Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

FISA's False Choice

Grrrrrr - no edit ability ----Grrrrr

Cleaning up my previous post to make it readable

Ever since 9/11, this Administration has put forward a false
choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. … Secrecy
must not trump accountability. ... I share your commitment to this cause, and
will stand with you in the fights to come.

Barack Obama, 08/01/2007

 

 

Which would you rather have …

 

A.)     President Obama without the new FISA bill

 

B.)      President Obama with the new FISA bill

 

C.)     President McCain without the new FISA bill

 

D.)     President McCain with the new FISA bill

 

 

If you honestly believe that our country is better off with A than B, then why on earth are you working so hard to tell everybody to shut up about FISA?

 

If your argument is that it’s a necessary evil in order to get Obama to the White house, you have accepted the false choice of FISA …

 

Obama must support FISA or the big bad Republicans will smear him as soft on terror and that will be insurmountable in terms of winning the election

 

That’s a position of fear, of handing power to your opponent, and finally it just plain doesn’t hold up.  Do you actually believe that if FISA passes as is, that the Republicans will not attack Obama as soft on terror.  Do you honestly believe that having taken a principled stand to oppose and defeat the FISA bill that this fact alone will sway an undecided voter that Obama is ‘soft on terror’?  Do you think that voter would have been untarnished by other false Republican smears and would have voted for Obama otherwise?  Sorry folks it just doesn’t add up.

 

Obama promised to ‘change the way things are done in Washington’.  He’s in Washington now.  He can demonstrate that change now, by standing up for the people and the Constitution.  People, if he’s afraid of the Republicans now, that isn’t going to change.  We’re going to get one capitulation after the next if we don’t forcefully demonstrate that we expect him to keep his word, to us, that I “will stand with you in the fights to come”.   Stand now Senator -  and stop kneeling in front of the Republican altar of security trumping liberty.




Comments (31)

A copy/paste from my post on this issue (my formatting got messed up too, second the grrr)

I understand that we must not loose this election. I understand that if Obama fought the immunity portion McCain will try to use that to portray him as soft on terror. I'm not going to rail against him and his decision here but I'd like to point out that many who voted for the war did so primarily because they were concerned with being portrayed as soft on terror.

Lets hope this is the last time that argument will work.

avatar

Sorry, I think the Iraq war vote and terrorism is a terrible comparison. They are totally different. This bill won't directly result in deaths of young Americans and millions of civilian Iraqis. This bill won't cost us 9 trillion dollars. And this bill, at least in theory, relates to terrorism whereas the Iraq war had nothing to do with terrorism. Reasonable people knew that.

avatar

You are an intelligent person who usually offers sound comment, but reasonable people know that the pending FISA legislation does not relate to terrorism (with the exception that threats of terror are being used to frighten us into doing things that are not reasonable).

"Don't fall backwards now"
~Barack Obama

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean don't fall backwards by disagreeing with Obama's position on this? Or don't fall backward on the original intent of allowing civil suit against the telcos?

E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.
E). President Obama with whatever.

Obama promised to ‘change the way things are done in Washington’. He’s in Washington now.

But he's not president yet.

I truly admire your passion. I'll admit, when I first started reading your posts, I thought you were a concern troll for awhile, but I don't doubt your sincerity or your passion any longer. And your relentless idealism brings back fond memories. But when you've lived on this planet as long as I have, you've seen the successes and the failures, and you start to get a feel for what works. And Barack Obama is doing what works. I know it's frustrating and hard to watch. I know it shakes your faith in the guy. But believe me, he's the real deal and he's not going to let you down. You've got to learn (or simply decide) to trust these people. They know what they're doing. And they WILL NOT let you down. When he's elected and he's finally in the White House, he will make you proud as hell. You've got to make yourself believe this. It's a choice. Choose it. Suspend your doubt. Politics is a dirty business. But a politician like Barack Obama comes along once in a lifetime.

A little Buddhist koan for you to consider: In Buddhism, it is forbidden to cause suffering, and it is against Buddhist law to kill any living thing. And yet, Gotama Buddha died a painful death after eating rotten meat. How could that be? In the Diamond Sutra, it is said: "Thus have I heard. Upon a time Buddha sojourned in Anathapindika's Park by Shravasti with a great company of bhikkhus, even twelve hundred and fifty. One day, at the time for breaking fast, the World-honored One (the Buddha) enrobed, and carrying His bowl made His way into the great city of Shravasti to beg for His food. In the midst of the city He begged from door to door according to rule. This done, He returned to His retreat and took His meal. When He had finished He put away His robe and begging bowl, washed His feet, arranged His seat, and sat down."

