Obama Votes to Silence Debate and Pass FISA
Arizona Senator John McCain did not bother to show up for Wednesday's Senate votes on whether to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to absolve George Bush of responsibility for initiating an illegal warrantless wiretapping program and to provide retroactive immunity to the telecommunications corporations that violated the privacy of their customers in order to collaborate with a lawless president.
But that's O.K., Illinois Senator Barack Obama cast the votes that McCain would have.
In addition to joining the majority in a 69-28 Senate vote to approve legislation that the American Civil Liberties Union describes as "a Constitutional nightmare," Obama backed a key move to silence debate on the FISA bill.
During a day of decisions on amendments, cloture and formal approval of the FISA rewrite, Obama cast several votes in favor of failed amendments to limit certain forms of retroactive immunity for the telecommunications corporations. But, in the essential votes on whether to advance and pass the unamended bill, the senator from Illinois broke the majority of his Democratic colleagues -- including New York Senator Hillary Clinton -- as they worked to keep the debate open and block final passage.
In the case of the cloture vote, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president sided with Republicans who argued that the essential Constitutional questions raised by the White House-backed FISA legislation did not merit extended or thoughtful debate.
Seventy-two senators backed the move to end the debate, while 26 sought to keep it going. Two senators - McCain and ailing Massachusetts Democrat Edward Kennedy - missed Wednesday's votes.
Those 26 "no" votes on cloture were cast by Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders and 25 Democrats, including Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, Obama's Democratic colleague from Illinois, and Clinton, Obama's primary competitor for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Leading the fight to keep the debate about the FISA rewrite open were Connecticut Democrat Chris Dodd and Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold, the two senators Obama promised earlier their year to work with in an effort to block this assault on the Constitution and corporate responsibility.
Said Feingold, "I sit on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, and I am one of the few members of this body who has been fully briefed on the warrantless wiretapping program. And, based on what I know, I can promise that if more information is declassified about the program in the future, as is likely to happen either due to the Inspector General report, the election of a new President, or simply the passage of time, members of this body will regret that we passed this legislation. I am also familiar with the collection activities that have been conducted under the Protect America Act and will continue under this bill. I invite any of my colleagues who wish to know more about those activities to come speak to me in a classified setting. Publicly, all I can say is that I have serious concerns about how those activities may have impacted the civil liberties of Americans. If we grant these new powers to the government and the effects become known to the American people, we will realize what a mistake it was, of that I am sure."
Unfortunately, while Obama once promised to work with Feingold, he wasn't listening on Wednesday when the Wisconsin senator explained to his colleagues that granting retroactive immunity to the telecommunications corporations would effectively block the ability of Congress and the courts to address not just massive corporate wrongdoing but attacks on the privacy rights of Americans.
"If Congress short-circuits these lawsuits, we will have lost a prime opportunity to finally achieve accountability for these years of law-breaking," said Feingold, who flatly rejected Obama's argument that, while unappealing in some aspects, the FISA rewrite was somehow acceptable as a whole. "That's why the administration has been fighting so hard for this immunity. It knows that the cases that have been brought directly against the government face much more difficult procedural barriers, and are unlikely to result in rulings on the merits."
Russ Feingold was speaking the truth about a moment in which the ACLU said the Senate was on the verge of passing "an unconstitutional domestic spying bill that violates the Fourth Amendment and eliminates any meaningful role for judicial oversight of government surveillance."
But Barack Obama did not want to hear it.
John Nichols, a pioneering political blogger, has written The Beat since 1999. His posts have been circulated internationally, quoted in numerous books and mentioned in debates on the floor of Congress.
Copyright © 2008 The Nation
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
32 Comments so far
Show AllDid Ross Pero win? NO, but he was on TV and got to talk of that SUCKING SOUND that NAFTA would make. He got to plant a seed in the minds of Millions. Lets be real and work to get Ralph Nader into the debates (he is the best known) and maybe he can plant some seeds about SINGLE PAYER health care or REDUCED military spending. One good sound bite about "not for profit" health care might force some real discussion. Winning would be great, but right now we should take whatever we can get.
I hope you americans who put all your hopes in Obama have woken up. NO CHANGE IN THE COURSE THE USA IS GOING. Israel snaps its fingers and that black guy with a passed dances. Your country is so screwed and still millions can't see it.
☆_STAR_★ ◎F THE ♪♫_SEA_♪♫I have placed some links of my recent inspirations for you,
although I left out the recent 9_!_! thread
that although quite interesting is not empowering
in the manner I suspect that you're interested in
Namaste « Presence »
ezeflyer-----so it's about winning huh? Not about providing our children and grandchildren some shreds of freedoms down the line? Do you even have a line in the sand that you will not cross when it comes to your vote???? I am profoundly discouraged by this winner mentality? Decent leaders will never emerge as long as we continue to buy into these totally false choices that the powerful puppeteers keep offering us?
