Skip to main content

People tell me it's a sin
To know and feel too much within.
I still believe she was my twin, but I lost the ring.
She was born in spring, but I was born too late
Blame it on a simple twist of fate.

Bob Dylan - A Simple Twist of Fate

        I've come to Kos far later than most everyone here. I perused the site once in awhile over the last few years, yet didn't start posting until a few weeks ago. Like most on here I have been a passionate supporter of Sen. Obama since I first saw him at the convention in 2004. It was then I knew that someday this graceful man would be President. While many of my more moderate liberal friends told me that this year was too early for him to run, I shrugged and said strike while the iron is hot. Time dictates when it is time to run, and in no other year or decade of recent memory would Sen. Obama have had a realistic chance to win. I think America is on the verge of a shift in the center right paradigm.

      I think we tend to forget in that speech of 2004 he outlined a new type of political movement. It gets called "post-partisan" often enough. I don't really like that term because it hangs more responsibility on his shoulders than even I think it is possible for him to fulfill. America is a long way from "post-partisan".  What we all loved about that speech and you will also find it in both of his books is the idea that a Democrat could talk so easily about so many things that previous Democrat were unable to articulate. We've heard for so many years how "un-patriotic", "godless", "weak" we are that when someone finally came along that could shed those labels and re-define the rules...we were excited. I think because of the Democratic Primary and the constraints in terms of the electoral pool, we thought that running a strict left platform was finally possible. We seem to forget he wasn't running for the Presidency; he was running to be the head of his party. Now the real game is afoot.

     I knew the game would shift a bit once he claimed the nomination. I knew that there would be things that disappointed me as well as surprised me. There aren't any deal breakers for me except the war in Iraq and getting out as soon as possible. I am not so foolish or stubborn to think there won't be other wars, in fact I know that the war in Afghanistan and in a way Pakistan (We don't say that, do we?) are necessary.

FISA? That was a blow to my solar plexus. It still is and I don't really understand all of the intricacies of the bill itself and frankly I am little dumbfounded that it received as much support in the House as it did. Yet just as FDR ran on support of the League of Nations and dumped it because FDR knew that winning wasn't everything; it was the only thing....Obama realizes that without Victory all of these things are insignificant.

I think the thing that surprises me is that finally some people are starting to feel something and they should really just go back and read THE AUDACITY OF HOPE. It's the blueprint for Sen. Obama and perhaps we should realize there will be cases and times when he takes what some consider "Conservative" stances on issues and legislation. He is not Jerry Brown, Gus Hall, George Mcgovern and thank the stars for that. In 40 years we've had two Democratic Presidents. One, ultimately a failure for his inability to solve an energy crisis that we are only know understanding and the other a charismatic leader who turned the democratic party into Republican Lite....

I trust Sen. Obama and as I heard in a recent conferance...We are not in Sweden. If we were  the idea that we could keep him completely left would be not only likely, but realistic. Sen. Obama has his work cut out for him. While no other year previously would he have had a chance...he also will inherit a country in as much trouble as FDR did after Hoover. We must fundamentally shift our entire view of energy and build a NEW DEAL for the 21st Century. That doesn't mean we shouldn't write his campaign letters and try to hold his feet to the fire. I've written many over FISA.






Originally posted to danieladamsmith on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:35 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Agree totally, (8+ / 0-)
    we really, really need to win this one.

    Step one: get on the air now, Obama, in TV markets across the country.  Early voter opinions are being formed now.  Don't let McCain outspend you in all these markets.  I thought Obama had a bunch of cash-on-hand.  Ground game and innovative stuff is great and all, but traditional TV is also a big part of where it's at.

    It's been FISA-overload here lately.  It's one thing in a long train of important things/issues.

    We gotta win this election.  Like you said, SCOTUS decisions, vetoes, wars, literally thousands of long-term, country-changing things are in the balance.  It's time to unite.  Obama just wrapped up the nomination this month, and the last couple of weeks, I've cringed coming here.  We all need to step it up.

    Fired up, ready to go!

