Look at what forum you are in again before you make that statement.

What I object to is that no mention of that was made over here.

It's as if the Democratic party has two public enemy no. 1's. Who you blame seems to be directly related to which forum you frequent. It's crazy.

I'm just asking for a little perspective here.

Obama and Pelosi, and both leave much to be desired. And this will be true until Obama picks a running mate, then we'll have 3 people to pick on.

It's wouldn't be right. Obama is not in the House of Reps, he's in the Senate.

Lets not get all worked up until we see exactly what Obama is going to do in the Senate.

why can't our own presumptive national leader at least do the same?

We have separate branches of government for a reason. Within the legislative branch, the house and senate should be independent of one another. Separate versions of the bill should be passed in both the Senate and House, then a compromise should be reached.

Bush has flouted this and intruded on the legislative branch of government. I hope Obama doesn't do the same.

I don't want him to repeat the illegal actions of Bush. The last thing we need is a Democratic president that acts like Bush.

:hi:

The bar is damn low.

that's a compliment.

Your hatred for Obama is obvious.

You don't really even care about FISA, you're just using it as an excuse to hit Obama over the head.

:hi:

:rofl:

Talk about ignorant. I would edit that if I were you.

For some reason I doubt you would be showing this much concern if Hillary won the nomination.

can't see the forest through the trees. This is a great example of why Democrats always lose.

fully. If he votes for an amendment to strike down the immunity and if THAT fails, also votes down the bill, then I think we should cut him some slack on this issue relatively speaking, but we'll see. In the meantime, in addition/in lieu of posting here, those who oppose this bill should voice your concern directly to his campaign. His candidacy is said to be "people powered and funded", this will be test of not only that premise, but of how many people truly care about this. If you are upset about an issue I'd urge people to try to exercise this leverage when and where it exists, before you decide to stay at home or vote for someone else, this can be a very informative experiment (even if it's one that I hoped would not need to happen at this point). Speaking for myself though, I'm still behind him right now.

He's got the issue "under consideration."

Nothing gets done without negotiation and votes.
Obama and his team have shown themselves time and again to be master political strategists so I think they know what they are doing apropos this issue.

I trust his instincts. I trust his vision and I trust his integrity.
So I trust that he will do what he feels he needs to in order to win the election in November.
And not just for the top of the ticket but also in the Congressional races as well.
At which time a whole program of reforms and new directions will be possible.

You have to pick your battles and I believe that if he felt this is one he needed to fight here and now he would or will.

I also defer to those who are in the thick of the battle to know better what all of the issues are.
There are down-ticket battles that will be effected by this issue, there is the possibility of an "October surprise" and there is a center-of-the road voting population that needs to be courted. In other words, like most of politics, it isn't a black and white issue.

Remember, the largest issue is Victory in November, without that the rest is dust.

If we're all so passionate about this that we jump on every thread about FISA, we should be passionate enough to call even the unlikeliest senators to express out opinions.

Put up or shut up--and look at your own senators first.

Poor us. Bile and Lumpy McSame. Be sure to tell them to fuck themselves for me.

My rep voted for it. Now it goes to the Senate, where one of my two Senators is chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and chief Democratic cheerleader for this sellout. If you think it won't pass in the Senate you haven't been paying attention.

Since you asked, I am disappointed in every Democratic member of Congress who has supported this legislation, and in every one who will. My opinion matters little, but in that respect on this issue, I'll give Obama the same chance as I give all the others: If he votes against it he will have done the right thing.

So that he understands how IMPORTANT this is
to his contributors and the people of the
United States.

if anyone has a link, i would appreciate it. instead, i have been reading posts from progressives here, on salon, and on huffpo. mostly, they are slamming obama, declaring the end of all rights as we know it. some say that this actually gives us rights back. until i can read the bill for myself, i just can't form a thoughtful opinion. i emailed the obama campaign asking for clarification on how this bill doesn't reduce our 4th amendment rights. if anyone actually knows the specifics, other than giving immunity to tele companies that aided the president in wiretapping, please share. thanks!

I've decided to read it too - it's not good. Basically it forces telcoms to give up info to the government, & gives them compensation if they do, possible contempt citations if they don't.

And it releases the telcoms from any liability:

`(e) Release From Liability- No cause of action shall lie in any court against any electronic communication service provider for providing any information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with an order or request for emergency assistance issued pursuant to subsection (c) or (d), respectively.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/~c110iib1Sa:e0:

i've downloaded the pdf and will start skimming the 116 pages!!!

but of course they're voting against it. True patriots, every one.