-
Website
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/ -
Original page
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/07/fisa-jacking-obama-takes-the-lead/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
Can we dispense with the lilberal histrionics. Black folks and and white liberals weren't complaining when Bill Clinton's omnibus crime bill was eroding due process that mostly effected poor black men. The Constitution will survive.
It kills me how some Black folks are willing to take up the liberal mantle, selective mantle, against the first Black nominee of the Democratic Party, but fell in line with every flip flop and move to the Center by previous white candidates.
With all due respect, we don't need this shit! We all know damn well that Senator Obama's campaign would not survive if he opposed this compromise. Most Americans don't give a damn about telecom companies getting immunity. They know they were likely duped by this administration, just as the American public was. They blame Bush NOT the companies. The only result of Senator Obama opposing this bill would be the Republican smear machine successfully branding him soft on terrorism. And it wouldn't be a damn thing Kos and liberals could do about it but complain--while no on is listening!
Why can't you expend this energy and passion going after John McCain and his numerous flip flops. It's bad enough he gets a pass from the the gushing MSM, WHITE, media. Senator Obama is NOT the enemy!
And again.
And again.
Barack Obama voted no on the immunity portion of the bill.
Whenever I find any evidence of McCain's dangerousness and stupidity, I post it here.
I hope we get to read some analysis from our great editorialists about McCain's BS.
He is.
It won't stop me voting for him, but it has effectively capped my enthusiasm for him and the devastating effect of him looking like just another politician is immeasurable.
His campaign COULD survive. It did. He opposed it. Now he doesn't. The thing that is remarkable about Obama to me is that he talks to Americans as if we're grownups. He is thoughtful and he thoughtfully presents his views and people understand that.
All they ~ we ~ I can understand about this is that he's selling out.
I would have liked for him to be on record in opposition; that would make an attempt to change this legislation much easier.
The Speaker of the House capitulated and she gets a free pass.
I call ish.
And Conyers can kiss my ass.
The white progressive/left in this country is, in my experience and observation, mainly composed of rhetoric -- words -- and is often into symbolic rather than substantive action. It often comes down to feel-good and feel-self-righteous symbolic politics for the individuals involved, rather than concrete and sustained attention to what is actually going on in this nation, what needs to and can be done, and serious respectful organizing that would actually address that situation.
Senator Obama is NOT the enemy!
True, in actual reality. But that's not what we're working with here, at least in some places.
In the core worldview of the white progressive left, at least, he can't be what he actually is. He has only three possible positions:
~"One of Us" (suspect anyway, but if he does exactly what we want when we want it, we'll consider it)
~"Someone Ignorant Who Needs to be Educated By Us" (a very typical position for people of color from the white progressive/left worldview, I've noticed, but hard to the point of nearly impossible to put Senator Obama in there),
or
~The Enemy.
It's a symbolic-action, rhetoric-fueled limited-complexity play with rigid and limited casting options for Senator Obama.
he is a brilliant, thoughtful, well educated professor of constitutional law.
constitutional law.
so uphold the freaking constitution. to do otherwise is to align with bush et al.
ergo to align with the enemy.
Unfortunately from some worldviews, it IS that simple.
The relationship of such worldviews to what is actually going on, now ... that's a different story.
so what exactly IS going on now?
As for the Clintons, I gave up on them after the whole welfare reform debacle. I thought that was big time fail. That and Hillary's vote for Iraq War II were contributing factors to my opposition to Hillary's presidential campaign.
This is a stupid move on his part. He making his very vocal, but monetarily and action-supportive, base EXTREMELY unhappy, and creating a story where there didn't need to be one. FISA is not on the average person's radar screen, and standing up for Fourth Amendment rights is never a bad thing-- even to people on the right! Voters especially don't like it when corporations get away with illegal or unethical activities. I doubt that most voters would hold shooting down FISA against Obama.
We always have options; limited though they may be, but nonetheless, we do have them, and we need to let Senator Obama know that the Black vote is not something to play fast and loose with. Not anymore.