" Let's see now---a piece of candy that kills us quick or one that stuns us first and kills us more slowly?" Some damned choice that is.
Sorry, I cannot cross the line of voting for anyone who refused to protect my 4th amendment rights. Go ahead if you can. It's surely your right. Just stop trying to convince those of us without cast iron stomachs that we should too.
With my protest vote, I am trying to send a message---maybe it's just a message in a bottle, but I cannot look into the mirror and vote for Obama or anyone who voted for this abomination called the FISA bill. I've had enough!
"heres an alternative to voting for obama…go to the polls and write on the ballot "Dear washington BC, please give me my tax money back,"
I meant give me an alternative candidate that has a good chance of winning, not an action we can take.
Don't include Nader, Kucinich, Paul, etc who have no chance of winning because no matter how high your expectations are, or how outraged or disgusted you are, or how much money Republicans are paying you to bomb this site, the sheeple won't vote for them.
This is the plan. Obama has been bought off
or scared off from any serious change we can
believe will occur.
Thanks to this latest capitulation by the senate,
get ready for total misinterpretation and control
of every thought or action on the part of the crude
people.
The Homegrown Terroism and Violent Radicalization
Act of 2007 is another example of facism. If you be-
lieve that if life isn't fair and fighting is a
part of life, then fighting isn't fair. Anything
goes in a fight, as long as you are attacked first.
You will be subjected to ridcule and vilification
at the least, and marginalization and imprisonment
or death at the worst.
At this point, I believe the base, despicable demo-
rartic nominee will lose because that was the plan
from the start of this charade we call an election.
Polite discourse dosen't work on people who think
they superior to individuals or groups. Their in-
sults are allowed because they possess the traits
most coveted by liers and murderers.
They can take all of this retoric about shifting to
the center and shove up. If we, The People have to
this garbage from these murdering motherfuckers,
eat the righteous retoric of the People.
Do not hide behide any rules or laws, just beat or
kill with full transparency. Oh! that's right you are
sons of bitches and daughters of bastards. You need
slaves to perpetuate and maintain your empire.
It matters not if they willing or unwilling parti-
cipants. I hope anyone who has voted on any legisla-
tion in the last thirty years or so that has turned
the people of this and the world into serfs, dies.
This isn't a call for revolution. My beliefs are
mine and mine alone. An insult is to treat someone
with insolance and contempt. It isn't always a fact,
but at times can be a fact.
Whoever dosen't like whatI say, Fuck their Mother
everyday. Righteous Freedom of Speech is Absolute.
My parents, lifelong Democrats, are spinning ferociously in their graves.
Read what Bill Moyers had to say about democracy after the 2006 election (first essay in his book on the subject), then think about what the congress has done since. The time has come for us to act, and to do so with all the strength we can muster.
Anyone who votes for a known liar does not deserve that vote, but deserves to be a slave of liars. If the voter does not have principles, do not expect the politicians to have any.
heres an alternative to voting for obama...go to the polls and write on the ballot "Dear washington BC, please give me my tax money back, I do not authorize their use for the shredding of our constitution. And while you're at it, get my brothers and sisters out of iraq and back home so we can can get some real work done--like educating, feeding and curing our country and the rest of the world. And maybe also finding an honest, non-politician to run for president"
Saying Obama is not worth voting for without giving us a real alternative to McCain/Bush/Repugs is perplexing to say the least. But not so much if you consider that paid repug shills are bombing this site.
I mean a real alternative that has a chance of winning and kicking out the Republican devils, not whom progressives would necessarily like it to be. A lesser evil even, as long as he can replace the greater one, the Bush anti-Christ and his successors.
A favorite tactic of the right is to appeal to baser passions using mob psychology. I think that is what they're trying to do here.
One has to put one's mind on "tilt" to make any sense of Obama. He's not worth it.
FISA
Check out Title VIII: "Protection of Persons Assisting the Government." A "person" is defined as "an electronic communication service provider" or "a landlord, custodian, or other person who may be authorized or required to furnish assistance. . . ." Note how wide open is the category of "other person."
And "assistance" is defined as "the provision of, or the provision of access to, information (including communication contents, communications records, or other information relation to a customer or communication), facilities, or another form of assistance." Notice how wide open is the category of "another form of assistance."
Bank account numbers and passwords, medical records, 'sins' told in confession etc. are 'data' and keys to your mailbox or safety deposit box or your house are 'other' forms of assistance. Can they now take your child for ransom with impunity? Possibly. Is 'other person' the neighborbood burgler or voyier? Congress obviously does not care. It's Abu Ghreb for the masses! Remember that Saddam was one of the Persons Assisting the Government. So was Oswald and McVeigh (veterans).
Obama = McCain Lite!
