Obama Spokesman: I Don't Know His Stance On FISA
Barack Obama is keeping his position on the new FISA bill close to the vest -- so close, in fact, that even his aides don't know what it is!
During a conference call this afternoon with reporters, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs was first asked whether the Obama campaign would schedule time for the candidate to vote in the Senate next week, and how Obama would actually vote on the policy. Gibbs initially said he didn't know about the scheduling, without addressing the main subject.
Later on, another reporter asked specifically about Obama's position. "I better check on that, too," Gibbs said. "I honestly -- that's what I need to work on, as well."
It certainly is striking that Obama is now the leader of the Democratic Party, but he has yet to say anything on such a crucial public issue. Obama has in the past opposed lawsuit immunity for the telecom companies that participated in warrantless wiretapping, but neither he nor his campaign have commented on his position for the latest bill.
Late Update: Here's the audio from the call:
Late Update: Just to clarify, we're not faulting the staffer here for failing to answer the question. The staffer, after all, simply can't make up an answer out of thin air. The larger point at play here is that Obama has yet to provide an answer on a major issue over the last two days.
Late Update: Obama has now taken a position -- in favor of the bill.
Not much of a spokesman. We all know his position on the FISA bill, there is no mystery there, he opposed telecom amnesty originally, and he still will. The only question is whether or not he will have time to make the vote.
But really, what is the point of posting a story about a spokesman not knowing the answer to a question?
June 20, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
The POINT, LV, is that many us sober folks -- who haven't drank the Koolaid or have recovered from it -- are waiting with baited breath to see if Uncle O will yet again pull his gimp string.
You're so sure he's gonna come flat out against telecom amnesty??
Wanna bet?
June 20, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes.
And I've never seem him "pull his gimp string".
And stop it with the idiotic koolaid nonsense. Your candidate lost fair and square, get over it.
June 20, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
The gimp string is lame, and he's never "pulled" it.
But I agree, I want to know what he's going to do and if he's actually going to take a public stand or just do this quietly. Obama is lauded for telling people what they might not like to hear, but does have the guts to do that with FISA? Or is he busy making a list of republicans he'll want to wire-tap?
And don't you dare accuse me of being a Hillary supporter.
June 20, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did I? I don't believe I did.
June 20, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
My candidate. LOL
I worked my butt off for Obama in NJ, RI, and PA. And if you don't find his embrace of all things establishment and corporate over the last two months to be revolting, than you're in this for reasons which have little to do with politics and much to do with identity.
June 20, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
You sound like someone who is quite naive when it comes to politics. You fail to understand Obama, or what he does, and it seems like you expected someone totally different. If you worked your ass off for him, and are now throwing around your bitter anti-Obama rhetoric, it seems you made a mistake somewhere in there, and that isn't surprising given the nonsense you are spewing. If you had actually been paying attention and had an eye for the big picture you wouldn't be so conflicted.
Think Obama sucks? Then stop bitching and go vote for Nader. He seems like a good fit for you, neither seem to have a flair for the realistic.
June 20, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
"spewing" is a Republican word.
Just writing something here is not "spewing".
I believe "spewing" must be oral, in fact. Like puking, a related word.
June 22, 2008 7:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
You would appreciate this "Tom Tomorrow" cartoon from this past March.
June 20, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
exactly i dont know what the big deal is he has said before that he doesn't like wiretapping for heavens sake
http://sensico.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/dwc-checklist-4-change-part-2/
June 20, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
The issue is that people like to find an excuse to complain, whether it is because they are bitter about their candidate not winning the primary, or because they like Nader, or because they are McCain trolls, or whatever, they want to try to blame Obama for everything, as if the man isn't just a little busy.
Yes, he opposed it from the beginning, he was also the only candidate who actually showed up last time to vote against it, but no one seems to remember that. It is all about boooo on Obama because he can't commit 100% of his time to every goddamn issue or piece of legislation.
And they also seem to be under the mistaken impression that if Obama snapped his fingers or made a pretty speech everything would be better and all the Democrats would magically stand together as one. Yeah right. FISA is out of Obama's hands, I'm tired of people bitching about it. This shouldn't even be a post, give me a break.
June 20, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
All Obama had to do, as far as I'm concerned, was to say something before this disgusting capitulation by the House Democrats. He didn't have to spend 24/7 on it. Just something. But did he? No. Dead silence while the Bill of Rights goes down the toilet. I've supported him all along, but I'm nauseated by this little piece of political calculation.
June 20, 2008 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was the House, he is a Senator, it passed by a huge margin, there was nothing he could do. Period.
He may have been waiting on purpose for the House to do the inevitable before taking a stand in the Senate.
If he doesn't do anything and it passes the Senate, then you can whine about political calculation, but right now that is very premature, and I'm quite sick of people acting like Obama came out and voted for the goddamn FISA bill in the House. There is absolutely no story here but some dumbass staffer not knowing the answer to a question, and we have a ton of comments about people complaining and trashing on Obama for nothing. Give me a break.
June 20, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think that. I don't believe that Obama can magically make this go away. I do believe that he could take a stand on this and make an important difference in the debate on this issue. Contrary to your presupposition, I am an Obama supporter and that is precisely why this is disappointing. Cutting and pasting statements from months ago are not going to fly. We have a bill today. If we want to stop that bill or even if we want to effect the public perception of that bill or the public debate over surveillance policy, we need prominent Dems to stand up and say something about it. Some have. Feingold has. Obama has not. I don't think it does progressive causes any favors to give him a pass on that.