Because I'm just not seeing it.
My eyes are open.
Show me.
Really now, if you all are so out done buy this, you could start with cancelling your mobile phone service or at least switch it to a company that wasn't involved. Some grass roots efforts in this area would speak volumes to your outrage.
My cell provider told the government to take a hike when they were asked to spy on its customers, and I'm glad I have them, now, because to some extent, my phone calls weren't eavesdropped on by the Spooks on the Hill.
Black people's issues are generally everyone's issues. FISA is everyone's issue, but I'm old enough to remember COINTELPRO. FISA-type legislation got that ball rolling, too, but hey, y'all paint me as being looney, anyway.
Read "The Spook Who Sat By the Door" if FISA isn't a big enough issue to worry you. Additionally, as Jill pointed out, Bush gets a "Get-out-of-Jail" card courtesy of Congres on this issue. FISA didn't need any overhaul - out of over 50,000 requests for wiretapping, that secret court only turned down requests five times in the thirty-year history of FISA. So, why was Bush afraid to go that route with FISA as it was already written?
The answer is that he didn't need to. Period. But, then again, Bush is the only POTUS I know that considers the Constitution toilet paper.
Obama taught Constitutional Law. There are times he may have to compromise, but this issue, after promising to filibuster the legislation, is not the time for that compromise.
But if FISA didn't need any overhaul, where is your outrage about the Blue-Dog Democrats who fasttracked the bill in the House.
Conyers is a Black man.
I'm still waiting....
Don't be too shocked if the next POTUS gives Bush a blanket pardon a la Gerald Ford with the excuse being that we should put all the unpleasantness of the past 8 years behind us...
Don't get me started on Conyers. I personally know that after the Downing Street ploy, he finally gets back his Chairmanship and Pelosi threatens to kick him out of it if he didn't back down on Impeachment proceedings. He's also 79 years old, and probably going senile, because a Conyers 15 years younger would have told Pelosi to kiss his ass for threatening him and his position.
Pelosi has long considered the CBC her personal slaves, and Mel Watt, Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick and Elijah Cummings have willingly obliged her in that thinking, even to the point of slinging Cynthia McKinney under the bus when she was assaulted by the Capitol Hill police. Pelosi told them to distance themselves from McKinney; Watt, Alcee Hastings and others willingly complied.
As you know, I'm from the San Francisco Bay Area, so I still have family there, and they tell me that Ms. Nancy has Cindy Sheehan to worry about right now. Sheehan may not win, but she will garner enough votes to send Ms. Nancy a message to listen to her constituents or in 2010, she might be facing Gavin Newsome next time. S.F. was the FIRST city to lead the Impeachment charge against Bush - how do you think those constituents felt when Nancy Pelosi took impeachment off the table?
I think Bush used FISA to spy on Congress Members and he has major blackmail shyt to use if they get out of line. That HAS to explain all the capitulation I've seen, even from Obama.
However, with today's vote in the Senate, the power of the executive has been expanded dangerously to violate citizens right to be secure in their communications against warrantless spying for "evidence" that may be used against them.
If you never make a call or send an e-mail overseas or visit a foreign web site, you're less likely to become a "person of interest." However, if you work for company that has international operations, have a family member in the military stationed overseas or is a foreign exchange student, or if you're a Muslim brother or sister who has family in the Middle East, Africa or Asia, for example, watch what say, do, and who you contact.
If this isn't a deal breaker, I don't know what else is.
Consider for a moment if Bill Clinton had violated FISA by ordering the telecos to conduct illegal surveillance of Americans. I don't think Republicans would be lining up to defend him the way they and the Democrats are for Bush. Instead, they would be drawing up articles of impeach, and rightly so.