My teacher, Dajian Hui Neng, lived in exile with a group of hunters for many years. Every evening when the hunters returned from the hunt, he would put his vegetables in the pan with the meat they had killed that day. This is thought of as a minor point by the careless and the inattentive, but it is one of the great teachings of Buddhism.

I'm not comparing Barack Obama in any way to these great teachers. What I am saying is that the greatest of all human virtues is the ability to set oneself aside for the good of all. Set yourself aside. It's not a punishment. It's an opportunity.

hrebendorf,

I totally -- TOTALLY -- agree with you. E is th answer. And it is so hard to communicate the "sixth sense" that develops about politics and public will once you've been around the block a few dozen times. I hate to use the word "experience," but it does have resonance here.

Ditto.

I am a fire-breathing revolutionary who wants to change the way we do everything. It's why I supported Kucinich initially.

I am also a pragmatist who knows that it takes more than passion to win. It takes intellect and reason and the ability to sacrifice incremental gains in exchange for monumental opportunities.

I have a feeling the Obamicans know he is way more progressive than he can run and are actually looking forward to what that might look like. I find it ironic that Obama's republican supporters are more convinced than his democratic supporters that he will change the entire dynamic of the federal government in this country.

It's going to make a hell of a film one day.

hrebendorf -

It's hard for me to trust someone who says

I will stand with you in the fights to come

and then runs for cover at the first test.

I hope you'r

TPM - You could really usre a comments editor !!!

Last line of my last comment was meant to read ... I hope you are right hrebendorf, but I think you're wrong.

Do you think I'm wrong, or do you fear I'm wrong? Either way, you can choose to override your own mind. It's a weird concept, but it works.

The pendulum must swing both ways
Before it is brought to rest in the middle
All limitations are self-imposed

Obama will not break with the first dent. We need to remind him that we are his base and that we support the 4th Amendment.

avatar
If you honestly believe that our country is better off with A than B, then why on earth are you working so hard to tell everybody to shut up about FISA?

chophouse, you're a genius! You could have ended the post right there (although the rest of your post is good too).

The answer, from what I've read in the threads, is that people seem to think that disagreeing strongly with Obama is the same as bashing him. I can't say I understand how that's bashing, but it's a recurring theme.

I think the problem is that there's a difference between disagreeing publicly and disagreeing privately. I've written Obama some NASTY emails lately, urging him to take a tougher stance on this. I'm talking really angry, abusive shit. But I would NEVER publicly criticize him for this. The reason why is because this is a family matter. I don't want a single Republican getting the notion that we're a house divided, and I don't want to discourage a single Democrat. I want to win. I expect to win. And I refuse to discuss defeat. Period. This is not realistic. This is reality.

PS: I've never breathed a word of this before and I never will again. Obama is my man. 100%.

I'm down with you wanting to keep your doubts and criticisms (which you don't actually have, natch) private at least up through the election but I think you're asking a little much of people if you want them to do that too.

For some of us it's not just important that he gets there, but how he gets there.

Me too. I'll keep writing letters to Obama. Of course he needs to hear from us. Our input is absolutely essential. But taking a family fight to the shopping mall is not a smart idea. Know what I mean? I'd like to keep this within the party. The Republicans don't need any encouragement.

I've written Obama some NASTY emails lately...really angry, abusive shit.

I'm sure those emails are being analyzed at this moment under the PAA. Hope there weren't any terroristic threats implied. If so, we'll mount a Free the Cross-dressing Cat! campaign.

Yeah, I'm fucking stupid as hell. They were full of threats. Jeeeeeeee-ZUS!

By the way, my word choice was lazy. Angry, yes. Abusive, no. The word I should have used is rude. Harsh, perhaps. Disrespectful. As in, "I sure hope you know what the hell you're doing, Sir, because from where I'm sitting it looks like you may have lost your mind."

On second thought, abusive yes. Somewhat. :)

OK, no more talk about this from me.

Public disagreement is healthy for the country, so long as it doesn't devolve into nastiness. Most of the disagreement with Obama on FISA that I've seen has been strongly felt, but it has not usually been what I would call destructive criticism.

We certainly could have used a little more public disagreement with Bush before, say, starting the Iraq war. Certainly there are figures in the administration who allegedly argued against the move privately, but who fell in line once the decision was made. It might have been better had such concerns been aired publicly.