June 20, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is a Senator, this vote was in the House, and it passed by a large margin, there was no stopping it.
Having said that, next is the Senate vote, and this is the only place where he has any chance of making a difference.
All I'm saying is people need to quit whining so damn much about what Obama "didn't do well enough" when there is still time.
I don't know if people have failed to notice this but Obama is kind of busy right now. Give him a chance to work out his strategy and come out with a statement. For all you know he could be working with Dodd and Reid and Feingold and the others right now in trying to figure out a game plan while everyone is bitching and throwing their hands up in the air saying he has somehow let them down. It is hardly constructive, and it would not be like Obama at all to not come out against this, so there is no reason for everyone to be assuming he isn't going to work to stop this in the Senate.
June 20, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
First, he doesn't "have to make it go away". Second, he is more than a Senator. He is the leader of the Opposition Party. Third, restoring the Constitution is SINGULARLY THE MOST IMPORTANT CHANGE we need. If he does not stand for the Constitution, he stands for NOTHING.
June 20, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
As far as I've seen he hasn't turned his back on the Constitution yet, so I think it is just a bit premature to be acting like he has.
June 20, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just like he missed the MoveOn vote, yet made both the vote directly before and after it. Or how about him missing the vote to designate the IRG a terrorist organization when there was ample notice for him to make it back from NH? Geez! Everyone's so hard on Obama. Don't they see he's running for the most important position in the U.S.? Why is everyone trying to hold him up to such a high standard? Give him a break, already!!
June 20, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you had been paying attention you would know that he skipped the MoveOn vote on purpose as a protest to it even coming to a vote.
And he has been clear on his position on Kyl-Lieberman, he just wasn't there to vote for it, I'm not sure why, but I'm sure he had a reason. He has been clear on his position though so it isn't like he gained any wiggle room by not voting for it. The vote itself doesn't matter unless his vote would have changed the outcome, which it would not have.
And last time I checked this hasn't come to the Senate yet, but the last time it did he showed up to vote for it, so you have no reason to be complaining.
June 20, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is not any piece of legistlation. This is about the Constitution, his supposed area of expertise. He has the power to stop this legislation in the Senate. I hope you are right and he is doing so behind the scenes, by planning a filibuster.
If we can't hold his feet to the fire before he is elected, how in the world will we be able to do it afterwards?
June 20, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm all for pushing him to do something, but this constant negativity and bitching and everyone acting like he just came out with a statement saying he loved the FISA bill and wanted to make out with Bush is ridiculous and completely unproductive. If you want to pressure him contact his Senate office or email his campaign and make your case, but all this is completely stupid.
June 20, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is not just any "goddamn issue" or some two-bit piece of legislation. This is legislation that would have the effect of gutting the Fourth Amendment, one of the lynchpins of the Bill of Rights. This is legislation that says, in effect, that the president has preeminent power to determine what is and is not legal when it comes to matters of security. This is legislation that turns the whole notion of checks and balances on its head.
You think maybe the guy who wants to become the next president of the United States could take a bit of time out of his all-important campaign schedule to weigh in on that little question?
June 20, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who's to say he won't? It hasn't even come to his chamber of Congress yet. My point was he has a lot going on, so people need to be a little patient and not expect him to rush to a podium right away to make a speech. These things take time.
June 20, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
What law says he has to wait until the legislation is introduced in the Senate until he can something? Russ Feingold has spoken out about it. Pat Leahy has spoken out about it. Harry fucking Reid has spoken out about it. His is a disappointingly equivocal statement, but at least he has said something. If Obama has spoken to this issue in the past and his position hasn't changed, why should it take him more than 5 seconds of his precious time to come up with a statement? Or at least to confirm to his spokesmen what his position is?
Obama is no longer just another US Senator. He's the leader of the Democratic Party. He needs to . This is (or certainly should be) a critical issue for Democrats.
June 20, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if it's significant that the HTML deleted "lead" from the above post when I was trying to say that Obama needed to lead. I thought I had the HTML bolding tags right, but I guess not.
June 20, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
A TRUE leader MAKES time for the Constitution. Let's see which side Obama's bread is buttered.
June 20, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly, let's see, as in people need to quit bitching about Obama prematurely.
June 20, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g04HHlwllHw
VERY INTERESTING ....
June 20, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can always count on RaeKa to spread his diseased buttcheeks and push some bowel movement of a smear out..
June 20, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
Interesting choice of words there considering the topic of that video....
June 20, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
...BUT STUPID.
June 20, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is terribly disheartening. Although I have been a strong Obama supporter, I'm afraid that my hope has been misplaced. Is he just another democrat who's afraid to take a stand? I fear that he may be. I'll wait until this thing is finally settled before I make up my mind, but things don't look good for the home team and we're in the ninth inning.
June 20, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't make the mistake of underestimating him, leave that to the trolls.
In reality there is next to nothing he could do to stop this from happening, which is what some of the more naive people here don't seem to understand. Reps in Congress know how they are going to vote, they know who is against it and who is for it, and they will vote how they are going to vote, no matter if Obama makes a fuss about it or not. They have committed themselves to being spineless and spineless they will stay.
