Barack Obama vs. Barack Obama Supporters
The Huffington Post is reporting that all is maybe not well between Barack Obama and his liberal lapdog supporters...
Only weeks into the general election campaign and already a notable tension is beginning to materialize within the Democratic Party. At question is Sen. Barack Obama's relationship with the progressive netroots, the online community that helped aid the Senator's rise to the presidential nomination, but has since seemingly played second fiddle in terms of courted constituencies.
Whaaaaaat? How can this be?
Here's how it all went down. Over the weekend, Barack Obama announced that -- although not in favor of the idea of retroactive immunity for the shady corporatations that helped our own government spy on us -- he supports the FISA legislation that the Senate is about to pass that will magically make all the illegal wire-tapping that the White House did legal after all.
But it's all alright, because he super double-dog swears that, as president, he won't take advantage of the power to watch over all of America like Big Brother...
"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.
Oh, well, he seems like a nice man. How can you mind surrendering your Constitutional rights to someone so charming?
Anyway, uber-lib Glenn Greenwald over at Salon was quick to get all "Waa waa waa, I don't want the Constition Constitution* torn to shreds" on Obama's ass...
It is absolutely false that the only unconstitutional and destructive provision of this "compromise" bill is the telecom amnesty part. It's true that most people working to defeat the Cheney/Rockefeller bill viewed opposition to telecom amnesty as the most politically potent way to defeat the bill, but the bill's expansion of warrantless eavesdropping powers vested in the President, and its evisceration of safeguards against abuses of those powers, is at least as long-lasting and destructive as the telecom amnesty provisions.
The bill legalizes many of the warrantless eavesdropping activities George Bush secretly and illegally ordered in 2001. Those warrantless eavesdropping powers violate core Fourth Amendment protections.
And Barack Obama now supports all of it, and will vote it into law. Those are just facts.
Isn't it just like a liberal to want to conserve our inalienable rights and keep the federal government from amassing too much power? Fucking predictable.
* I am the wurst spellor on the planit.
Ask
backflip
blinklist
BlogBookmark
Bloglines
BlogMarks
Blogsvine
BUMPzee!
CiteULike
co.mments
Connotea
del.icio.us
DotNetKicks
Digg
diigo
dropjack.com
dzone
Facebook
Fark
Faves
Feed Me Links
Friendsite
folkd.com
Furl
Google
Hugg
Jeqq
Kaboodle
linkaGoGo
LinksMarker
Ma.gnolia
Mister Wong
Mixx
MySpace
MyWeb
Netvouz
Newsvine
PlugIM
popcurrent
Propeller
Reddit
Rojo
Segnalo
Shoutwire
Simpy
sk*rt
Slashdot
Sphere
Sphinn
Spurl.net
Squidoo
StumbleUpon
Technorati
ThisNext
Webride
Windows Live
Yahoo!
Email This to a Friend
If you like this then please subscribe to the 
RSS
We are so screwed. McCain or Obama. And I thought last time, and the time before that, that the choice could not possibly get any worse. Wrong again.
Join the Campaign for Liberty.
CampaignForLiberty.com
I am stunned by what Obama has been doing.
I oppose FISA Immunity. We are a nation of Laws and we are all supposed to obey them.
I support The Fairness Doctrine. WSB is the most powerful Radio Station in The Southeast. Since Reagan Neal Boortz, Sean Hannity, Clark Howard and Michael Savage have been attacking Public Schools, Social Security and Medicare daily. No opposing voices, no logic, no proof and no defense because no questions are asked. I attack WSB on their Messageboard(Clark Howard) because his consumer advocate show spends most of its time calling for Rich People's Tax Cuts, the inappropriately titled "Fair Tax" Rich People's Tax Cuts.
The Fairness Doctrine would merely require that we get the rest of the story.
It is good enough for the English, French, Irish, Germans and Italians, why isn't it good enough for us.
[pic of Obama]
CHANGE
Because it's all you'll have left when I'm done.
How priceless... You wonder why Obama doesn't care?
"I used to give him donations, but I just took the bumper sticker off my car. I hate to say it, but now I'll vote not for him, but against McCain."
Umm, but you're still voting for him right?? Yeah, cry and moan all you want. As long as you're a guaranteed vote, he really could care a less about why you're unhappy.
Welcome to the politics of "change"
I too wonder where Jon Stewart & Stephen Colbert is on this. Are they planning to be lapdogs for the democrats? They just didn't seem so funny this week.
Daily show needs to pick this up. Obama needs to be chastized for this. I used to give him donations, but I just took the bumper sticker off my car. I hate to say it, but now I'll vote not for him, but against McCain.
Where the hell has Jon Stewart been on the FISA issue!!! I know his cult following is probably more interested in bong jokes but Stewart should be leading the cable charge on this.
I myself am torn about the Obama aspect of this but what I think is happening is that Obama is being politically cornered into supporting this and the only way to undo that and make him an honest broker again is to turn up the heat on him.
Nobody wants to see McCain in the office, but we need to keep our peeps in check.
Some people have real problems realizing satire when they read it. You can tell that the author is a fan of Mr. Greenwald, if this passage, "Isn't it just like a liberal to want to conserve our inalienable rights and keep the federal government from amassing too much power? Fucking predictable." does not set off your satire alarm; you need to go back to English class.
The "Strange Bedfellows" PAC is now up and running. The joining of the ACLU, the liberal netroots, conservative think tanks, and Ron Paul supporters who managed to shock the political world with their "money bombs" raising over $14 million for Paul during the primaries is complete. It is taking the coincident and absolute conviction that the Constitution and Bill of Rights are beyond debate and come before all other considerations that the liberal netroots and the Pauliacs share and turning it into a PAC that targets Democrat AND Republican who votes to eviscerate the Constitution.
The link is: http://breakthematrix.com/strangebedfellows
I think it is site is interesting
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/06/guide-to-new-fisa-bill-part-i.html
David Kris talks about the FISA Bill and has this to say:
"As it turns out, however, changing technology and increasing globalization make it very difficult to devise a narrowly tailored legislative solution to this recognized anomaly."
So there again, why the big secrecy, I mean, Bush could have just approach congress to get a solution? Congress would have been very fast about it, after 9/11.
It all looks as if Bush/Cheney were not acting in good faith, to hide so much, cover up so much.
I mean, the Attorney General firings of US attorneys, the political hirings don't give much conciliation that this administration was acting in good faith to save us from the terrorist.
Or for instance the way the Bush Administration fired people in the government that were opposed to unbid contracts. Or what about this from CBS files:
"An e-mail -- obtained by CBS News -- appears to show the White House was anxious to hide ballooning cost estimates. Sent on behalf of former Medicare administrator Tom Scully, it warns the agency's chief actuary, Rick Foster to not tell Congress the price tag would be well above the White House's stated 400 billion",
We really need to let the lawsuits against the telecoms go foreward because I really want to know what the heck Bush was doing and I don't for minute believe Bush/Cheney were acting in good faith. I pretty sure they are bad faith actors.