This was a moment for leadership. Instead, the Democrats and their party leader, Sen. Obama, capitulated to Mr. 28 percent. History will not be kind these feckless cowards, and even less so to the citizenry who failed to use their powerful franchise -- the vote -- to hold officials accountable and protect the Constitution.
our president is a felon. he should be in prison.
instead, congress just gave him a pat on the back and prevented anyone from ever addressing his crimes.
crimes.
do you think any of us would have our criminal acts ignored or approved of as congress has just done with george bush?
doubt it.
what do they have on barack obama? what could it possibly be that would make him cave like this?
I'm still waiting for Black folks to attack Conyers the same way they're attacking Barack.
I'm still waiting....
During the primary, Obama rightly skewered Clinton for her lack of judgement vote in 2002 to support Bush's illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Today was Obama's "judgement" vote, and he failed by siding with Bush's illegal warrantless wiretapping of Americans over protecting the Constitution.
It may be funny to you, but not to citizens who become victims of this tragic vote today. And I bet this is a real knee-slapper for the plaintiffs whose civil suits against the telecos will instantly evaporate with the final stroke of Bush's pen.
I'm just not feeling like many of you are.
That's all.
Hillary voted against the bill. I suppose that makes her more worthy of your support.
Kathy: It wouldn't hurt for him to have a Democratic Congress that he can work with, 'cause you know the Republicans won't give him a honeymoon.
This is not a "double standard". It is about Obama living up to his advertisement. If we want "change we can believe in", he needs to bring it and stop slinging cliches.
Glen Ford and Bruce Dixon have been lambasted as "haters", and you've flamed me and anyone else who tried to point out how important it is to hold Obama's feet to the fire, NOW, instead of "get him elected and hold him accountable then." I will repeat myself - if we don't demand Obama be accountable to us, his BASE, what makes you think he's going to remember our demands once he's in the White House?
::
That's some serious hyperbole. We don't have to agree about Barack, but the race card has got nothing to do with this.
Well, when he becomes POTUS, and he does nothing to correct this FISA bill, what will all of you shouting dissenters down, have to say?
The Fact that a lot of Black people know little to nothing about FISA is a sad testament to the issue that the government does a whole lot of shyt to us and to our communities and we don't know how much we've been screwed over until it's too late. And it's usually by some mouthpiece that tells us we shouldn't ask questions because it's going to be alright.
COINTELPRO should give all of us pause, but because the messenger was Cynthia McKinney, it got ignored, but was actively used to build up the Prison Industrial Complex.
Why is it easier to ignore Obama's position changing, but forget how Bill Clinton did similar shyt during his eight years in the Oval Office and only now do we realize the damage his policies have caused?
Some things Obama might need to get a free pass on, but FISA isn't one of them, and thank God, my cell provider told the Government to go to hell when they came calling about spying on their customers. You might want to check and see if yours is one of them, because if they have been spying on you for the last couple of years, you can't sue them for invasion of privacy.
I fully understand the excitement of a brotha getting the White House; it's probably equal to when John Conyers and Charlie Rangel showed up on the Hill back in the 60s. Look at where the CBC has gone, and all because we wanted a Black Face in a High Place and didn't call them out when they started swinging corporate and against the interests of the communities they serve.
The race card has to do with it if it's seen that Obama gets a free pass and while McCain has a lot of shyt we can call him out on, we also shouldn't leave the door open to get hit with a racism charge ourselves. THAT is what I was saying.
The other problem is, as you already mentioned, a lot of people don't know about FISA or haven't done their research, and they are giving their opinions without that information. I have only read about it through the bias of third parties, and I don't know much about the history of the FISA court, or this bill's relation to the Protect America Act, so that's why I asked questions below. On the one hand, I think that Obama should have supported a fillibuster on the bill as he said he would do, but on the other hand, because I don't know the history of the bill, I want to temper my remarks.
Barack hasn't gotten a free pass. He's being pulled apart from all sides on this. That should satisfy you, no?
Until I change my provider, I'm with AT&T, who clearly are part of the wiretapping, and I'm still free.
And I say all kinda shit on my cell phone to all different kinda people.
And I'm still free.