I don't know what people seriously expect to see happen here. Obama comes riding into Washington on a white horse, rides straight onto the floor of the House and gives a tear-jerking speech that makes all of the corporate spineless Democrats suddenly see the error in their ways and all stand up together against Bush, after cheering for Obama and hoisting him up on their shoulders and parading him around the Capitol, right before they sit back down and vote to impeach Bush? Is that what people expect to happen?
Obama can accomplish a lot, but I'm sick of people acting like he is goddamn superman and going "where is Obama?" on every goddamn thing that comes up, as if he can snap his fingers and make it all better. He isn't the problem here, and he isn't the solution, it is the idiots in Congress who are voting for this crap.
People need to quit being so naive and quit bitching about Obama, this isn't his fault and this isn't something thats within his power to fix. Call your representatives if you want to complain.
June 20, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
He can lead a filibuster in the Senate next week, supported by Clinton, Biden and Dodd who all agreed earlier in the year that they would stop any bill that included immunity. That's what he can do. Knock this bill down, don't let it or any other bill come to a vote until after the elections.
June 20, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Nobody is asking Obama to stop the bill singlehandedly. We are, however, expecting him to work with those already involved in the effort to stop it.
June 20, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm all for that. Hillary won't make it though, she has said she is on vacation for the next month. Obama was the only candidate still running that showed up to vote last time. Hopefully he'll do the same this time.
What I'm saying is that it is premature to start whining about it and accusing him of ducking out.
Like I said before, people need to unbunch their underwear and calm down.
June 20, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is probably a fair take on the issue. On the other hand, it is hard to be calm and collected when faced with the looming threat of this bill being passed into law. I have every confidence that Obama will come down on the right side of this issue (or rather, the left side), but in order for opposition to be effective, it needs to be quick because McConnell & al are looking to rush this abomination through in order for Bush to be able to sign it very soon.
June 20, 2008 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed, I'd rather see it sooner rather than later too. Perhaps he was just waiting for the inevitable to happen in the House before putting his foot down in the Senate.
I want to see the telecos go down for their complicity as much as anyone, and I hope he does the right thing. I have faith that he will. Obama just likes to plan his attacks, he is probably working behind the scenes as we speak.
June 20, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glad she is fighting for the people as she promised.
You know what Hillary learned from the AUMF? Be absent at the tough votes.
June 20, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
She isn't on vacation until next month. She's making a joint appearance with Obama on June 27th. If she can do that, she can make an appearance in the Senate to stop the bill.
June 20, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pretty sure she is already on vacation, or we'd be seeing her in the Senate:
"Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is taking a month off from Congress to recuperate after her marathon run for the presidency.
She is not expected to return to the Senate until July 7 or July 8 after the Independence Day recess, according to two Democratic sources."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2032533/posts
June 20, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama couldn't do anything? Bullshit. He could have called up Nancy and Steny and Rahm and told them he didn't want this thing to come to the floor, and they would feel it next year if it did. I guarantee you they would've listened. Maybe they would've done it anyway, but he should've gotten in their faces about it.
June 20, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think you really understand how the House works, and all the crap involved in these decisions. The vote was going to happen. Period.
June 20, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really, what were all those Democratic agenda items voted and passed in the six years prior to this Congress? Right. That's what I thought.
June 20, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Every goddamn thing that comes up"?
I'd say LOL, but it isn't funny.
This isn't October. While the Constitution burns(what's left of it), where is this guy? Back during the days when he needed the support of progressives and libertarians, Obama voted against amnesty for the Telecoms. But now, when he needs the support of the Military-Corporate-Intelligence state, Obama and his staff are
refusing to announce where he stands on this. They refuse to say if he will travel back to Washington for the vote, or how he will vote.
Obviously, this dude is waiting to see if his vote will matter or not. If the pattern of the last couple months holds, he will vote against
amnesty for show, and will be absent if it matters.
June 20, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, only you have absolutely no reason to assume any of the crap you are saying is true, it isn't at all based on what he will do, because he hasn't done it yet, you are basing all of this condemnation on a staffer not knowing the answer to a question, or perhaps just not wanting to answer a question. You don't know a damn thing about what is going on, or what he is or isn't going to do. You don't know that he is letting the Constitution burn or any of that nonsense.
And there is no pattern, you are blowing smoke out of your ass.
June 20, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, silly us for expecting a leader to lead rather than just shrugging and saying "Hey, what could I do?"
June 20, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
You should be careful not to overestimate him. He is, after all, a politician. A very good one, but a politician nevertheless.
June 20, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Annoying. Obama is invariably going to make decisions that I don't agree with, which includes silence at a moment like this. Even though I know it will happen, I still hate it when it does.
June 20, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Democrats to Americans: The truth, ykou want the truth. You can't handle the truth"
June 20, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this means that Obama supports the FISA bill because he either believes it's vital to security or because he doesn't want to antagonize the 105 (of 233) House Democrats voting for the bill?Why would Obama be silent on this issue otherwise?
Does Obama want to ignore the issue to deprive Republicans ammunition seeing how standing on either side of the issue is problematic for him (betraying civil liberties vs. the perception of being weak on national security)?
