Obama's response to the protest on the FISA "compromise" is horrible.
He's gonna wind up voting for a bill that contains retroactive immunity, despite earlier vows to veto any such bill. What happened to filibuster?
He says the "exclusivity provision" makes clear the idea that FISA is the only method by which the President can spy on Americans - even though the old FISA law already says that.
He talks about overseeing the watchers - but there's no such provision for oversight. In the USA, such oversight is supposed to come from the Courts. Obama seems to think it'll come from the Inspector General's office, or the AG's office. He expects the Exec Branch will investigate itself.
He finishes up with a toothless "promise" (after breaking his earlier promises about FISA, why should we listen now?) to have his AG "review" the surveillance methods under use. Instead of promising to prosecute obviously illegal activity.
How is it possible that those of us criticizing Obama for this incredible blunder are "purity trolls"?
Here's an idea - the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights are two of the most "progressive" documents in history. You can make a good argument that the ideas contained in those 200+ year old pieces of paper form the bedrock of most liberal, progressive thought.
Why is it okay to ditch those ideas?
Those of you blindly supporting Obama through all this need to ask yourselves, if he'll jettison portions of the Bill of Rights out of fear of criticism from the GOP (!), then what would he stand up for?
Who benefits from this cave-in? Not the American people, certainly. You gotta ask yourself, why is Obama doing it? Why weaken the rights US citizens enjoy?
If you'll screw with my rights, what won't you screw with?
It's a fair question for Obama and his supporters. If I was a wealthy Clinton donor and Obama called ME, asking for money, that's what I'd ask him...