  •  I Can't Argue with This (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jezreel, Modern Progressive, Junah

    Let the man pick his battles and pick his battlefields.

    It's in his hands, now. You put him here.

    Fall in or get out of the way.

    Pluto now orbits Overnight News Digest ʍou sʇıqɹo oʇnld

    by Pluto on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:53:31 PM PDT

  •  The president of our hopes and dreams. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    And it only costs us the Fourth Amendment.


    Once again I'm stuck choosing between the lesser of who cares.

    Ceux qui peuvent vous faire croire à des absurdités peuvent vous faire commettre des atrocités.

    by Orange County Liberal on Sun Jun 29, 2008 at 11:56:05 PM PDT

    •  Faire croire? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

        I really don't understand. We are not electing Jesus for Christ's sake! We're electing a Political leader who offers some hope for change not heaven on earth. And before burying the 4th amendment we should understand what really happened. For some reason I don't think that the five hundred odd representatives and 100 senators are living in Jonestown or that Senator Obama is Jim Jones.
        In real life there is ideology or power and those with power (bestowed on them by the people) can get things done, whereas those with ideological purity stand on the sidelines quarterbacking the New Orleans Saints from their armchairs.
        It is fascinating pondering how many people here think that Obama is Anakin Skywalker on the verge of becoming Dick Cheney!

  •  PRESIDENT McCAIN (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Like a blow to the solar plexus. Bless your CapsLock.

  •  You want to win? (5+ / 0-)

    What exactly do "you" want to win? The presidency? I didn't know you were on the ballot. That's one of the problems with identity politics. You get so wrapped up in a candidates life that you come to believe that it is you, rather than they, that run for office.

    You seem to think that criticizing your candidate somehow hurts them, that everyone must march lockstep behind them on every issue. Those that don;t are labeled "Purists," or "Single Issue Voters."

    Obama is likely to win the election, regardless of the criticism he receives on FISA. You know why? It's because, contrary to anti-critics, most of those that criticize him are some of his biggest supporters.

    I don't know about you, but I'm the same before, during, and after an election. And if my candidate is going to be hurt by a sticks and stones, then he shouldn't be out on the playground.

    As for your fear of a McCain presidency, even if he were to win, you are mistaken to believe that he could appoint a conservative to the Supreme Court. They would need confirmation. So unless he got some democrats to cower in a corner and vote his way (like the last two Justices), then they wouldn't get the job.

  •  Amen DanielAdam! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, Modern Progressive, Junah

    I couldn't agree more. And also to you; HariSeldon, "FISA overload" aptly describes what I've seen here at Kos lately. Like you, I too have cringed coming here too for the same reason. We really do need to step it up. We've got a GE to win and we can't win by decrying, condemning and ridiculing our candidate.

    We must use time creatively... and forever realize that time is always ripe to do right. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    by Jezreel on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:05:01 AM PDT

    •  Step it up? (6+ / 0-)

      You're absolutely right. We have a general election to win. There is ass to be kissed, praises to be sung, and money to be given.

      To hell with those pesky so-called democrats that concern themselves with broken promises, laws, and the like. It's all about our candidate winning, at any cost, and why -- because we trust him completely, with our hearts, our minds, and most importantly, our money!

      Yay for group think.

      •  There's shades of gray in everything, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        There's no need to swing it all the way in one direction in the way that you put it.  I don't trust any politican completely and utterly, yadda yadda yadda.

        But we have a candidate now.  He is a good solid candidate.  I support him.  I believe that Senator Obama will be better in the long run for this country than Senator McCain will.  It is as simple as that.  I don't get into touchy-feely emotional attachments to candidates.  I am more of a logical thinker.  That is why these single-issue arguments/battles/flame-wars of the past couple weeks have particularly irked me.  But, I'm hoping we'll get past it shortly.

        •  Single Issue (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Avila, blueoasis, limpidglass, browneyes

          You mentioned in a comment above that you are all for criticism on this issue, but draw the line at obsession. The problem is that such a line is arbitrary. You can't say that you can criticize a candidate 10 times, but not 11. Some where do you draw the line?