June 20, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
a) If Obama skips the vote, it will be political suicide, not to mention a serious lack of balls.
b) If he votes in favor of amnesty, he is painted a flip-flopper (again?), and is doing 'politics as usual'. He will disappoint many of his supporters (people who make that $100 donation)
c) If he votes against the bill, he will be painted a liberal, weak on national security and McCain and Co. will run with it.
His best option is C. He just better have his generals, former sec's of state, and other top dogs behind him on this one. He needs to come out swinging before even voting...
June 20, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Painted a flip flopper again? What's this again crap?
June 20, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just in response to yesterday's spin on the public financing BS. The other side will paint it as a pattern.
June 20, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/opinion/20brooks.html?hp
Yeah, I know, David Brooks can be a real douche bag, and I don't think his is a fair take on the campaign finance question at all, but he's still very influential with a large segment of the population. When he paints Obama as a flip-flopper on this issue, a lot of people are going to see it that way.
June 20, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Public financing opting out. It's a flip-flop because he used to be for it, until he found out this week that the whole system is broken. What a shock that must have been for him.
June 22, 2008 7:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
What about Option D:
He could call Harry Reid and let him know he's putting a hold on the bill until further notice. He could suggest that they pass a FISA with all of the updates needed without immunity. and If Harry doesn't honor his hold, he can filibuster the bill and support Chris Dodd or Pat Leahey for Majority Leader in the new congress with the new Obama administration.
In other words, he could take a strong principled stand.
I've been a strong supporter of Senator Obama since the beginning of the campaign, but I'll be extremely disappointed of he lets the bill pass without a real fight.
June 20, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
100% agreed. This is the Chips Are Down Era, and speeches are not going to do.
Boss Obama, clench your fist fer pete's sake!
June 20, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Surely Obama could work with Feingold and Dodd to make the case that FISA works perfectly well as it stands, and that any adjustments should be considered by the next Congress and Administration--rather than by the ones who have violated the law and shredded the Fourth Amendment.
And Obama could tell Reid in the corridor that if Reid forces the bill to a vote in the Senate, Obama will throw his full support behind Dodd for Senate Majority Leader in the next Congress.
Watching Obama play this one will be interesting. I'm keeping my wallet shut until I see how this plays out.
June 20, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously.
This is a huge test. The big times. He has the wind at his back.
Time to act.
June 20, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
New mcCain Ad: "He stood up to the president"
WOW. Wish House Dems were that brave
June 20, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
"New mcCain Ad: "He stood up to the president""
He voted with Bush 95% of the time, not exactly a profile in courage..
June 20, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bah! Screw Obama's silence! Bah! and Fie! on Obama!
June 20, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Fie upon him!
June 20, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's an empty suit, albeit with a golden tongue. I'm telling you.
June 20, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
The funny thing about the "empty suit" rhetoric is that the charge is emptier than the fictitious way they characterize Obama..
June 20, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly, they are just bitter so they say stupid meaningless crap like that, and keep repeating it, no matter how many times he proves them wrong.
June 20, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think we know his position is clear. He opposes the bill but I think we need to think here.
This compromise is going to pass and be signed into law. Many want a filibuster but I am not sure there are enough votes to sustain one in the Senate which already passed a telecom immunity FISA bill.
Many would like for him to wage a big fight. There is a major risk in doing so. This compromise is supported by many DEMS and was worked out by DEM Leaders. How would it look to the general public if he is unable to bend the will of his own party's leaders in Congress. That is what would happen if he started a fight now. He would look weak and that would bode well for his chances of actually bending Congress to his will as President.
I know this is a bad deal and many are justifably upset. But look at the big picture before saying Obama should make a big public fight over this issue especially after the deal is already done.
June 20, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
i know it's probably too much to ask, but i was hoping obama would teach us something about the constitution and the rule of law. i thought this campaign was succeeding by NOT underestimating the american people.
June 20, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly!
It's not like this rocket science.
June 20, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Many would like for him to wage a big fight. There is a major risk in doing so. This compromise is supported by many DEMS and was worked out by DEM Leaders. How would it look to the general public if he is unable to bend the will of his own party's leaders in Congress. That is what would happen if he started a fight now. He would look weak and that would bode well for his chances of actually bending Congress to his will as President. "
I disagree. Fighting would make him look like a strong leader who is willing to stand up for his principles, regardless of who he has to stand up to. How would it look to the public? It would look like he's taking control of the party and forcing them to finally stand up to the president who 70% of the public disagrees with. It would look like he is willing to take a risk to do the right thing, and show what happens when Democrats grow spines.
June 20, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. The Dem leadership is clearly broken. Learned cowardice. Hard to break that habit. Like heroin.
June 20, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Better to be weak than look weak, is that what you are saying? Is that really the best we can hope for? If it is, maybe I should stay home in November after all.
June 20, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the reason we have not seen Obama come out on this is because it's part of the much larger issue of illegal activity by the criminal enterprise posing as a presidency, an office he will likely earn. If you open the door here, you have to open it all the way.
He's a constitutional lawyer, allegedly brilliant, so let us assume he knows perfectly well both context and substance. It will be up to his DoJ to fight this fight, after all.
So, anything he says has to be couched in those terms. He has to be very careful.
But it seems to be the clock is now running, and that he has until the Senate passes this bill to come out with with something about this white elephant in the livingroom. Vermont will arrest these people for war crimes, for example. So will a growing number of countries.
I will need to be hearing a speech or three on this subject on the order of his speech on race before I could possibly vote for him.