I will change providers because I'm not interested in giving any more money to AT&T.
But I'm still free.
So if what you're saying is that Barack shouldn't get a free pass on this because he's Black, so be it.
He's not getting a free pass.
I respect everybody's melodrama. I do.
But I, for one, am not interested in taking him to task on this because it's very clear to me that there's more going on here than meets the eye.
A lot more.
I doubt many other Black people are going to call him on this. Who wants to be the Judas who ruins the first viable Black candidate's chances?
I'm still trying to figure out how FISA is solely a black folks issue.
That would be fatal.
Did Hillary submarine Obama on FISA reform?
"Originally, both Hillary and Obama voted for cloture. However, Hillary changed her vote before the tally closed, opposing cloture and supporting a filibuster. A little later, she voted against the FISA reform — only one of 28 votes against — while Obama voted for its passage.
..Has Hillary decided to woo the netroots in a bid to resurrect her presidential ambitions for 2008? Obama hasn’t technically clinched the nomination yet. The superdelegates can still change their minds before the first vote at the Denver convention. "
But I really wish you would go away.
Just saying.
Obama voted for the amendments to strip immunity, but voted for the bill itself. And of course there was no filibuster.
When you answer the phone tonight, remember to say hello to the NSA, too!
I am really disturbed by the idea that Black people shouldn't criticize Obama on substantive issues (his "blackness" is not a substantive issue; the economy, the constitution, crime, etc. are). He has made it clear that he will not be the "black" president, and we shouldn't treat him as such. I am extremely excited about getting a Black man elected President, but there is no way in hell does that mean he gets a pass on decisions that may hurt the country.
Yes, White progressives are increasingly vocal about areas that Obama differs from them, however, 1) I have seen little lessening of support from them for him, 2) they are holding him to his promises about FISA and to be a "change we can believe in" that listens to grass roots, 3), of all the issues that Obama splits with progressives, there is only sustained criticism about this one issue, and 4) we've seen time and again that shifting to the center/right DOES NOT WIN ELECTIONS. All the hoopla about needing to be palatable to independents and republicans means little when independents and republicans are more open than ever to progressive ideas.
He's the nominee. What's the point at this point?! Traditionally, parties have fallen in-line to achieve their objective of winning in the general. What's different now?
What's pissing me off is that's it's a bull shit issue and you know it! It's being used as weapon against him by Hillary Clinton supporters to sabotage his election. Is it worth it to you?
Everyone is still trying to win the election, but we'd like the Constitution to still be intact when it's over.
Perhaps Senator Obama should go on a poverty tour to redeem himself like John Edwards and Bobby Kennedy before him? You know the same John Edwards who supported ALL of Bush's anti-terrorism efforts and Bobby Kennedy who tapped Dr. King's phone calls, a technique he learned while working for Eugene "communist hunter" McCarthy, before re-inventing themselves as populists.
Say it again!
I need to repost this because I just feel like it:
I got your back, Barack
This is where I'm at.
One of the reasons that we all support Obama is because of his promise to compromise when absolutely necessary. Certainly we won't tolerate compromise every issue, but we've helped to sell his message as someone who can work across the aisle. If we wanted otherwise, we should have supported Dennis Kucinich.
Now obviously, Barack isn't in support of Bush's brand of FISA. So let's not characterize him as such. Yet let's also recognize that Barack would have been writing the script for the Republicans' next attack ad had he voted against FISA. Not only would he have been branded soft on terrorist, it would surely have played into the already-existing notion that he's a secret Muslim terrorist.
I, too, would like to see the telecoms be held civilly liable where warranted. But I don't think taking an all-or-nothing position on telecom liability is the best way to demonstrate the wisdom that we know Barack has.
p.s.
Since when is civil liability for telecoms such a dire issue anyway?
Now there is little chance that Bush can be prosecuted for illegal wiretapping because the details of how it was accomplished will be kept secret.
Yes he is. He voted for the version of FISA that was to quote one rethug in Congress, "more than they dreamed of."
