« Now A McCain Surrogate Demeans Wes Clark's Service | Home | Anti-FISA-Cave Group On Obama's Web Site Keeps On Growing »
Anti-FISA-Cave Group On Obama's Web Site Keeps On Growing
That social networking group set up on MyBarackObama.com for the specific purpose of urging Obama not to support the FISA cave-in bill has now grown to nearly 7,500 members.
It's the fourth largest group on the site, after less than a week in existence.
Advertisement
Comments (147)
Can we expect daily updates on this, with the site linked, of course?
July 1, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why not, if it keeps on gaining one ranking per day? I for one am interested.
Number one by the end of the week? Let's see if we can make it happen.
July 1, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hear, hear.
July 1, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think for Greg to be properly diligent about this, he should post two updates every day.
And maybe three, for the West Coast readership.
July 1, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fine by me.
July 1, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Probably better if he just post the updates on the hour.
Or better, he could turn Election Central into nothing but a link for that networking group.
July 1, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
....that would be great for the group and for the Constitution!!!!
July 1, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!!!
July 1, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like it. Greg, has the clinton crowd set up a website to pressure her on the vote? I'm sure alot of people would want to join that group, sign petitions and such. Thanks!
July 1, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think I recall reading some place that she was opposed to the bill, but I don't have a link. If that's accurate, I guess the question has to do with the optics of her opposition & Obama's support (presuming he continues to support it). It would be an opportunity for her to give him a dig -- deserved IMO -- but it would definitely complicate the choreography of the last week or so. Stay tuned, I guess.
July 1, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg,
You missed out on your true calling:
carnival shill
July 1, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It could be that Greg and many, many others are more interested in what they consider to be extremely important issues like upholding the Constitution of the United States and prosecuting people who break the law than in blindly following any leader. Some people prefer blind allegiance and that's their choice, but don't criticize people for standing up for what is right when their leader doesn't seem to have the courage to do so on his own.
July 1, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, brother, I am actually on the same side of this argument as you are, and even I find the self-righteous priggishness of this post off-putting. If you really mean to convince folks of something, this seems like a rather poor means of going about it.
July 1, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you.
What he misses in his fervent, smug self-righteousness, is that the FISA bill says nothing about "prosecuting people who break the law."
The fight is over retro CIVIL imminity.
If one doesn't know the difference, they they ought to just be thought as a fool, than opening their mouths and removing all doubt.
This whole FISA mess has turned some into the exact type of animal that they accuse the people who give Obama a pass on the FISA compromise:
blindly following the positional orthodoxy.
July 1, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, if Oleeb is missing that, I am afraid that I am in the same boat as Oleeb. I think that the distinction between civil and criminal prosecution here is rather too fine to matter. The provisions of the new FISA "compromise" will still erode our commitment to the rule of law, regardless of how one parses the finer details. As I said, on the substantive merits of the argument, I am on Oleeb's side of this debate. I cannot see, however, how it helps to advance our position (that is, Oleeb's and my own) to accuse those who disagree with us of being cultists of personality and suchlike. I think that you are wrong on this point, dear Buckeye Nation, but I refuse to believe that this is simply because you are given to "blind allegiance" or some such.
July 1, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whoa, that's a mighty lame dis! "Carnival shill", indeed! A masterful analogic piece of wit and repartee.
-one of the proud original 7500 and Obama contributor/canvasser
July 1, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg,
Can you found out if McCain's campaign accept the credit Bush gave him on the new GI benefit bill? Do you they any response or statement about Sen. Webb's comments on Countdown last night. This really should be a story on this. Taking credit for something he has actually opposed.
Please follow up on this. I believe this is a real story versus Gen. Clark's.
July 1, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hopefully the Obama campaign will take notice of this. There is more to be gained from staking out the anti-retroactive immunity highground than from trying to get the Republicans to let us share their "tough on terror" podium down in the Hell of the Hypocrites.
July 1, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Must be a slow news day.
Are we supposed to be expecting this group to get shutdown by Obama's campaign? THAT would be newsworthy (and sad).
July 1, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Annnnd, still not impressed or interested. If I had no respect for their servers, I could start a group for people who demand that he renounce his support for the Compernican model of the solar system and get the same number of sign-ups.
I do find it interesting that Reid hasn't put that bill up for a vote in the Senate yet.
July 1, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is only one way to really fix this, IMO. And that is Congress revisits the AUMF.
That's where it all started.
So Russ Feingold, and Chris Dodd, neither of whom are running for anything now, can say what they like, but if Congress isn't willing to revisit their bad mistake that started all this, it ain't going anywhere.