Pax,
M.
June 20, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
You'd vote for McCain, Nader or Barr instead?
That seems pretty lame, if you want my opinion.
June 20, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
A vote must be earned.
June 20, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, Obama has been pretty lame on this. He has had plenty of opportunity to make a stand against this if that is what he wanted to do. There is little doubt that he is avoiding the issue at this point and that is tremendously disappointing. He will either skip the vote or vote no without releasing any kind of strong statement against. That sort of a statement, if he had made it yesterday or even if he makes it tomorrow, might have actually pushed the debate into a more favorable position for the people against it. He has decided he won't spend any of his political capital on this. Sad.
The thing is, I really cannot see how standing against this crap would hurt any Democrat and especially not Obama. But I guess they have their own calculus on these matters.
June 20, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess they have their own calculus on these matters.
Maybe, but it's not the calculus that gave us denny hastert's seat. that guy (Mitchell?) was way against warrantless wiretaps. more likely they were bought.
June 20, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly, he has no reason to not take a stand, and he has made a stand in the past on this issue when it mattered, so WHY THE HELL ARE YOU ASSUMING HE ISN'T GOING TO DO ANYTHING THIS TIME??
I'm sooooo sick of people making all of these assumptions that Obama is just going to fail everyone based on nothing.
Hell, at this point a bigger part of me wants him to come out strong against this not so the bill will be defeated but so I can come back and say "See? I told you to quit bitching before it was even clear what he was going to do, now next time you want to underestimate him go STFU!"
Seriously, does no one understand how ridiculous it is to be acting like he already released a statement saying he wanted to vote for amnesty when in fact there is nothing of substance to base any of this complaining on??
June 20, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto.
He's on record as opposing immunity. The freaking bill hasn't even made it to the Senate. Some of these commenters are going to object to whatever he does.
And for everyone gnashing their teeth over how he's supposedly failed this very critical and crucial test of leadership, what are you going to do? Vote for McCain?
June 20, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
So because Obama is the only Democrat on the ticket, we have no right to hold his feet to the fire and expect him to speak out against the rape of the Constitution? We have no right to expect him to care as much about the Fourth Amendment as about campaign finance reform? If he decides to stay silent and skip this vote, we're still expected to pour money into his campaign and act as if we think he walks on water?
And you guys accused Hillary Clinton's supporters of blind idolatry?
June 20, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lux,
OK. I get it. You think those of us who are annoyed by Obama's silence on this issue are jumping the gun. Fine.
I will just say this because clearly we disagree and you seem to think I am stupid for taking the position that I have on this. You may, of course, take it as you will. This issue has come up now, right here, today. Its a crucial issue that speaks to how we will treat executive power and the rule of law going forward. There is no chance that Obama does not have an opinion on this and there is no context in which it is reasonable for him to not release some statement of his opinion on this as soon as possible. Your attitude seems to be "oh. he will say something and it will be great and you guys will totally be busted when he does!" Maybe you're right. In fact, I hope you are.
But what I am seeing today is that on one of the most important issues we are facing today, he has deliberately chosen not to respond at all. Not a cursory statement of disapproval. Not a promise to make a complete statement later. Nothing. He has his spokesperson out there stating that he does not know Obama's opinion on the most prominent issue, the largest news story of the entire day. This is not plausible. It is not plausible that he has not known at least the general outline of this for some time and it is not plausible that Obama has no opinion on this. His opinion and when he reveals it matters.
He is the leader of the party. "Lets just wait and see" isn't good enough right now. None of us would find it at all acceptable, for instance, if he waited two or three days to respond to some scurrilous charge that McCain threw his way. This is more important and there is no doubt at this point that he has deliberately chosen not to respond. Of course, I have no choice but to hope that he does better next week and into the future. That doesn't change the fact that I find his lack of response today disappointing and it doesn't mean, as you irrationally seem to think, that being disappointed makes one a closet Nader supporter or whatever other sort of ad hominem crap that you seem fond of slinging around.
June 20, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right. Responding this weekend or next week is too late, however inspiring the rhetoric of the response. It's not going to get enough play to make much difference in the vote.
Maybe his voice wouldn't have made any difference anyway. But I sure as hell would like to have seen him try.
Finessing the McCain campaign on campaign finance reform is all very gratifying, but it's not nearly as important as preserving the Constitution.
June 20, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
cmon, barack.
if this bill passes, it will be codifying the "if the president does it, its not illegal" rule of richard nixon.
youve done everything right so far, please don't let me down on this one.
June 20, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I submit that the big picture has to do far more with erosion of our constitutional rights and the ongoing corporatization of our federal government. The viability of the Obama campaign -- important as that is -- is very much second fiddle, and I say that as a three-time donor.
The longer the crickets keep chirping over at Obama headquarters, the worse the fallout is going to be. If faced with nothing but difficult choices, one has to stand up and do the right thing. And even in the most cynical sense of campaign competitiveness, anything less than actively fighting this bill could do some serious damage to Obama's standing.
June 20, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
This five- or six-time donor agrees. To give Obama a pass on this for "electability" reasons is just the same old partisanship the Republicans use to rationalize their evil ways. Silence won't cut it. Obama must take a stand or explain why he doesn't plan to do so.