He completely reversed his earlier position.
He voted AGAINST the constitution.
And the reason this has been such a big deal to the 'thugs is (1) that it provides immunity to one of their most important constituencies, the big telecom companies, but more important, it provides blanket coverage for any Bush & Co. misdeeds. We will never know everything Bush has done with this having passed. Never.
So it is a big deal. And frankly, I am beginning to believe that the talk I'm hearing about Bush & Co. having spied on members of congress in order to blackmail them is true.
I cannot, for the life of me, figure out why Congress continues to bend over and take an *unlubed ass fucking from these people who have a 30% approval rating, if that.
The only thing that makes sense is that for the 7 years he sat in the White House like a big fat toad eavesdropping and plotting and politicking and manipulating, Karl Rove actually uncovered misdeeds by our congressional reps that would cost them their congressional seats. As a result, they continue to bend over* when they don't have to.
The spinelessness of this congress defies explanation. It does. It is outrageous and inexplicable.
Again, I respect people's criticism of Barack, but why isn't there outrage about the fact that the Speaker of the House took impeachment off the table???
I'm just asking.
Where is all of the outrage to surveillance cameras and checks points going up in cities like DC? Neighborhoods where black folks have lived for generations under siege from open air drug markets and violence with no police protection or surveillance. Now that the neighborhoods are in "transition" (young white liberals moving in), damned the 4th Amendment! I haven't seen KOS or any sympathetic Negros on Montana Avenue, NE, DC protesting. Where is the outrage from white liberals and like-minded Negros? It's interesting how willing white folks are to compromise on their core beliefs when it serves their own interests.
As I said, the 4th Amendment has been steadily eroding under both Republican AND Democratic administrations. Up until now, those effected have been mostly Black and Brown. Now that white folks on the upper east side of Manhatten have to worry about their phone calls to to their Pakistani room mate from graduate school being tapped, white liberals want to cry foul.
Get the fuck out of here!
Cameras are in public areas. Wiretaps are on private conversations. There is a difference.
As I stated, I don't need to put on a tin foil hat to imagine what the government might do. I'm witnessing it being done in black communities today, black RESIDENTIAL communities where white folks are transitioning in, the same white liberals who are up in arms about FISA, but are more than glad to have police check points and surveillance cameras in these neighborhoods for THEIR security.
JOHN MCCAIN DIDN'T FIND IT NECESSARY TO VOTE ON THIS BILL.
Where's the outrage?
Also, billary voted against FISA. She made a lame excuse, but we all know that she was positioning herself to make a statement at the DNC's Convention as to her willingness to agree with the "Party" position. She's SNEAKY! Will NEVER TRUST her!
Off topic: Mr. Obama responded to Rev. Jessie., but, Mr. Jessie, Jr. put DAD on "FULL BLAST"!! I'd love to be at their Sunday dinner! :>)
Poor Rachel Maddow (bless her) has been doing her damnest filling in for Keith to point out every inconsistency, but it simply just does not have any traction.
Did anyone see the Vietnam veteran who confronted McSane at one of his town hall meetings? You know the town hall meetings that he does so well connecting with people. Well, the veteran took him to task questioning him on his voting record in regards to veteran affairs (most recently Senator Webb's GI Bill) for the last several years. McSane was completely caught off guard and basically never answered the question, repeating the same meme that he has perfect record according to all military groups. This meme again was debunked by the vet.
I am not sure who said it, but it was mentioned that this election is a "referendum on Obama". It surely appears that way because McCain can get away with hella.
McCain is expected to act like a republican. He represents what we are trying to change.
Remember? Changey hopey changey hope? ?
Obama is not a republican. Neither are the rest of the sellout democrats in congress.
What the hell are we hoping for if the democrats are as bad as the republicans?
New York is so heavily Democratic that I can vote for whomever the hell I want, but I'm certainly hoping that Obama won't have disappointed me so badly by November that I'll be forced to write in Howard the Duck.