I saw a bumper sticker the other day - it had a picture of both McCain and Obama on it, and it said "Same Shit, Different Piles".
And it's up to our watches.
Obama *could* raise himself a notch in my estimation if he is elected and takes the oath of office saying, "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States except for the Bill of Rights and most of the rest of it." If he winks, we'll know he has a sense of humor and maybe would even be fun to have a beer with.
Well, at least Obama, if elected, will now have the option of tapping all the Republican members of Congress, their aides, operatives, escort services, psychiatrists, brokers and doctors, looking for scandalous, compromising or incriminating information with which to blackmail their votes in favor of Obama's agenda.
So maybe the R's in Congress will be next to appear to be complete sell-outs.
He could also use the information to protect himself against opposition assassinations by compiling a mountain of secret damning info and letting the opposition know, "If I get killed... all this goes public."
Or, he could send the lot of them off to Gitmo or Syria for "re-education".
As Mel Brooks said, "It's good to be King."
Goebbels sez July 10th, 2008 3:34 pm
I think its D & E
Anybody But Those Trampling on the Constitution Please.
A vote for Obama, sadly, is a vote for McCain, at least in my world, where my conscience is allowed at the polls. My apologies if this hurts your favorite corporate Democrat.
Obama commits suicide on the Senate floor.
I wonder if he will make the trains run on time.
"A glimpse of ezeflyer's position on removing constraints on executive power in order to allow for POSITIVE change"
It's not my position. I said it's ostensibly Obama's position. "Ostensibly" means "seemingly", "evidently", etc.
It would seem the democrats as a group have calculated that either
a) the overarching concern of the majority of American voters is stripping the Bill of Rights and rule of law from the Constitution;
b) the American voter has no actual involvement in their retention of political power;
c) the American voter has the collective intelligence of a crumpled beer can; or
d) all of the above.
A glimpse of ezeflyer's position on removing constraints on executive power in order to allow for POSITIVE change occurs towards the end of a scene in George Lucas's otherwise execrable "Star Wars: Attack of the Clones"
ANAKIN: We need a system where the politicians sit down and
discuss the problem, agree what's in the best interests of
all the people, and then do it.
PADMÉ: That is exactly what we do. The trouble is that
people don't always agree. In fact, they hardly ever do.
ANAKIN: Then they should be made to.
PADMÉ: By whom? Who's going to make them?
ANAKIN: I don't know. Someone.
PADMÉ: You?
ANAKIN: Of course not me.
PADMÉ: But someone.
ANAKIN: Someone wise.
PADMÉ: That sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me.
A mischievous little grin creeps across his face.
ANAKIN: Well, if it works...
Nice piece, but just for once, I would like to know who Nichols is voting for?
And to say so in public.
Oh, unlimited executive power for POSITIVE change! Why didn't he SAY so in the FIRST place?
NOBODY could have a problem with THAT explanation! Why, it would be like objecting to Santa Claus having the use of his magic sleigh!
Thanks a lot, Obamabots.
Ostensibly the Obama campaign planned this to allow Obama to acquire the executive power for positive change. One way to prove this would be for Obama to select Dodd or Feingold as running mates.
I AM NOW VOTING THIRD PARTY. ANYTHING BUT THE"LESSER OF TWO EVILS" OBAMA IS A TRAITOR TO OUR CAUSE!
Special interests and "free enterprise" capitalism it is what this country has devised as worth living and dying for. The basis for the consumer ideology is energy and its association with an auto centered economy closes the circle. It uses the media to direct the public flow of the so-called truth and we have a perfect example of it in this political campaign. It is why Exxon Mobile is out of control and the public is given platitudes rather than help. The media is out of control as this election has shown just how far it has gone to dumb-down the public. The recent move by ABC to remove candidates from the debates was outrageous.
They are trying to determine the fate of the country and the world being mouthpiece for special interests and the government and to silence dissent. Media censure is unheard, the FCC should rule for the public but like the EPA its teeth are continually drawn. The media has no right to exclude any politician who is running for office as happened recently with the ABC debate. The only exclusion under the rules used by ABC should apply to a candidate not sitting in public office. The license of ABC would be lifted if the rules were changed but the congress, with the exception of a few pushes for more media conglomeration supported by special interests.
I hope that someone picks up on this thought but I doubt that will happen, it's all too far-gone. We have seen the obsession by FOX and CNN, particularly in the form of Wolf Blitzer, and the FOX rabid journalists constantly referring to the Rev. Wright controversy. Blitzer's bias was clear. He was quick to use every possible negative he could against Obama from the Flag Pin to anything else he could get his mouth around. But it worked Obama wears the pin all the time now.