June 20, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I recall that originally he was against telecom immunity a while back. I hope he sticks to his guns. This sell-out is pathetic. I really don't get it. Why do the dems want to give immunity? We will never find out what happened if these lawsuits are wiped out by this legislation. Come on dems!!!! Stick to your guns.
June 20, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunately, I think that's the whole intention. The strong suspicion is that there are prominent Democrats who are complicit in the illegal wiretapping, who knew it was happening and didn't have the courage or the sense of Constitutional duty to fight it. And that's why Democrats like Pelosi and Hoyer and Rockefeller and Reid have not prevented it from going through. They don't want the whole truth coming out, because it won't just be loyal Bushies who will be exposed by it.
June 20, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is, have not prevented telecom immunity from going through.
June 20, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
My first political donation in eons was to Dodd for his stand against the FISA a few months back.
Now lets see if the BO supporters of/by/for this site are ready for the political castor oil we all will be swallowing here.
I sincerely am starting to feel empathy for the strong BO supporters as we, together, watch their ICON behave just like any other politician, as usual, but now without the ability to hide it.
Sorry there is no distracting primary to make us look the other way.
I really mean no disrespect with this post-I really do empathize (I was (still) am a clinton supporter)
June 20, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except there is absolutely no evidence at this point of Obama acting like a regular politician.
June 20, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
One thing is for certain he HAS to vote. From there either way he votes he'll take a political hit.
If he votes with it then the activist base of the Dems will sour on him, but if he votes against it he'll be painted as soft of terror/protecting the country and going against many of his House and Senate colleagues. I certainly don't expect him to make a political stand on this issue, because it will pass with or without him voting for it.
I think he should vote against it, take the "soft" hit but show he'll stand up against political pressure. Voting against it will show that he's not going to be "that President" and will actually publicize the issue - which could actually be a good thing. Sure it will be a McCain attack point, but I also think if Obama explained what was really going on and why he voted against it it would win over independents/centrists as he'd have essentially voted against possibly giving himself more power (should he win the GE of course). "I'm not soft on protecting Americans, I'm hard on protecting the Constitution and limiting Presidential power.
Voting for it will leave the bill on the back pages and turn off the very people who helped get him to where he is today.
June 20, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Take a breath. He's said he's against immunity back in January:
http://firedoglake.com/2008/01/28/barack-obama-statement-on-fisa/
June 20, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then how come his spokesman doesn't know where he stands now?
June 20, 2008 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who cares? It is just a staffer who either didn't know, or more likely, didn't want to answer the question. It could easily be explained by Obama planning something, and didn't want it partially leaked to the media before he was finished making plans, so he told his spokespeople not to tell the media anything.
The staffer's answer didn't warrant a post on TPM, let alone all of this condemnation based on no evidence.
June 20, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its no longer January Tzal. We have a bill on the table now, today. We need Senators to stand up against this now. At the very least, he could have put out a statement as Feingold did or even one as sniveling as Leahy did. He has chosen not to. That probably wouldn't stop the shameful capitulation of most Dems on this issue but that is absolutely no excuse for letting this issue stand.
There is little doubt that Obama is avoiding dealing with this issue at this point. I have supported the guy and I don't expect that he will lose my vote over this (although I might be channeling my donation budget to other causes) but his lack of response on this is truly pathetic. There is no excuse for it and blanket statements from months ago are not going to cut it. What does he think about this bill today? He has had ample opportunity to let us know. This is political cowardice, pure and simple.
June 20, 2008 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
He can only fight this fight if he wins.....the bill has to fail to pass the Senate for him to look as good as you would like. If it passes he looks like he can't corral his own party behind him. That would not be a good thing.
But one reason he is holding back on coming forward with a position is he could be mapping out a strategy to defeat this measure.
June 20, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I say he is mapping, and people need to quite whining.
I feel (yet another) an "I told you so" moment coming when he comes out with his response. I don't know how many times I've had to say "I told you so" during this campaign, but people keep underestimating him.
June 20, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
From your lips to the Ears of Arioch.
June 20, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope you're right.
June 20, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would love to hear you say "I told you so," because it would mean that the right side (or rather the left side) had prevailed in this fight. From your lips to God's own ears.
June 20, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry to have to be the bearer of bad tidings, but:
Obama Backs Surveillance Cave
June 20, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama actually showed up to vote for the Feingold amendment a little while back, so we know that he stands on the right side of this issue. He just needs to exercise a little more visible leadership by leading (or at least supporting) a filibuster. I will still be supporting him regardless of how he works with this issue, but I will be a heck of a lot more enthused about him if he takes a more vigorous stand, and I am sure that I am not alone in that sentiment.
June 20, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I called his campaign office and the person was very nice. She said they've logged a lot of calls about this. Urge him to filibuster this POS bill, he might listen. 866 675 2008, option 6
June 20, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
OH MY GOD!!! YOU MEAN SOMEONE ON HERE ACTUALLY HAS A CONSTRUCTIVE SOLUTION INSTEAD OF ASSUMING OBAMA IS GOING TO WAFFLE AND BITCHING ABOUT HOW MUCH HE SUCKS FOR SOMETHING HE HASN'T EVEN DONE???!!
What a novel idea, actually contacting Obama's campaign and telling them you want Obama to filibuster. Crazy!
(THANK YOU!)
June 20, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm already feeling a bit of buyer's remorse.
