Blogtalk: Obama’s F.I.S.A. Vote

It should come as no surprise to Senator Barack Obama that his vote today in favor of expanding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is drawing cries of outrage from many corners of the liberal blogosphere. After all, the senator’s own campaign Web site had become a focal point for his supporters to express their displeasure with Mr. Obama’s stance on the bill.

That was the case again today. Carl from Ft. Worth, Texas, posted a message on Mr. Obama’s Web site this afternoon. The subject line read: “Obama just lost my vote.” He continued:

“I am disgusted. Obama will NOT receive my vote in November, regardless of whether it means McCain wins (at least HE’S being honest with us). Once again, Dems picked the wrong guy in the primaries. Time to leave the party I guess.”

Other comments struck much the same theme. Patrick in Chicago wrote “Can I get my money back this candidate appears to be defective” and Christopher from San Francisco put it simply “Senator Obama, you fail.”

Ouch.

(Recall that Mr. Obama tried to calm his critics last week with a statement on his site emphasizing that his position on the surveillance plan, “…was not an easy call.”)

Armando Llorens, who blogs under the name Big Tent Democrat, at TalkLeft.com took issue with the comments Mr. Obama made yesterday saying that his support for the bill was not politically motivated, but rather represents a genuine policy disagreement with more liberal elements of the Democratic Party:

“I do not believe Barack Obama. I will go further. I do not want to believe him. Because the alternative is worse. Because if Obama believes the BS he said about the FISA Capitulation bill, then he is not fit to be President. If Barack Obama really believes this about the FISA Capitulation bill, then he is as dangerous as George W. Bush.”

Mr. Obama’s vote for the bill, which provides legal immunity for phone companies that participated in the government’s wiretapping program, represents a reversal for the presumptive Democratic nominee. He previously opposed that provision. Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, was not present for the vote.

The F.I.S.A. bill passed 69 to 28 in the Senate today, and a number of prominent Democratic senators, including Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Chuck Schumer of New York, Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Mr. Obama’s former rival, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, voted against it. (Here’s the official tally of individual votes.)

In a statement released by her Senate office today Mrs. Clinton said: “While this legislation does strengthen oversight of the administration’s surveillance activities over previous drafts, in many respects, the oversight in the bill continues to come up short.” The statement continues:

“…even as we considered this legislation, the administration refused to allow the overwhelming majority of Senators to examine the warrantless wiretapping program. This made it exceedingly difficult for those senators who are not on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees to assess the need for the operational details of the legislation, and whether greater protections are necessary. The same can be said for an assessment of the telecom immunity provisions.

On an issue of such tremendous importance to our citizens – and in particular to New Yorkers – all senators should have been entitled to receive briefings that would have enabled them to make an informed decision about the merits of this legislation. I cannot support this legislation when we know neither the nature of the surveillance activities authorized nor the role played by telecommunications companies granted immunity.”

Blogging on Open Left, Matt Stoller wrote: “It’s interesting to consider how Clinton would have voted were she the nominee, and there’s no way to know now.” But, he added, “kudos to Clinton. It’s ironic so far I suppose that Clinton is of late a more reliable ally than Obama, at least on this issue.”

Senator Obama received some support from the blogger HatchInBrooklyn who posted on the popular liberal site, DailyKos, that “it’s time to put the ‘Obama Caved On FISA’ talk to an end”:

“The FISA bill is obviously imperfect, but I do not believe that a serious Presidential candidate can afford to vote ‘no’ on legislation that is intended to help prevent terrorist attacks. If Obama were to oppose the bill as a whole, he would be handing McCain — who didn’t even bother to show up and vote today — a huge opening to scare voters and paint Obama as weak on terrorism.”

“No. No no no no no. No,” replied Josh Orton of MyDD. “Democrats must always stand against Republicans on national security – because Republicans have proven miserable failures on national security, and yet still try to politically intimidate Democrats by painting them as weaklings yearning to surrender.”

Moe Lane at the conservative blog, Red State, appeared to relish Mr. Obama’s stand on the F.I.S.A. bill: “…the netroots went with the equivocator. Barack Obama brazenly lied to them about his intent to filibuster FISA, and they support him anyway. And now they have to go give him some more money, so that he can lie to them some more.”

Comments are no longer being accepted.

Obama not only sold out the American people with his vote on FISA, but he lied to the people like me who supported his campaign with my time and money. Look at the Democrats who voted against FISA, like Hillary and Harry Reid and Chuck Shumer. Why couldn’t Obama vote against it? He told us he wouldn’t triangulate like the other politicians, and that is precisely what he is doing. With his support for the death penalty and his opposition to gun control, what has Obama become? Now I know why people voted for Nader in 2000.