July 1, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are a lot of things that need to be fixed post-Bush, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't care about breaking more things.
July 1, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Almody half way to number one (13,353) and #2 is only 1,100 or so members away (8628).
We can do it! Stand up for your rights!
July 1, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Almody? Um, yeah... should be "almost".
July 1, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, but I am already standing up for my rights. I also know how to pick my battles.
July 1, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
hmmpf. i like to fight any fight that's worth fighting.
July 1, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
But is it a hill to die on?
July 1, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, tis not. However, plan to keep fightin' until the vote. After the vote I will STFU and I will still back Obama, just maybe not as profoundly.
July 1, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love how so many people see the headline on the side of the TPM main site, click on it, read the article, and THEN take the time to post how uninterested they are.
July 1, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Target!...Cease fire...
July 1, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
FISAmentum!
July 1, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, well, FISAmentum has the potential to do damage to Obama's ability to turnout the progressive vote.
And if that happens - I ain't blaming Obama.
that's all I'm sayin - I am sick of the circular firing squad the goddamn Democrats invariably start engaging in during a campaign.
I'm sick of this whole thing because most of it is trumped up bullshit and nobody asks what the motives are of those who insist that Obama fucked up here.
3/4s of the people bitching don't know what they're bitching about.
I'm out - I don't have anything else to say about FISA.
July 1, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
But, Tena, how can you call yourself a progressive?
FISA.IS.THE.MOST.IMPORTANT.ISSUE.EVER.
July 1, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe it's the most important issue ever, but yes, I do think it's important.
July 1, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is precisely because I love you, dear Tena, that I am relieved to say that I do not believe the above for a moment. You are not one to bite your tongue and keep quiet. I fully expect that you will continue to take issue with folks like myself who think that Obama should stand his ground on this issue and I love you all the more for it. People like you and CT Voter keep people like me and JosephCast honest. :-)
July 1, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
What she said. It's been doubly frustrating for me because of all the just flat out wrong crap getting said about the merits by people who suddenly think their effing con law professors.
July 1, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Believe it or not, I'm not a Constitutional law professor...however I do understand the difference between criminal and civil immunity...a point lost on most of youg gang.
July 1, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
this is the year to stand our ground and speak truth to power. not to run with our platform between our legs. it's the year we don't treat the American citizens like idiots and explain ourselves and tell them why we are fighting for them and their rights.
that's why i joined this group. that's why i've written letters.
running to the center hasn't worked b/c the American people see that as weak, pandering. I say stand up for what you believe in, don't cave. The American people respect that.
FDR didn't cave in 1932 (a similar election year by many metrics), he told the American people things they didn't want to hear, but had to hear.
Obama should do the same.
July 1, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with josephcast - the Democrats have been branded as the weak party, and they bring it on themselves.
This is a year for change.
July 1, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
woohoo congrats to those who care the most.
But as I've learned, most average americans don't know FISA from FICA
July 1, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm an old RICO fan, myself.
July 1, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
What I don't understand is this.
Why have a particular group denouncing Obama's stand on FISA if the dissenters don't want the protections in the new FISA amendments.
If they're spying on you now then Obama already knows how you feel!
July 1, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your railroad is a failroad.
Opposing FISA because of critical flaws /= opposing the protections contained within an immunity-free bill.
Some opponents of the FISA bill feel the way they do because of telecom immunity. We feel that it rewards criminal behavior, ongoing criminal conduct. We believe in the rule of law. We want our leader to take a principled and correct stand on this issue, as his colleagues Feingold and Dodd.
We oppose telecom immunity in FISA because shitty bills are shitty. We refuse to applaud how awesome they might be on a strategic level when they certainly will undermine constitutional protections on a constitutional level.
It really is as easy as that.
July 1, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
How is the sign up being screened to make sure that Republicans and PUMA freaks are not gaming the system in order to embarrass Senator Obama?
July 1, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't matter. Keep your enemies closer.
The Puma folks have been a traveling band since they left the DLC.
They went to the McCain website where they had the Riot Act read to them for the Republicans there didn't want their "vote against Obama for Hillary" metality. Then they roam the air and get a host in PUMA then try to return to the democratic party.
Obama snubbing the DLC the other day left them completely homeless.
July 1, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't Harold Icke get a much bigger number, in a much shorter time, to sign a petition to have Obama pick Hillary for VP, and that fell flat on it's face.
With all the publicity that the FISA issue has received, the number that has signed up, which I am sure includes a good number of PUMA type mischief makers, the number reached is not very impressive.
July 1, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correction: Not Harold Ickes, make that Lanny Davis.
All weasels look alike to me.