I wish I had more than "well, he's better than McCain..."
Easy there, Clintonites, I don't exactly see your girl taking this bull by the horns either. If she did, and Obama didn't, I would be almost ready to say "you were right all along". Seriously.
This issue transcends petty bickering.
June 20, 2008 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is premature to have buyers remorse, you wouldn't know it by reading these comments, but psssstt: He actually hasn't done anything bad yet.
As far as Hillary goes, last time this came up for a vote Obama showed up to vote against it, Hillary was in the area and didn't even bother to show, so don't worry, he still took more of a stand than her. And right now she has no excuse for not being in the Senate coming up with a strategy to block it. If she really wanted to take the Ted Kennedy route and get back on the horse and really become a champion in the Senate she probably wouldn't be on vacation for a month.
June 20, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Love the audio's you are posting, thanks so much. Helps to hear the back and forth, and also the inflection in the voices.
June 20, 2008 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
Hey Amelie, are you as cute as that drawing?
June 20, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its a movie character...so yes...
Save the flirting and go buy the movie..
June 20, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am really disappointed myself that Senator Obama has not spoken out about the current FISA bill. I am VERY disappointed. I have supported Senator Obama since before he even decided to run for president but right now... I feel like he is not on top of what is going on NOW and I want more from him than this.
June 20, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, are you part of the Obama campaign? "Of course he's against it!.. but he might not have the time to vote against it."
He better be there for the NAY vote or he's lost my vote!
June 20, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great! McCain thanks you!
It is obvious he is against it, and that was in reference to the stupid ass question posed by TPM, as if we don't know where he stands just because some staffer didn't want to answer a question.
June 20, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have been an Obama supporter, but his silence on this is troubling. I don't know what happens behind the scenes, and I don't know why or how this even came to a vote in the House, but here's my prediction.
Obama will make a lukewarm statement against it, and vote against it, but won't help anyone filibuster it.
What it says to me is that the Democrats, as a party, don't really care about the rule of law. God save Dennis K and Russ Feingold, but the leadership does not care. They could have sat on this all year and STILL crushed the Republicans in the fall. They have the polls. But they felt more sympathy for AT&T, and some bullshit about how this will make us more "secure" (not secure in our homes, persons, papers, and effects, but, y'know, secure), than for Americans and the Constitution.
They don't care about the rule of law. I'd love to be convinced otherwise, but they don't.
June 20, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain would have been certainly more direct that this.
Obama seems to have perchance to run when he doesn’t know what to do.
A political Katrina just blew over and Obama, AWOL????
It isn't a good sign. Obama has run away from fights before (the debate fights with Hillary saying he just wanted to campaign) - but we really didn't notice it, didn't think of it as a big deal, at least that is, not until now.
At some point, McCain will have the right to say that Obama is a coward and that winning the election seems to have given Obama the right to sleep in.
June 20, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Received 6/19/2008 11:05 AM
Dear parent55,
Thank you for contacting Obama for America about the proposed legislation to give phone companies legal immunity for past wiretapping. Senator Obama holds strong opposition to this special interest provision is frustrated that the President and his supporters in Congress continue to push it. This fight is just one more example of why things in Washington must change.
Senator Obama has consistently opposed this Administration's efforts to use debates about our national security to expand its own power, whether that was in regard to the conduct of the Iraq war or its restrictions on our civil liberties through domestic surveillance programs or suspension of habeas corpus. It is time to restore oversight and accountability in the FISA program, and rejecting this unprecedented grant of retroactive immunity is a good place to start.
Giving retroactive immunity to telecom companies is simply wrong. Thankfully, the most recent effort to pass this legislation at the end of the legislative year failed. Senator Obama unequivocally opposes granting immunity. Senator Obama cosponsored Senator Dodd's proposal in order to remove it from the current FISA bill.
This Administration has put forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. When Senator Obama is president, there will be no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens; no more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime; no more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. Our Constitution works, and so does the FISA court. By working with Congress and respecting our courts, Senator Obama will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.
Thank you again for contacting Obama for America.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
June 20, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, I think that response (autoresponse?) is a bit out of date, because "the most recent effort" was not at the end of last year, it was just today. Last year it failed because it was voted down in the House -- it passed the Senate. With no filibuster.
Now that it has passed the House, where is Obama's "strong opposition"?
June 20, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
If he can't take a stand on an issue as important as this, then he doesn't deserve the title, "leader." If he doesn't stand up for our privacy rights and for the rule of law, what good is he?
This is a pivotal test of character and leadership. Independents are watching and listening. Votes and financial support are in the balance -- as are our Constitutional rights.
June 20, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am in complete agreement with you.
June 20, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great, you have the support of the troll. Glad you all are in good company.
If that isn't a wakeup call I don't know what is.
June 20, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weird, it sounds like you've already made up your mind what you think, even though he hasn't done anything wrong yet.
Jesus Christ, if I didn't know that McCain was computer illiterate I'd say he is reading all of this right now masturbating and how Democrats are falling over themselves to trash on Obama for something they just think he might possible do or not do.
June 20, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
From the letter from the Obama camp posted above by parent55:
"When Senator Obama is president, there will be no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens..."
This is true. Because wire-tapping American citizens will no longer be illegal.