I had been supporting Barack Obama…I trusted him and I
believed in his ability to change this country around and
bring this country back to where we were!

I am a victim of the Verizon wiretapping, for no good reason whatsoever… How dare the government invade my
home, my privacy…I am an American ..and expect democracy to be enforced!

Barack Obama granting immunity to the telephone companies for this illegal wiretapping is inexcusable.I’m afraid that the democrats have loused themselves up …
and it will be an easy ‘in’ for the Republican Presidential candidate.

I lost trust

Steve Bolger July 9, 2008 ·

Evidently only Dennis Kucinich in the whole pathetic Congress has the integrity to call for the constitutional penalty for high crimes like starting wars with lies to circumvent the Bill of Rights – impeachment.

The folly continues. July 9, 2008 ·

Just as there were enough Republicans and Democrats to allow Bush to get away with his many misdeeds, and the war, there are enough to let the mischief be continued.

Bin Laden must be laughing in his condo in Saudi Arabia.

Obamas vote on this treasonous Bill is in total violation of the 4th Amendment. Hillary lost many votes for her vote for the Iraq war and I predict Obama will lose many votes for his stand on this. With immunity for the telecoms we will never know to what extent we were all spied on. I am fuming…

I am waiting for the angry pundits to sound off and it is going to be interesting. Let the war of words begin!

FISA was the perfect “Catch 22″ for Obama; voting “yes” he would get attacks from the left; voting “no” he would get attacks from the right. To make things even more fun, John McCain does not vote on the bill and Hillary Clinton votes “no”. The reasons for McCain and Clinton doing what they did, so there will be no “blame game” on either one of them.

Well, I am in the middle and FISA is the least of America’s worries right now. FISA only affect you if you are calling up terrorists. I don’t like the idea that the Us can spy on international phone calls, but in a time of war these kind of bills are a reality.

Now, back to the real issues:

1. Oil
2. Energy
3. Fires
4. Flooding
5. Health Care
6. Credit
7. Stock Market
8. Unemployment
9. Foreclosures
10. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

At least Obama was there, and made the hard call. If McCain is elected president, is he going to be off campaigning when an equally hard call has to be made?

I don’t think Obama’s call was the correct one, but someone who can justify their choice and has the guts to explain why is infinitely better than someone who doesn’t show up and make a choice at all.

To all the liberal bloggers:
You fools who are not voting for Obama because he is not liberal enough: wonderful, let’s elect a guy who’s even more conservative, who also supports immunity, and who wants to continue the war in Iraq for up to 100 years. That’s a wonderful way to further our policies: by stubbornly allowing the election of a more conservative candidate.
Ah, yes, this is the genius, of idiots.

If Obama is such a persuasive orator – and face it, that’s the only reason he’s the presumptive nominee, not his short and mostly unimpressive record in office – why can’t he vote against such a dangerous and unnecessary bill, one that he pledged to support a filibuster against if it contained telecom immunity – and be confident in his ability to explain his reasons without looking soft on terrorism? After all, he managed to be opposed to the gas tax holiday, which polls showed to be popular, and pull that off as a political win by explaining why he felt it was a gimmick.

This FISA bill is a lot more complicated than the gas tax holiday and non-political junkies won’t follow the debate anyway. But it does risk alienating his supporters, civil libertarians and anyone who is paying attention; i.e., those most likely to vote.

So why did he do it? To court the telecom company dollars? To collaborate with Bush administration law-breakers? To expand executive power for his own administration?

This vote by Obama is a deal-breaker for me as it is for many others.

Only two Senators did not show up for FISA vote and one of them was McCain. And yet, he had the courage to bash Obama for his vote? What a hero McCain is! I’d say 69 Senators made the right choice.

PS: The same applies to the Medicare vote. Even Ted Kenney came to vote, but not McCain?
Of Course McCain did not bother to vote for the Energy Policy Act H.R. 6 either.

JP, milltown, nj July 9, 2008 ·

owww, Michael Falcone, great post about all the trouble sen. obama is in with the left.

i’m sure they’ll all vote for mccain now. LOL

could this post be any more pointless?

This was not a good vote for Obama—not because it angered his leftist supporters but because it angered his libertarian supporters, many of whom are in fact independents. His success in the western states in particular will depend on winning the support of such libertarian independent voters; that task has now become just that much harder.