          More importantly, the fact that you feel like drawing a line at all shows that you believe that your candidate is vulnerable to criticism, that he'll somehow be hurt by it. I tend to think of Obama as sterner stuff, and that's why I'll still vote for him, despite him having gone back on his promise.

          But I'll be damned if I'm going to let anyone determine what is appropriate criticism, and how much, in order to be thought of as a "true supporter" of him.

          •  You're correct. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Jezreel, Junah
            It's a tricky call and completely arbitrary.  Up to each individual to make that determination (if one even needs to be made, like you said, which I'm not sure of myself).  For me personally, we're gettin' pretty darn close on this one..

            How does the saying go?  It's kinda like porn.  You know it when you see it.  Not that I ever see it.  *looks around nervously*

            But to hear great numbers of people talk of withdrawing financial support and going into all sorts of deals and campaigns and marches etc etc yadda over a very complex issue to the detriment of our nominee is disturbing.  Our future selves 8 years from now would probably slap ourselves silly right about now.

      •  By stepping up I mean some of the (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Junah, lolynda

        rhetoric here is overkill and reflective of political immaturity. This is a POLITICAL campaign. In politics there will be compromises. I for one don't know what Sen. Obama's long term strategy is for handling the FISA issue. I don't think that he has articulated his is.

        I do know that Sen. Obama is a politician. And no politician regardless of how intelligent, articulate, skilled, charismatic or influential he or she is, will ever fulfill every one of my expectations. I have NEVER agreed with every one of Sen. Obama's positions and I never will. I do know that this is only one battle in a war. And this battle is not over.

        It just seems that an extraordinary amount of energy, time and effort has been expended on this single issue on a political blog site.

        BTW, the hyper-emotionalism is counter productive. The "asses to be kissed, praises... etc, is useless to making a point.

        What I and others are saying is that while Sen. Obama must be held accountable for the promises he's made, he must first must get elected.

        We must use time creatively... and forever realize that time is always ripe to do right. Martin Luther King, Jr.

        by Jezreel on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:50:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Really? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Avila, blueoasis, limpidglass

          If that's what you really think, then you and I are very different people. You see, what a candidate says means almost nothing to me. I look at actions. If their actions don't match their words, then their words less credible to me.

          I see so many people saying they trust Obama, and that they support him because of that trust. But their trust is based on his words. And if his words are contradicted by his actions, then upon what basis do you trust?

          An election is nothing more than a job interview. But you seem to be saying that a candidate should be hired first, and then interviewed. Where in the real world do you get that?

          If a candidate isn't going to keep his word during the election, then why do you think he'll keep it after the election. That's not hope. It's fantasy.

          Nevertheless, I will vote for Obama because the alternative is even worse. But I will not for a moment quit bitching about broken promises and issues that are important to me, and why? Because I refuse to sacrifice my values in order to be deemed -- Politically Mature.

          •  How are your values (0+ / 0-)

            being sacrificed by Sen. Obama's actions?

            You are correct. You and I are indeed very different people. I don't ascribe that kind of power to anyone. No one has power over my values.

            You have every right to spend your time "bitching about broken promises". I choose not to use my time ineffectively.

            I will instead continue to support Sen. Obama's candidacy. And when and if he's elected, I will work to keep this issue alive by means of letter writing, petition drives and whatever other means are available to me because I don't believe that the FISA battle is over yet.


            We must use time creatively... and forever realize that time is always ripe to do right. Martin Luther King, Jr.

            by Jezreel on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:27:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  My Values? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Avila, blueoasis

              I never said that my values were being sacrificed by his actions. I said that I would be sacrificing my own values if I chose to remain silent.

              You seem to believe that the FISA issue is important, and that because of that you will write letters and join petition drives after the election. But why not now? Isn't it important now? Will it somehow change after the election, and be more important? You say that spending time on this important issue would be ineffective. Would spending time on it after the election be more effective? And which is more likely to produce results, spending time in opposition to a bill that hasn't passed, or spending time in opposition to a bill that has passed?

