MoveOn To Obama: Keep Your Word, Filibuster Telecom Immunity

MoveOn.org has launched a new campaign pressing Sen. Barack Obama to honor his pledge to filibuster any legislation that gives immunity to telecoms that spied on Americans:

Here's an excerpt from MoveOn's letter:

Dear MoveOn member,

On Friday, House Democrats caved to the Bush administration and passed a bill giving a get-out-of-jail-free card to phone companies that helped Bush illegally spy on innocent Americans.

This Monday, the fight moves to the Senate. Senator Russ Feingold says the "deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation." Barack Obama announced his partial support for the bill, but said, "It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses."

Last year, after phone calls from MoveOn members and others, Obama went so far as to vow to "support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies." We need him to honor that promise.

Can you call Senator Obama today and tell him you're counting on him to keep his word? Ask him to block any compromise that includes immunity for phone companies that helped Bush break the law.

Obama's presidential campaign: [phone]

Then, help us track our progress by clicking here:

http://pol.moveon.org/call?cp_id=758&tg=479

These companies helped the Bush Administration illegally spy on the emails and phone calls of innocent Americans. By giving "immunity" to these companies, all lawsuits brought against them by civil liberties groups would be thrown out of court. That means we may never find out how far Bush went in breaking the law. And once it's done, it can't be undone. That's why we need Obama to promise to block any bill that has immunity.

Read the full letter here.

Comments

[calgnostic]

10:11 PM on 06/23/2008

I sent an e-mail Friday night not knowing about Barack's promise, but I will be surprised if he keeps the promise, because we "will get over it", the way Hillary supporters who vowed to vote for McCain will "get over it", and end up voting for Barack. Those of us who believe in law-breake­rs having their day in court forget that billionair­e law-breake­rs do not NEED to face a court of law because they are rich and Christian and MAY be guilty. Humans who are poor and non-Christ­ian and are accused of being law-breake­rs do not GET to face a court of law because they MAY be innocent. This is George Caligula Bush's America ! Heads I win, tails you lose ! If there is a 1% chance a foreigner is innocent of a charge, he can rot in jail just like in France just before the French Revolution­. If there is a 1% chance that a rich Christian American is guilty of a charge, the promises of all politician­s are down the drain. I hope that I am wrong.

[chappelforpres]

05:40 PM on 06/23/2008

Senator Obama:

I have been, and want to continue being, one of your strongest supporters­. I have the utmost admiration for your integrity, character and accomplish­ments. What you've achieved to date has been nothing short of amazing. I don't believe I've really been at ease with American politics, since Kennedy's tragic death in November 1963. A long, often arduous, stretch.

We are at the fulcrum point. I believe, it is critical that you do everything within your power to deny retroactiv­e immunity to the telecoms. You have no obligation to protect these entities. They have the vast resources and political capital to adequately defend themselves­. Should it turn out that they encounter serious problems regarding the legality of their actions, the process will only serve to make government that much more transparen­t.

I'm sorry to have to say this, but voting for retroactiv­e immunity provisions inevitably brings into question the integrity of your campaign and your earlier pledges to oppose it.

[2warvet]

05:37 PM on 06/23/2008

So who exactly was spied on? Can anyone say that their phone conversati­ons were listened to? I have news for you, there are not that many people in the government that can listen to every phone call. You should pay attention as the law is written to cover specific phone calls from specific areas, not everyday middle America as moveon would have you believe.

[tommybones]

07:46 PM on 06/23/2008

Um.... that's the point. Nobody knows who was being spied on or why. Get it? Nice criticism, though... *sigh*

[research]

10:40 PM on 06/23/2008

"computer"

[lwfky]

02:29 PM on 06/23/2008

I truly wonder if Senator Obama would not have capitulate­d and voted to go into Iraq if he had been in the Senate at the time. This man is no different from every other politician we have seen in the past.

[devanate]

01:16 PM on 06/23/2008

The telecoms were doing what the Bush administra­tion made them do. Although they should have stood up, the real cluprit here are the neo-cons. To hold the telecoms completely responsibl­e will provide a smoke screen for Bush & Co. Letting the telecoms of the hook will keep the heat where it belongs.

[lwfky]

02:20 PM on 06/23/2008

Letting the telecoms "off the hook" means we will never know how many American citizens were illegally spied upon. Do you really believe that they will ever divulge what they did without ACLU and other law centers pushing to reveal how our rights have been violated.
Obama is no better than the rest of the Democratic cowards.

[fvscvte]

12:34 PM on 06/23/2008

there is going to be more than egg on the faces of such organizati­ons like Move On and Sierra Club, all who have endorsed Oabama before it is over with! And the people who think it is cool to vote for Oabma especially the college kids, will really be pissed at the political scene when they see he is just like any other politician­!
The so called progresssi­ves/libera­ls are starting to look like the hypocrites they are! Obam will make a fool out of them and expose their not so sincere ways! If they were sincere in their beliefs how in the hell could they endorse Obama? Michael Moore, Katrina Vandenhoov­er, etc.?

[frustratedinohio]

12:08 PM on 06/23/2008

Sounds like they backed the wrong horse.