Lawrence Wirth July 9, 2008 ·

Of course I will still vote for Senator Obama, but his vote condoning a crime and taking away my Fourth Amendment rights has made me sick to my stomach. He needs to work hard to make up for this one – he helped put the rubber stamp to one of W’s wishes again.

It’s not even worth explaining Obama’s position here on FISA because the answer is only a thought process away. The reactionaries still wish to live in a boolean universe, where everything is either just black or just white. Too bad that the drive to expel emotion often trumps the need to be rational.

… and we put all the blame on our politicians for the divisive politics of our culture.

So, Nick, eviscerating the 4th Amendment isn’t a big issue for you, huh? Any other amendments we can throw under the bus that aren’t any of your concern?

What about the whole Constitution? not really that important when gas is $4 a gallon, right?

Yeah, let’s get back to important issues, like how cute the Obama children are.

Charles Dickens July 9, 2008 ·

Doesn’t he remember? An argument could be made that Hillary Clinton would have won the primary, but for her 2002 vote “for the war”? Is this a fatal vote? The GOP are going to be all over this.

As to the bill, it breaks my heart that Sen Obama voted as he did. But maybe there was some super secret reason. I don’t know….

Hillary lost many votes for her vote for the Iraq war and I predict Obama will lose many votes for his stand on this.

— Posted by greg

Exactly correct. The same flawed reasoning, vote for crap or you think you’ll lose the election.

I am sure, however, if Hillary were the nominee, she’d have voted for it also. Small comfort.

So–what are ya gonna do? Vote for McCain? He didn’t even vote–hard to know what he was thinking. Would it be better if Obama didn’t vote?

Looking at the larger picture–Obama still gets my vote.

“…it’s interesting to consider how Clinton would have voted were she the nominee, and there’s no way to know now.”

It’s also interesting to consider how Obama would have voted on the Iraq resolution had he been a U.S. Senator in 2002. Given all the recent flip-flops by Barry O, it seems very easy to know now.

Superdelegates – it’s not too late to change your minds!

This is so disgusting i am not going to vote for any of them ! It seems like Nader is the only Person i would trust to change anything in Washington! Why do people accept this crap from these Political Leaders.Seems the only way to change things would be to Vote them all out, and start over! I thought Obama was the one to do this!But with this Vote he has shown everyone otherwise! It will be interesting to see how many will stick with him. All the money People have given to his Campaign. Its a shame!! But what else can a Voter do to change this Criminal behavior in Washington??

Yes (to Chris, & all those who say at least the democrats who sell us out are better than Republicans), it would probably be better if Obama were the next president instead of McCain. But progressives have been playing that game for 60 years, and supporting democrats who have moved the country farther and farther to the right & functioned mainly to legitimate the Republicans/corporations by giving them a phony opposition. The ONLY way things are ever going to change is if we get a real opposition party, and a real news media.

To all you who haven’t fallen in line yet…careful…what you type and say can now be held against you.

This should now be considered the Adnarim law, because this just totally reversed what the Miranda law sought to protect.

Between the Governor of New York going down for getting caught in these new wiretapping laws, and other, smaller examples – your only protection is to stay out of trouble…and, let’s hope that that all those now legally able to interpret your communication…from your search terms to your you tube visits…just remember…someone or some program really is watching.

Would anybody like a $47,000 cocktail weenie?

For months I tried to tell you wild-eyed Obama lovers that though he has great political skills, he’s a “business as usual” politician and not a change agent as he claims. Then I gave up.

Now I’m back because I just can’t resist saying I told you so.

Clinton is my senator and I’m proud that she voted no on FISA, whatever her motives. She’s a liar and she doesn’t always do the honorable thing but at least she’s not the kind of self-righteous hypocrite who casts herself as a holier than thou ultra progressive savior of the world.

I’m still going to vote for Obama in Nov and I hope all the PUMAs change their minds despite Obama’s FISA vote. The Republicans do not deserve another term in the White House.

Hillary voted against the FISA bill as did Schumer so my senators listened to me and my requests. I am one of the ones who supported Hillary and am not voting for Obama. He has never been attractive to me and continues to this day to confirm my feelings about him. He is just running for his own ego and his buddies. Hillary serves the people.

Curliquedan July 9, 2008 ·

No guts AND no glory. This would-be emperor truly is clad in whole cloth.

At this point, he’d be doing Democrats a favor if he released his delegates to Hillary, and stepped aside. But he won’t…HA HAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!