              Maybe you don't see the inefficiency of silence with regard to issues that are important to you. I do, although it will likely be for naught because to many people that think FISA is important choose to remain silent. But in light of your silence, I can see how "important" this issue is to you.

              I wish you luck in your letter writing and petition drives after the election. I trust things will be more convenient for you to pursue an issue of such importance.

              •  kronos wrote: (0+ / 0-)

                You say that spending time on this important issue would be ineffective.

                Actually, I did not say that spending time on this issue would be ineffective. I said: I choose not to use my time ineffectively.

                The fact that I don't choose to spend my time bitching about broken promises by writing about it on this Web site, does not mean that I think that spending time on this issue would be ineffective.

                Actually, I have spent time on this issue already. I am spending time on this issue now. The difference is that the time I'm spending right now is fruitless. Whereas the time I spent writing letters previously may yet yield results.

                Sen. Obama has not won the GE. Until he does win he will be limited by how much power and influence he has. He can choose now to filibuster the FISA Bill or he can choose to work on winning the election.

                Obama is an expert in Constitutional Law. He has recently stated (and I'm paraphrasing) that the Telecom companies are not the problem. Instead, the problem is the abuse of power by the current administration.

                Moreover, other Constitutional lawyers have said that the current Bill has holes that can be exploited by the next president to overturn this legislation in the future. Perhaps Sen.Obama is planning to exploit the loopholes in the future. Perhaps he is planning the hold the Bush administration accountable in the future. I don't know because he has not elaborated on his strategy.

                I intend to learn as much as I can about this Bill and do whatever I can in the future to make sure that I hold Sen. Obama accountable for insuring that the Constitutional rights of the American people are upheld.

                Right now, Sen. Obama simply does not have the power, authority or influence to effectively counter the FISA Bill.

                We must use time creatively... and forever realize that time is always ripe to do right. Martin Luther King, Jr.

                by Jezreel on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 02:31:35 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I disagree, on several points. (0+ / 0-)

                  You said:

                  I am spending time on this issue now.

                  In your previous comment, you said:

                  When and if he's elected, I will work to keep this issue alive by means of letter writing, petition drives and whatever other means are available.

                  "When and if," you said. I can only go by what you write, and if you say you are working on the issue now, but in another comment say "when and if," please don't be offended if I raise the point.

                  You also write:

                  Sen. Obama has not won the GE. Until he does win he will be limited by how much power and influence he has. He can choose now to filibuster the FISA Bill or he can choose to work on winning the election.

                  Now why do you assume that he can only do one or the other, and not both? And why do you assume that if he does one, he will lose the other?

                  It seems to me that his influence, as the nominee of our party, is considerable over other democrats. The question would then be whether or not other Democrats would break rank with their nominee in order to provide immunity to the phone companies.

                  But then again, maybe Obama is afraid of what the Republicans might say about his stance on national security. This is understandable though, considering the widespread popularity of the Republican Party. And of course, their credibility is beyond reproach.

                  You say that as an expert in constitutional law, Obama has said that the problem is not with the phone companies, but with the administration. This maybe true, however, I find it hard to believe that it is constitutional to break the law, whether it is the phone companies, the administration, or anyone.

                  On the other hand, maybe Obama's vast expertise in constitutional law has led him to conclude that the phone companies did not break the law at all, in which case he would have had to conclude that the administration didn't break the law either. Unless of course he is arguing that the phone companies are not to blame on the basis of the childhood refrain: "He made me do it."

                  And finally, there is your "He Might Have A Plan" statement, which as a matter of fact, will be the same argument that Keith will make tomorrow night in his Special Comment, as an attempt to excuse Obama (and himself) from changing positions on the issue.

                  But no doubt the bottom line is that we don't have a clue whether or not he has a plan. Most of us thought he had a plan when he vowed to oppose any bill containing an immunity provision. Apparently we were wrong. But who knows, he may yet prosecute them all criminally, or he may just sit back and enjoy the underpinnings of a national surveillance system.