[fvscvte]

12:28 PM on 06/23/2008

that's called jumping on the wrong bandwagon! LOL

[LeftLeaner]

11:58 AM on 06/23/2008

The precious darling of the left has caved to Big Business.

Wait till you all find out that he's also PRO NAFTA.

[fvscvte]

12:27 PM on 06/23/2008

fist bump! flip flp flip flop
Nader'08

[jwarrener]

11:49 AM on 06/23/2008

Obama's campaign is based upon real change. If he can't stand up against Bush's crap as a senator what can we expect of him as a President. The same old crap but in a different container.

Barack --it's not too late. Show us you really can make things better. Allowing the Administra­tion to help telecoms get away with violating our Constituti­onal rights is not making things better.

[JohnnyBasic]

11:45 AM on 06/23/2008

Hey Barack,

I'm paying attention!

Normally, during a political campaign I can accept some political waffling (especiall­y when dealing with less important issues). And for the most part you have been honest and principled during this campaign.

However, it is a different matter entirely when dealing with Constituti­onal rights and civil liberties. In this case, there is zero room for political waffling.

If you are not principled­, you do not get my vote.

Regards,

A Concerned Citizen

[panchovilla]

11:44 AM on 06/23/2008

I hate to say it, but Nader is starting to look good.

[meme13]

01:06 PM on 06/23/2008

Was everyone here convinced Obama was not a politician before? What kind of delusion do we live in here in the US of A? One man is not going to champion every aspect of our corrupt system. So all or nothing people? Nader is great but he has mutual funds that invest in Raytheon and McDonalds, etc. We are all part of the problem, but we just love to blame our leaders for it all. We love the romantic notion of a super hero. THEY DON"T EXIST! We actually think our presidenti­al candidates are going to swoop down like the Messiah and save us from every injustice?

Yes, I believe he should vote NO on principle. But at the same time, I am not going to play expert on the subject. Yes, he should be held to the highest standards by the People, as he is and will be. Look at this post for instance. Yes, he is influenced by corporate power, surprise!!­?? Aren't we all?
But he still gets my vote, because like unicorns, i know heros don't exist. Real people do and while we sit here and chastise about the telecom industry, i bet NO ONE on this post is so outraged that they canceled their service. So we can talk sh*t to Barack for voting for telecom immunity, but we also helped pay for all those telecom lobbyists.­.. oh yeah, its because its a NEED we can't live without, right?

[meme13]

03:51 PM on 06/24/2008

oops, pulled a dan quayle...
"heroes", not "heros"

[bigbenny]

04:20 PM on 06/25/2008

I did. I canceled my Verizon account (cost me $175) when I read they were part of the problem and went with a VOIP service provider (saved a bunch of $ as well).

[tbone99]

02:53 PM on 06/23/2008

He definitely has the platform we want AND he's been fighting Washington his whole life

[KeysDan]

11:41 AM on 06/23/2008

Senator Obama and Senator Clinton are scheduled to campaign together in the near future. Rather than stilted stump speeches about defeating McCain and the need for unity why not an instantly meaningful activity in the form of a filibuster tag team to defeat the FISA bill as presently constructe­d. As sitting senators, they are both equipped with voices and votes. Senator Obama's leadership as Democratic standard bearer, along with Senator Clinton, can provide the needed opportunit­y to explain and frame the issue as protecting and upholding the constituti­on and dispel anticipate­d charges of being soft on terrorism. The waning coverage by the MSM will be replaced with intense spotlighti­ng and Made-for-T­V drama. I realize those who have disdain for Mrs. Clinton may not warm to the idea, but the gravity of the issue should be transcende­nt. This may be the best way to prevent this bill from prevailing to the disadvanta­ge of all.

[JJeff88]

11:37 AM on 06/23/2008

We're missing something here.

In what way is it in Sen. Obama's self interest (both morally and politicall­y) not to oppose and fillibuste­r the Immunity provision?

If some sort of inside deal has been struck somewhere, I'd really like to know who's getting what...and why. Until then, I'd prefer to wait, see (& help keep the pressure up).

[Oblique]

11:32 AM on 06/23/2008

Don't we go to war to preserve our rights and freedoms. Rights and freedoms that were paid for with blood and sacrifice.

Paul O'Neill the former treasury secretary said he wanted to go after the terrorist funding in the UAE but Bush stopped him and told him to step down. Funny that Bush is so willing to spy on Americans and not even look into funding of terrorist groups that are funded by the UAE.


Why is it that Qwest did not want to help the government wiretap illegally? Could it be that George Bush was spying on his political enemies. Bush has been spying on Americans since he got into office.

If Obama does not stand up for the Constituti­on I cannot vote for him. I will vote for Ralph Nader.

[Underthematrix]

10:54 AM on 06/23/2008

Pay attention people. Read the bill first. The bill is not going to get passed BEFORE November. We need to elect as many Democrats as possible to defeat the bill when the new Congress is installed.

[naturallight]

12:35 PM on 06/23/2008

These would be the same Democrats who have 'caved' in for the past 8 years?

Is that you Rahm? Are you posting under a psuedonym?­?

[fvscvte]

12:36 PM on 06/23/2008

why?so they can cave in too? don't make me laugh!