The dissenters are not always right, but it is still valuable to have debate over the issue.

hrebendorf, you seriously speak my language on this issue. Completely. I've sent emails to Obama, and to Bill Burton (who made the statement about filibustering a bill with immunity). But I see no point in senseless bickering and fighting among us. It accomplishes nothing. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." And I think we need to stand, and stand united, not divided. I am more sure of this now, after attending the Unity Rally on Friday, than I ever was before.

In private, I disagree with Obama on many issues. In public, I attack McCain.

Absolutely positively.

We've had almost 8 years of the "shut up and fall in line or we'll tap your phone" from the Bushies. Heck we had it from Democrats with their pens for protesters in Boston. Let freedom ring! Long live dissent! Dust off the Bill of Rights and use them.

Ok, I'll repost this since I put it on the unedited version of this post:

No, sometimes what some see as a position of fear is just prudence and I think this is.

The Republicans will do everything they can to paint Obama as the most leftist leftist on the planet- coddling terrorists and making us vulnerable.

Obama's vote on this isn't going to change anything. FISA isn't going away - it was in place before Bush ever showed up. The point of the statute is to empower the president to authorize the contravention of our 4th and 14th amendment rights - that's why it was enacted. I hate the statute, but it has been used by other presidents without causing this kind of controversy because they followed the statute's requirements. Bush ignored them - he broke the law. But the law he broke is FISA and it isn't going off the books no matter what happens next.

It's a national security measure and there's no way Congress is going to repeal it. It's a bitch as originally written and as rewritten because it is meant as a vehicle to go against the constitution.

It's not the statute that was the problem, (like it or not, and I don't) and Obama's vote on it won't change things. It's Bush - he didn't follow the statute. I wish it would be repealed altogether, but then, I don't like a lot of things. I don't like RICO; I am convinced the 3 strikes laws are unconstitutional - but the SCOTUS doesn't agree with me and there's not a thing I can do about that.

I think FISA as originally written is a crock of shit, but that doesn't do one thing toward protecting our rights that I think so. And I can promise you it is not going away - no matter what Obama does.

I'm not arguing that Obama should undertake a campaign to repeal FISA. I'm saying he should publicly oppose the current FISA bill before the Senate and actively exercise his position as party leader to make sure it is defeated.

I'm arguing that he should stand up and honor his commitment to

stand with [us] in the fights to come

You seem to be arguing that in the interests of political expediency (aka the bigger goal) he can be forgiven for not doing what he said he would do. Or that it doesn't matter because there already is a FISA blaw in place. And that is exactly what I mean by operating from a position of fear of what the Repubs will do or say.

THEY ARE GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY !!! It's ridiculous to throw away your principles when you are not even going to get the result for which you are throwing them away. That's surrender to the other party.

You should write to him, that's all I'm saying. Send him an email. Send him a letter. Lay out your concerns. Twice a day, every day. Whatever you think is right. But asking him to oppose this here--on this message board--isn't going to accomplish anything at all. I'm just saying that I think it's fine to discuss the pros and cons of FISA itself, but carping about Obama's position on a message board doesn't do anyone any good, and it may do some harm. MHO.

I have written to him. And I reply to every donation solicitation, explaining that I will not donate until he publicly opposes the FISA bill. I even replied back to that campaign strategy video they sent out on Friday.

I also joined the group on his website

http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/SenatorObama-PleaseVoteAgainstFISA

which now has over 2200 members.

I also faxed my 2 worthless Senators to oppose FISA. So yeah. I'm going through channels as well as arguing my position here. I don't think he/they care what I think, they've already written me off because they know I'm 'captive' - that I won't vote for McCain.

avatar

Chophouse - thanks for posting the group URL and signaling that there are a lot of members.

Mailing back empty envelopes to the campaigns those House Members who'd rec'd donations from me before seemed so isolated...

Perhaps I held Obama to too high a standard, hoping against hope that he would say

"I will vote for this bill to avoid problems in getting information prior to my presidency - not because it is a good compromise or fair to the privacy of Americans under our Bill of Rights - but because no other bill seems possible in the face of Republican obstructionism" - and then lay out the Constitutional problems....

Will admit I am torn between views of Hreben-- vs Destor's ... i DO hate to see these valid views about BHO's unfortunately infirm stance on Constitutional rights becoming co-opted by McCain camp persons and repackaged as 'signs of discord' -- in response? mostly my enthusiasm wanes for a bit as realism sets in, I get back to trying to earn the rent and eschew politics for a little while

sigh...

Post a Comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Book Club Calendar

Coming Soon



Nov. 30-Dec. 4



January 12-16



« Book Club ArchiveFull calendar »

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address