July 1, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read somewhere that the Atwater/Rove dark art of politics has the following double imperative:
1. Mobilize and energize your own base.
2. Demoralize and depress your opponent's base.
The FISA controversy falls under #2. We are playing into their game doing this endless recrimination.
Stop being so gloomy y'all and start feeling positive and bright about how great our candidate really is!
This is a once in a lifetime candidate we've got here and so please, please don't allow one disagreement to keep ANYONE from voting their conscience.
And a person's conscience is a lot wider than the particular constitutional issue raised by retroactive immunity. People's consciences cover a lot of ground. Poverty Inequality War Empire Civil Rights Environment....
You would actually be denying the preponderance of those intuitions that in aggregate make up your conscience to deny votes or support to BHO over this one issue.
July 1, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
One could argue he would get #1 by standing his ground against the FISA bill.
July 1, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
OR Sen. Obama could just vote his stated principles and the base would be fine.
July 1, 2008 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I say let the group box themselves into a corner.
At some point someone is going to pull a power play to expose themselves as the crown Prince(cess) of this motley crew.
After Glenn Greewald, KO, and Joseph Atler are shown that they really don't know what they're talking about, it'll be a case of Emily Litella's "Never Mind".
July 1, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like many here I think Obama's decision was a bad one. But I also think trying to pressure him to change through this ad hoc group is also a mistake. We've seen the fallout from direct democracy here in California through our initiative system. Voters are often simplistic in their desires and do not understand the big picture. That is why nine times out of ten the initiative pass only to either come back to bite us in the ass or be found to be unlawful. Representative democracy demands that the representatives make the final decision.
This kind of pressure is really no different than a lobby. They represent not just business but the people behind them or other interest groups like unions etc. Pressuring Obama through a group effort is lobbying.
July 1, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, not it's not. It's called a grassroots (or netroots) effort. We aren't trying to buy him off.
July 1, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes you are. just like a lobbyist, I heard over and over how people were not going to give Obama any more money until he voted against the bill. That is exactly the influence of lobbyist money that you all despise. Same difference.
July 1, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would see it as equivalent to signing a petition.
July 1, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I grant the soundness of this premise, but I fail to see how it stands as any sort of counterargument against the group in question. After all, our group on mybarackobama.com does not force the issue. Obama is still free to read our missives and decide to keep his position as it stands. In other words, he retains the power of making the final decision quite regardless of the existence or size of this particular social networking group.
July 1, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still say there's too much violins about the issue.
http://video.aol.com/partner/hulu/saturday-night-live-emilys-editorial-reply-22/w45TrHdhG_3xUYFMXlDm1l8yVt-MNGXi
July 1, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point.
While the telecoms were too eager to do Bush's bidding, they were told it was for national security purposes, etc. They're lack of courage is deplorable but not surprising.
It's Bush we should be going after.
July 1, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Suing the telecoms is the only mechanism anyone has come up with for discovering what Bush has done. There are no other means.
If we have a President Obama + lawsuits then we could actually could actually roll back some of this massive apparatus of imperial surveillance and stifling of dissent (because they know the names of everyone you have called over the past 6 years). Actual increases in civil liberties -- imagine that!
July 1, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
And he is free to do the same with lobbyists. Yet the "politics of change" decry lobbyist influence.
Can't have it both ways.
July 1, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said.
Obama's decision was disappointing but if he changes his mind he'll be accused of flip flopping.
The media will eat up this story of dissension in the ranks and it will hurt Obama's chances in the fall. It's time to move on, so to speak.
July 1, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not to be a wet blanket, but he will already be accused of flip-flopping. After all, he had already gone on record saying that he would filibuster any bill that included retroactive immunity, and now he is saying that he will vote for such a bill if that is what emerges in the senate. Given that this flip is already flopped, there is little to be lost from flipping back.
July 1, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a simple out for that problem:
"I listened to my supporters. They firmly indicated that they disagreed with me. In thinking carefully about the issue, and in rereading the bill, I have concluded that their opposition should be attended to."
July 1, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, won't work. That's what McCain said about immigration and y'all still called it a flip-flop...
July 1, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree.
Flippant media types will flip all over Obama's flip, flop, flip.
He can't be seen to be caving to a pressure group.
July 1, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I'm sure your group will broadcast that along with your blackmailed vote.
July 1, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then they'll call him a "Flip-flop-flipper..."
July 1, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
When he's voted, then I'll move on.
July 1, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the other senators will be off the hook. Are you sure you know who's who in responsibility? But people let off the other Senators. Fine.
July 1, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny how the outrage isn't towards Charlie Black's alleged influence.
Some supporters.