  •  What Fucking "Pragmatism"?? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoasis, browneyes, Jyrinx

    Who, exactly, is he pandering to with his weaseling out on the promise he made to filibuster ANY Bill conferring immunity??

    Who was going to vote against him if he kept his word but, since he showed he can fit in with other spineless Democrats, will now vote for him??

    And does anybody seriously think that taking this one fairly esoteric issue away will impede Republican attacks on him?? THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE TRUTH, THEY'LL ATTACK ANYWAY!!

    We have no intention of prosecuting Rush Limbaugh because lying through your teeth and being stupid isn't a crime.

    by The Baculum King on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:09:15 AM PDT

    •  I Really Don't Think... (6+ / 0-)

      ...his (new) position on FISA (and that of the Dem cabal) has anything to do with getting Republican votes.

      The telecoms can tap anyone's phone any time they want. They are in control. Chances are, they have thousands of hours on everyone in congress. They're blackmailing their way out of this. (The Elliot Spitzer business put everyone on high alert.)

      Telecom liability may be a battle we can't afford to win. (That's how most things work in government.)

      Pluto now orbits Overnight News Digest ʍou sʇıqɹo oʇnld

      by Pluto on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:16:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here's the thing: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, blueoasis, Junah

    If he's going to support the bill, it only HELPS HIM if we yell LOUDLY at him not to. Then he gets to point at us and say, "Look! I don't always cave to the left wing of the party."

    It's a crappy consolation prize, I know. But please realize that it's actually win/win to make a big stink. Either we win by defeating the bill, or we win by improving Obama's chances of victory. And if you're really singularly focused on Obama winning, and you really trust his political instinct, then we can't lose by speaking up.

    Denny Crane: But if he supports a law, and then agrees to let it lapse ... then that would make him ...

    Shirley Schmidt: A Democrat.

    by Jyrinx on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:24:24 AM PDT

    Recommended by:
    pwrmac5, Jezreel, Junah

    I understand the complaints of some of those that feel that Obama has already lost you....What can I or anyone else say. Vote Nader? Don't Vote? Vote without passion. Choose the lesser of two evils. I don't know.

    If you read what I wrote you will see what I believe. As I have said, I wrote many emails about FISA. Yesterday I wrote the campaign a note that we are heading into dangerous territory and that we and I are worried that McCain is attacking and we aren't responding. McCain is throwing out pie in the sky energy plans and we aren't doing anything.

    For the post that wrote "Why is it I want to win"...that's how I feel. If I didn't feel it was I and We, I couldn't even get passionate about this. I love Dennis Kucinich, but he never will and never did have a chance. He wasn't my choice, but I respect him an awful lot....We are not yet living on a Star Trek Planet of the Metronites...We are living in America and whomever wins has to govern all of America.  Maybe Sen. Obama has

    There will be some people that say if Obama doesn't follow every single issue in lock step with what certain principles are then he is betraying us...What can I say?
    Where have you been? Obama was never as Liberal as the mainstream media and FOX NOISE makes him out to be. I am against the Death Penalty. He isn't. I have some conservative veins in me that I didn't have at 20. I'm 40 and somethings change within you as time goes on. I am still overwhelmingly liberal. But I don't care if people have guns. I grew up in Pennsylvania. That doesn't mean that gun laws in Harrisburg should be the same as gun laws in Brooklyn where I also lived for 14 years before moving to Vienna, Austria.

    I can't live like the Eloi...There are still Morlocks out there.

    One of the great complaints I have with the Right is that "compromise is going over to their side". I can't be a hypocrite and claim that compromise is them coming over to ours. This is haggling. This is real life. This is fighting for what you have to have and giving ground to get that.

    America is a conversation..a changing one...a shifting one, but a conversation and sometimes we have to listen just as much if not more than just  waiting to talk.

    There are some people that will be disappointed in whatever happens. There always are?

    It's not fall in or get out the way, although return that on yourself. Is it "fall in with my particular view or you are just another politician".....

    All I am saying is ride your feelings to wherever or whomever they lead you...


    Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.

    by danieladamsmith on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:24:55 AM PDT

  •  Call me a purist, I guess. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grimc, Kronos Blue, limpidglass, Jyrinx

    I support the Bill of Rights.  All of them.  I don't see stripping away the rights of American citizens as "pragmatic" in most cases.

    blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

    by browneyes on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:26:48 AM PDT

    Recommended by:
    Jezreel, Junah



    But I won't just say this is it and you lost me. I can't do that. I voted Nader in 2000, now I was living in NYC at the time and Gore was already going to win NY, but I have regretted that decision forever and recount reminded me of that wound.

    But lets remember that Democrats always do this...we have a habit of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.

    I am going to trust SEN. OBAMA and if he betrays me and us...I will also turn that laser on him.

    Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.

    by danieladamsmith on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:34:11 AM PDT

    •  Trust (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Avila, blueoasis, limpidglass

      If you trust a man you've never met, never sat down with and got to know, then you are far to trusting, particularly when it's a politician.

      Here's the thing though. You seem to believe that there is this vast number of people out there that are so pissed about FISA that they won't vote for Obama because of it. Where are these people? I don't see them. I see critics of his broken promise. I see critics of his support for the death penalty. But I don't see people saying they aren't going to vote for him.

      Even if there are a few like that, or those that won't vote at all... so what. It's their vote, and I'll be damned if I have to guilt it from them with fear tactics: "If you don't vote, then you're voting for McCain!" Fear 101.

      I want Obama to win too, but you're taking your support too far, in my view. I'll never sacrifice my viewpoint on the alter of a politician.

    •  blind trust is anathema (0+ / 0-)

      to what the American system is about.

      The men who created it didn't trust any one man with unrestricted power. They were brilliantly idealistic, but they also had a very clear and unsentimental understanding of human nature.

      They didn't trust to the goodness of our leaders to preserve their design. Instead, they trusted to a more reliable, if less exalted, trait of humanity: petty jealousy and the desire to preserve one's own sphere of influence. They set up three distinct branches of government with distinct powers, which they intended to be perpetually fighting each other in an endless turf war.

      In this way power could never become too concentrated and tyranny would be avoided. This is what "checks and balances" means.

      To trust a politician--any politician--with the kind of unchecked power Congress is proposing to give the president with this legislation will lead us down the road to tyranny. And that's why we have to fight this, even as we work for Obama's election.

    •  Agreed DanielAdams. Your points (0+ / 0-)

      are well taken and appreciated. They make sense and reflect an understanding of the political process.

      We must use time creatively... and forever realize that time is always ripe to do right. Martin Luther King, Jr.

      by Jezreel on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:01:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Winning.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I think if we mean to win then we need to stand by working-class populism and renew liberalism. I think the country is ready for a leader who can articulate those ideals and I think Obama has the capacity to do it.

    Unfortunately, I don't think he will use his resources and skills in that manner but instead, follow into the "find the Center" bullshit and seem middle-road and weak in the knees while McCain works on fooling the "reagan dems" into voting for him again because after all, "he's just one of them..."

  •  Obama made a deliberate decision (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoasis, Kronos Blue

    as soon as he had the nomination locked up, he turned his back to progressives and civil libertarians, reneged on his promise to filibuster immunity, and supported this bill which legitimates Bush's illegal spying program and guts what's left of the Fourth Amendment.

    He knew he'd lose quite a bit of support (both financial and volunteer) from this maneuver. He did it anyway because he judged that gaining the support of corporate-friendly Democrats like Hoyer and Reid, as well as unrestricted spying powers, was more valuable to him than any voter support he would lose.

    As politicians often do, Obama did what was good for Obama. And since what was good for him was (in this case) not good for us, we need to let him know and do what we can to fight this.

    •  I forgot to say this: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      if Obama thought he would lose the election by reneging on his promise to restore the rule of law and supporting this FISA bill, he wouldn't have done it.

      So I don't think Obama's terribly worried about the flak he's taking from the opponents of this legislation. And if he's not worried about losing the election, I don't think there's much reason for you to be worried either.