June 20, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
For all you people gnashing your teeth and expressing your deep, deep, deep disappointment over your candidate's failure to do something, anything, about this FISA bill, even though said bill hasn't reached the Senate (but I digress), do you seriously think McCain is going to be better than Obama on this issue?
Seriously?
June 20, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, seriously. All this outrage even though Obama hasn't done anything wrong at this point. They all seem to be under the impression he is a House member and voted for FISA, or at least that is what they are acting like he did.
Quite ridiculous no?
June 20, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, No . . .
lots of commenters have been watching these various pageants for some time now and recognize the choreography here - and recent history tells them it will be even more so in the Senate - these folks recognize a fait accompli
longtime political junkies know as head of The Party, Mr Obama could have stopped or at least bolluxed this up for the Cheney enablers - either publicly or privately. but he didn't
maybe pragmatic to have helped the elders bury their complicity in crimes against the constitution and the People - but it is recognized by many here as the deeply cynical move it is
June 20, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you saying that criticism of Obama is the same as support for McCain?
I strongly disagree with that position.
June 20, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, you know what? I'm tired of settling for whatever the Democrats do, just because they're the only alternative to the proto-fascist Republicans. We put the Democrats in power in 06 specifically to repudiate the Bush administration's power grabs and various crimes. So far, they've rolled over and caved every single time.
Bush and his team have committed multiple war crimes, and the Democrats won't even *consider* impeaching them, much less prosecuting them. Bush and Co. will leave office and never answer for their crimes. And the Democrats are letting them go.
Obama says he's for change, he says no permanent bases and no illegal wiretapping. Well, here's his chance. He can filibuster this bill, or support other Senators who would filibuster.
He hasn't said what he'll do. And he may renew my faith in him and take a strong stand. He'd be the first of the Democratic leadership to do so.
June 20, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen.
But now Obama has made his statement. And he is caving, too.
Et tu, Brute?
June 20, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama:
This is the part for me that is weak. To show leadership, he could've said more. Indeed, if he really wanted to strip immunity from the Senate version, he would've expanded on the issue and been more forceful. Saying he'll work on it isn't saying much. No promises, and not exactly a tough stance for someone trained as a civil rights lawyer. I expect more from Obama.
If you did too, call his office and let him know:
1-866-675-2008
June 20, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's awful quiet in here. Where is everybody? Where are the Obamapods? You didn't-- I mean-- Uncle O didn't send out the order to drink the kool aid?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
June 21, 2008 7:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
stemy [sp?] and destor are correct.
And frankly, the job he seeks has only the 'bully pulpit' - so Obama's failure to take on that mantle of leadership now was disheartening.
And the timing of filibusters and cloture votes in the Senate is so Byzantine that it is highly unlikely Obama will be visible in that fight.
MY suspicion is that he may feel indebted to Rahm Emmanuel - who did not oppose the immunity bill. What a traitor.
Is Obama's failure to say something a sign that he is falling into that scratch-your-back mode - even over a principled issue such as the Constitution?
Speaking up could have been something as simple as saying - "I urge my fellow House Members to support my candidacy and not tie my hands with this bill. The Sunset provision is five years away and that's five years too many of wiretaps on Americans without oversight by our courts. I ask the House to instead draft a simple extension of the current bill - for all its problems - it will at least then expire once I am president - and I can work with Congress on a bill that protects our security while protecting Americans' Constitutional rights"
All in all his silence was very disheartening.
June 21, 2008 8:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
in the above post, I meant "sib" - good analysis to you both.
June 21, 2008 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
- and also, meant to say "I urge my fellow Members of Congress" - apologies
[yikes! I must be tired - I know he's a Senator! - pressing the 'send' button much to precipitously here!!!!]
June 21, 2008 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
How much do we really know about this new FISA bill other than what we have heard thru the blogs? Is is really in violation of our 4th Amendment rights?Did they actually improve the bill and protect the rights of our citizens also? Are we mostly reacting out of fear and why can't our Congressmen do a better job at explaining the bill to us common folk? In my experiences, if it cannot be explained in a simple and clear manner, it should not be supported.
June 21, 2008 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
obama now supports the "compromise".
i no longer support obama.
he won't stand up for me, i won't stand up for him.
June 21, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
and to be clear, i have no problem voting for the lesser of two evils because voting against the greater of two evils is often what democracy comes down to when your own views are - as mine so often are - outside of mainstream opinions and culture. but obama is just so many shades of grey away from mccain on too many of what i consider to be fundamental issues that i am finding it increasingly difficult to put on my pragmatist hat. at some point everyone has to have a line over which a candidate must not cross. to my own surprise, obama has crossed that line for me. as a democrat-voting independent i don't think i've ever felt so cut-off from representative government.
(and to be even more clear: that i do not support obama does not mean that i would ever support mccain. nor does it mean that i would support any third party candidate: even as an independent i am not so foolish as to think duverger's law does not exist.)
maybe i can get past the stench and see my way to voting against mccain come november... maybe. i just can't see it right now...
June 21, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is not the leader of the Democratic party. He's just not. He's been a senator how long?
Then again, Pelosi isn't either. If it's the heart and soul you want to call leaders, how about the progressive caucus members. Obama is not a member of them, and it shows. He's also barely been in Washington 4 years. It looks ridiculous to me to see it written that he's the leader of the whole party. No way.
June 22, 2008 7:12 AM | Reply | Permalink