"A few short months ago, Barack Obama outwardly opposed terrorist surveillance legislation, saying that he would filibuster any bill that includes immunity for American telecommunications companies that had been asked by the government to participate in the program. Today, the U.S. Senate will approve legislation providing the immunity Barack Obama supposedly opposed, and despite his promise, he will not support a filibuster. What Barack Obama will do is show that he's willing to change positions, break campaign commitments and undermine his own words in his quest for higher office."
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com...
Isn't this what many of the anti-FISA posters have been saying themselves lately. Don't try to fool yourselves. If this was a statment from Greenwald or KOS, or whatever other icon of the anti-FISA movement, most of you would agree right?
I don't have a problem with people who are against FISA, but as Hilary Clinton learned during the primary, once you put it out there for mainstream consumption (i.e. "not ready to be Commander in Chief), then you inadvertently help the opposition with ammo for attack.
I'm so sick of him I could spit bullets.
And here we are dissecting Barack as though he's a criminal.
Black folks wanna overcompensate so as not to appear as if they're give the Black man a free pass, but don't say a peep about the other guy who's showing his militaristic ass on a daily basis, then so be it.
I'm not letting this shit go.
I will continue to support him in all the ways I can, but this was dumb, dumb, dumb. I don't know who the hell he's listening to these days, but his campaign looks a mess.
Anyone who hasn't read the bill should do so, as it is only 114 pp long and is very poorly constructed.
Of course, we need to also remember that the current administration has been illegally wiretapping US citizens since February 2001, months before September 11.
Then again, most blacks aren't as outraged as other progressives, since Dr. King, the Black Panthers and others labeled "dissidents/radicals" by our government have been victims of warrantless wiretaps since the 60s, if not before, with AT&T happily violating the rights of Americans, no matter the administration.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Justice Thurgood Marshall wasn't wiretapped, especially since even Congressman Adam Clayton Powell, Sr. fell victim to this same so-called violation of US citizens' 4th Amendment rights.
with all due respect, that is incorrect.
But instead, we have those who have need to display their incredible levels of intellect, by degrading and bringing down the name of their own which shines. To the intellects I ask.....are you saying you'd prefer McCain? Are you saying you'd prefer status quo ? (white folks in charge) Are you saying McCain would do more for blacks than Obama ?
I don't think so. Therefore, wake up....as you know....one of the biggest problems in our community is black-on-black crime.....now is NOT the time for black-on-black slime. All of your negative comments regarding Barack Obama are only hurtful to the cause and helpful to the adversary.
p.s. We are great fans of JJP.
No one is talking about bringing him down. A few people will no longer support him, but the vast majority are willing to go the distance. I think YOU and CraigHickman and a few others are the ones with a self-defeatist attitude if you believe we can't even criticize policy positions without bringing down the entirety of Obama's campaign. Obama has a lot going for him. Even the leftiest lefty bloggers aren't talking about not supporting his candidacy. There is quite a bit of disappointment about this vote-- deservedly so-- but I think Obama has time to correct the course of his campaign.
and then she sold out. and i can't wait to get her gone. she let us down, she sold us out, i despise her as much as i do the other sellouts in congress.
should i have given her a free pass because she is a woman? the first? hardly. obama doesn't get a free pass because his very candidacy is something so many of us have dreamed of. or at least he shouldn't, in a free country. but i don't think we're really free here. we just say the words and pretend. no constitution. no laws. no freedom.
Not that I'm planning on holding my breath for either Obama or the more vociferously less discerning of his supporters to come to this realization.
Props to Jill for this post. I don't think that Obama's stance makes him any less of a politician than Clinton, and I'll still vote for him in November: it's just disappointing to see him cave like any other hack after all of that brave talk about change.
That seems to be lost on all those with ulcers.
Now we're choosing between 2 sitting senators.
One voted on the bill. One did not.
The one who didn't hasn't voted on a bill since, um.... well.... hmmm...
I'll get back to you.
one or two of y'all need it.