    Recommended by:

    I am not Nostrodamus..but what I think will happen is that Obama will now start running his UNIFY Platform...he will pick and choose the battles to fight or to reload. He will make some of us cringe. I have. Yet I needed that. I think for awhile I was buying into the Messiah. This was a slap of reality that this isn't THE STAR WARS REPUBLIC, but a place on terra firma.  McCain in the end will run to his base because in the end that's what he will need to win. John McCain of 2000 was a Republican I at least respected. That guy is deader than disco...

    30 Million people voted in the Primary. There are a lot more people voting in the General. We are his guide rail. That's what grassroot politics is all about; we have to let him and others know when lines are crossed. I wouldn't even be shocked if this FISA thing gets overturned in an Obama Presidency if it passes. Stand our ground. Write our representatives and his campaign....

    BUT THIS IS VICTORY OR DEATH. We have the chance to send the GOP back to the place they were after GOLDWATER LOST. They worked for 20 years to rebuild. We can do long as we let our friends know when we have a problem, but we don't just jump ship.

    Lets face it. We didn't blink on the campaign finance reform issue because we want to win. If the tables were turned that would have been as big of an issue as FISA.

    Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.

    by danieladamsmith on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 12:50:37 AM PDT

  •  For those that cannot accept there is a party.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    For those that cannot live with FISA and will not vote for Obama because of it...there is a party. Vote Libertarian. They don't want any government violations of power, nor do they want the government to do much of anything else. Barr isn't a libertarian, but if you are interested and so disappointed and inflexible on the 4th Amendment...

    go to FREE TALK LIVE...and see how long you last there. I lasted about 4 podcasts until I realized that I do want a government.

    Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.

    by danieladamsmith on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:03:58 AM PDT

  •  so are you saying (0+ / 0-)

    that you want to win?

  •  Carter solved the energy problem. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    He just couldn't get the American people to wake up and follow.  The man had solar panels on the roof and told people to wear an extra sweater.  It was ballsy and to the point and we were too spoiled to "get it."

    "The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." Orwell

    by NotablyZen on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:14:16 AM PDT

    •  Addressing and Solving are two different things.. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      He addressed it, yet he didn't solve it and many members of his own party were to blame. I remember as kids we were visiting our Grandmother in the Bronx and on the way home we literally coasted into a gas station in Pa, because we couldn't get in the gas lines in NY.

      This is a problem that is 38/9 years in the making. It will take more than Solar, More than Wind, More than Nuke, More than Drilling....we are going to have to start rethinking the entire way we live and planning a massive public transport project for America. Light Rail, like we have in all of the cities big and small over here in Austria. I admire Carter for what he said but he didn't solve it by a long shot.

      Although your point is very well taken.

      Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.

      by danieladamsmith on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:25:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Rec'd for analysis and bravery... (0+ / 0-)

    on the DailyIHateFISA

    Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

    by dvogel001 on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 01:44:06 AM PDT

  •  principle/purity is always the most pragmatic in (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueoasis, Kronos Blue

    the long run.

    The kind of pragmatism that is being bandied about around here has another name:  "Devils bargains."

    And those ALWAYS bite you long, hard and DEEP in the ass eventually.

    •  You could interpret this as (0+ / 0-)

      Picking the most Progressive candidate in the Primary, and never winning the WH. That's a pure position, in that anything less represents some degree of compromise.

      I'm at a loss to see the long-term benefit of that, except to the GOP.

      "Karl Rove giving Dems advice is the DEFINITION of 'Concern Troll'" - punkdavid

      by Darkmoth on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 05:18:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  it is the degree of compromise that is the key (0+ / 0-)

        some compromise is good.  But when you are contemplating compromises on constitutional bedrock.... things get a bit hairy.

        Once you are willing to start compromising core principles they are no longer core principles.  They no longer have a value worth fighting FOR but rather a value worth trading for.

        And that is when you are totally lost, because you have started selling off parts of yourself, cannibalizing yourself, reducing yourself.  It is mechanically similar to being a junky selling yourself to get your fix.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site