His support for Clinton was been clear and inappropriate, for CNN to call itself a "fair and balanced" news network at the time. I quote Mr. Nichols: 
" The media pretense of being a fly on the wall has often been preposterous. In the real world of politics — where power brokers and manipulators proceed with the cynical axiom that perception is reality — the fly on the wall is the wall. The political press corps is not observing reality as much as redefining it while obstructing outlooks and constraining public perceptions." But not only that, it is conditioning the American people in a one party system to behave in certain predictable ways.
As usual, few are able to see the stampede of the public sheep created by media. I support change that I once thought Obama represented! His rhetoric suggested there might be some but the Huffing ton Post clearly warned that we were facing a different Obama. Many of us wanted an America once again to be looked upon as a great nation that it could still be and once was.
The present "lack of experience" cries of Clinton during her campaign against Obama and now by McCain is preposterous. However, once it appeared that Obama would capture the nomination the DNC stepped in and told him what Obama must do as the other half of the oligarchic coin. True, the Democrats will do slightly better for the average person but not enough to change the corporate landscape soon enough to stop the ensuing global disaster
Could anyone having been near the White house as long as Bush done as badly for the USA or the world? There is experience, the experience of greed an American cultural reality! The discovery of a job approval rating for Bush at about 28% of the American people speaks volumes about experience and the ability of the American people to understand what has happened the USA. No one could have been as bad as the Bush team but to be elected twice is a travesty and a crime against humanity!
There is Washington experience in action! A flight from entrenched American politics is necessary . . .it has ruined this country and the world made greed the single value of importance associated with American world hegemony. The young people once again embrace hope as a result of the Obama campaign but that will quickly be replaced by apathy as they see once again the emergence of the usual political leader promising everything and delivering nothing. I would say that Obama is completely experienced in the ways of Washington we see it in action. The Hillary political group displayed the truth of politics; Obama offered change but now we see what entrenched politics brought to the American people by the DNC & RNC have done. They have virtually destroyed America with its policies and exclusive power clubs. The Clintons before and now the Obama camp show clearly that hope is dead; they embrace the single party system, this is America.
Clinton during her campaign morphed to the Obama populist message, it was called, "finding her voice" while at the beginning of her stump showing her Madeline Albright, bomb the children image. Now Obama having secured the nomination has lost his voice of change and has morphed to the business as usual candidate. 
Can anyone truly think that change is unnecessary? Does anyone think with the American political machines in place, as they are that Americans will get a different kind of politics in Washington?
I think not since all the politicos have adopted Obama's message of change but the only way they will get the kind of change we must have is when the entire globe melts down as is happening now. The mistakes that Obama may make as president cannot be greater than those of the past seven years of the regime in power. But his mistake of destroying the hope of the American people and particularly the youth has stripped the vitality that might have invigorated the American people and the world. The Democrats are a pathetic shadow of what the world needs now.
It is also necessary to have a democratic congress whether Obama assumes the Oval office or not it has to be slightly better than we see coming from the mind of the Republicans, however with them at least one knows what we get. If any hope exists it will not come from the leader of color we had hoped might be the person. The "politics of hope" is replaced by the politics of cynicism of a single party system as we have seen happen in this American political scene. We had some hope Mr. Obama might make certain that the programs that Americans wanted and "hoped for" could be enacted, that seems to be slipping away before our eyes.
Mr. Gore Vidal, has pointedly criticized mainstream media as one of the major problems, and what is wrong with the USA. The corporate media conglomerates control the message and that message is perversely distorted and panders to its advertising portfolio! Wolf Blitzer and the rest of the media propagandists, is only one of the most glaring examples of this criticism. He shows clearly those distorted ideas with his reporting, which is nothing more than partially factual opinion dictated by his bosses. He is a person who has no right to shape public opinion far from being the "fly on the wall" he espouses to be.
He has politicked for a re-invigorated Clinton White House given the recent movement of the Obama Camp toward the embrace of the Clintons we can look for Hillary Clinton as the VP within the foreseeable future. The media continues to move the so-called Democratic Party toward that eventual conclusion. This is a media conditioned country and it has been conditioned for that eventuality. This VP committee will decide in this direction. Remember the "Blitzer Dream Team".
We must remember flies morph from maggots. But it is not only Blitzer that has morphed to a new reality. While he displays ignorance as a virtue for the entire world to see, an example of what is considered, by many in America to be news reporting, but shows us a propaganda machine in operation. The only good thing that might happen as a result of a black president is the standing of the USA in the world which may rise briefly until the world sees that the policies of the USA are not very much different as they have experienced these last seven years and presently given the behavior and the twisted message orchestrated by the DNC for its puppet Barak Obama.
Shut down the Dim Convention. Politely of course, with proper and appropriate dialog with the significant authorities.
Cynthia McKinney/Dennis Kucinich for president. And they would get middle america easy if they promised to chase all these inbred fascist elites into prison at gunpoint using our brave soldiers. listen to me, Cyn and Den !
F@#* McCain, F@#* Obama...