July 1, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I support and plan on continuing to support. I don't understand why we find an issue important and all we do is get ragged on for it. I'm not beating my chest and saying I will vote for Nader, I'm not picketing Obama's campaign offices, I'm writing letters, signing petitions, joining social networking groups. I'm not hurting our candidate, simply hoping to change his mind while there is still time.
there is still time, and i will do my best to support my side of the issue until the vote is cast.
If he votes for the bill I will still support him. If he votes against the bill, I will enthusiastically support him. Those are my choices. I leave it to him. That's how I measure my support for Obama.
My legislators, which I have also written, will also have a measure of my vote determinant on how they vote. As for other legislators, not much I can do. They're not mine. For what's it worth I've also written Jay Rockefeller.
Isn't this how a democracy is supposed to work?
Please, continue crapping on me, while I use the processes available to me to make my voice heard.
'Preciate it.
July 1, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also, I've signed a petition to oust Charlie Black as well. I'd would suggest you try not to make me out like some kind of one issue crazy nut job activist, which I am not.
July 1, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, your side of the issue is the right side.
It seems that you enter the argument convinced that you're right on all aspects of the FISA issue without telling anyone why.
That leaves the impression that you think Obama doesn't have your best interest at hand.
How will you be able then to determine if he is making the best possible stance if you don't know all the intricacies of the amendments. You have outrage and organization. But to what end?
When Congress is on holiday they do speak to one another. There are plays two, three times ahead of what we see. The initial push was to get the bill delayed before the recess. That happened. Now it's a wait and see position. The histronics are just background noise at this point and shows that there are supporters that don't have a feeling for the pulse of things. This is what Madison didn't like.
July 1, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
ya just lost me, flowers. i make my voice known precisely because I don't know the intricacies of their deliberations and hope they will stand up for me when they do.
anyways, said my piece. I stand by it.
July 1, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seems you are lost.
Because I said "...the intricacies of the amendments".
Not the deliberations.
An uninformed activist is just as dangerous as an uninformed voter.
July 1, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
how do you draw that conclusion. because i don't understand your "meta" comment?
can you make a comment without making broadbased assumptions about me and my knowledge?
July 1, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
also, i have read the amendments. i thought by inticacies you meant the larger discussion, since they are rather self-evident, if a bit legalistic at times. thanks for assuming i haven't. so how do you feel about the amendment that re-defines weapons of mass destruction, that they snuck in there?
again- can you make a point without assasinating my character. because you don't know me. ya really don't, don't try to assume you do. you're just making yourself look like an ass.
July 1, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
...you're projecting here. yes, I think I'm right. What's right for you? That's for you to decide.
July 1, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
by support and continue to support (at the top), I mean Obama.
July 1, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
(Backs away from the meltdown)
July 1, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
....just like our delightful blue dog senators.
July 1, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
apology accepted.
July 1, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do I wipe spittle from the inside of my monitor?
July 1, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I don't do cowering"
~Barack Obama
July 1, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
just caving....
July 1, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
ok. He's caved.
Say Hi to Harriet Christian for me.
July 1, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unlike Christian, I WILL drop this issue when it is right do so and I will hold my tongue when it is right to do so. Responding to a cocky little shit like you is not one of those times.
July 1, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
You talking to me or Barack, Joejoe?
July 1, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The other senators aren't going to be our candidate, our nominee, our standard-bearer, the leader of our party, or our president.
Obama will be that person. That is why we are pressuring him specifically.
July 1, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
whateva, troll.
July 1, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops... My post was in reply to fogu2
July 1, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
For the record, I refuse to play hypotheticals: Oh the media will do this, oh they will do that.
However, one caveat, Obama has shown when he makes a stand he can turn the media around (ala race and Rev. Wright et al).
July 1, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, and pressure groups also (ala never mind).
July 1, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
the problem here isn't people like myself who are making a principled stand and doing what we can behind the scenes, but still support Obama and will still support him. It's little shits like you who attack us and make us out for the bad guy for questioning him.
Ask yourself: who's being divisive here? I'm just trying to stand up for what I believe in. You're the one laying into me for it.
July 1, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
So?
July 1, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wouldn't it be funny if that group is promoted by Republican operatives like the PUMA and the other FISA opposition groups?
July 1, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
just askin'
July 1, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah that would fit your narrow viewpoint 100%!!!
July 1, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess being informed is not your strong suit.
July 1, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
dar har har har. youse are da funniest feller on hear. dar har har har. now go shine your obama button collection.
July 1, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
busted.
July 1, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a final point, I will, more than likely, be out canvassing for Obama even if he votes for this shitcrap bill. Can you say the same? Or are you just another shill?
July 1, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink