Obama Spy Bill Vote Questioned At Netroots Nation

WSJ:

Sen. Barack Obama's support of a recent overhaul of domestic spy laws that rankled many on the left still has them rankled if the opening session at the annual Netroots Nation convention taking place in Austin, Texas, is any indication.

One of the first questions at a session on ground organizing run by Parag Mehta of the Democratic National Committee was about what Obama supporters should tell voters they meet while canvassing who are angry about his vote. Mehta inquired how many of the dozens of people in the room felt the same way-almost every hand in the room shot up.

Mehta offered a suggested line. Tell them "it was a bad bill but there were things in the bill worth fighting for," he said.

Read the whole story: WSJ

Comments

[hankandted]

Very good news that Mehta went to the bloggers and told them that they have to get off of the computer and out in their neighborhoods. Blogging does not win elections. Registering voters and making sure that voters vote is what wins elections.
Also working on protecting the votes by working with county officials before the election and protecting the voters and the votes at the polls during the election, i.e. troubleshooting. Not litigation afterwards or spouting off on the computer.

[abby4ever]

If you think it's bad over there, you should be here in the UK. The gov't has just proposed a massive, all-inclusive database...that will hold the details of our phone calls, emails, web site visits, and the like, all in the name of protecting us from terrorism and catching terrorists. Worse, this gov't, in the last year, has lost more sensitive info on its' citizens than you can imagine, they are really dumb at securing it.

The UK is a police state now, with our local councils spying on us---they have been doing this for a year but we only just found out about it a month ago, it was in all the papers and the gov't did not deny it.

They don't call Gordon Brown 'Stalin's little helper' for nothing.

[eden4barack08]

Mehta is an awesome organizer. “In the event of a schedule change, F#@% it, we’ll do it live!”

Hahaha, priceless.

[jacqmac]

HuffPost's Pick

The WALL STREET JOURNAL is suddenly a paragon of radical virtue? Since WHEN? Also, since Mr. Mehta suggested that anyone interested in working on the ground work in their own neighborhoods, I can tell you exactly what they will find in MY neighborhood. They will find people who are worried about paying the RENT, worried about their GROCERY BILL, trying to keep enough GAS in their vehicle in order to get to work IF they have a job, and worried about the kind of school their children will attend. They are also worried about their relatives and neighbors who are elderly and can't afford decent healthcare or the medication necessary for active conditions. They are worried that they will NEVER EVER be able to buy a house, no matter how much they save and sacrifice. And, since a goodly number of these neighbors of mine have SONS that are nearing the age of 18, they are worried that they will have nothing left to remember them by but a folded flag, EVEN IF the only way out for them is to join the military. THAT is what people in MY neighborhood are thinking about. NOT whether Obama voted yes or no or didn't vote at ALL on the FISA bill. I suggest that we heed the words of Mr. Mehta.

[Lemeritus]

Very eloquently stated, jacqmac. I would suggest to you that we are ALL concerned about the same things in OUR neighborhoods. At the root of the FISA conflict, however, is whether we can hope to have government and corporate accountability; without such accountability, how can we address the other issues you raise?

[hsk01945]

The straw that broke the Camel's back? Nobama votes "yea" on FISA. I am going to write in KUCINICH.

..and... I sent a note to the Nobama campaign: "I want my money back!"

[edwarvir]

good for you and while you are at it get some back from gwb too.

[MariaHopeful]

Er...how much exactly did you send? And where did you send your "note?"

FYI, that little Republican campaign of covertly encouraging people not to give, or to ask for their money back, failed. You need something new!

[JiminNC]

The K Street Journal is interested in this why?

[loper2008]

I am at the Netroots Nation conference and everyone here is 100% for Obama. Yes people are disappointed with his FISA vote and he will likely disappoint us again, but he will also move this country in the right direction. He will be open to changing the FISA laws when he is president and the left will have many victories, including new green policies, better educational programs, and health care. Obama is rebuilding the Democratic brand so that in the future even more progressive Dems will be able to be president.

The enthusiasm in Austin is very high.

[nippersdad]

I would be very interested in hearing about how Obama will be open to "changing the FISA laws" he has just voted to change for the worse and to immunize lawbreakers. Please expand on your statement, because "fifty years of Obama Democrats" covering up for government corruption does not sound like a particularly good deal to me. We have already had thirty years of that with Republicans, I don't think we can afford much more of it.

[holeybuybull]

loper2008, I'd prefer that Obama move the country in the "left" direction. I'm awed by your mindreading abilities. Principles, we don't need no stinkin' principles. We only demand them of our opponents. Actions speak louder than words. How can "accountability" be the new watchword if one doesn't hold their candidate to the same standard? Remember, W. ran as a "compassionate conservative". Choose the "red pill'.

[Gma11]

Thank you for your dose of common sense, loper.

[buckygreen]

Here is an interesting perspective on the FISA capitulation.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0715fisajul15,0,7695439.story

[Heaphy]

The netroots anger helps Obama in a very real sense because it conveys to middle-of-the-road voters that he is not beholden to the far left. Obama voted for the failed amendment to remove telecom immunity, and then voted in favor of a flawed bill, with the option to revisit the issue in the future. The bill won by a landslide vote - Obama's opposition would not have stopped it this time around. However, if all the angry netroots folks work to elect large Democratic majorities in both Houses this November, then President Obama can fix the situation in 2009. That's how real politics works, kids. Go do your homework and oust your local Republican Senator and Representative. Then we'll talk.
- Jim Heaphy

[nippersdad]

The netroots are not the only group outraged by the immunization of lawbreakers by a landslide vote; conservatives hate it too. This bill had no constituency but those law(breakers)makers in Washington. "That's how real politics works," and that, if I recall correctly, was what Obama was supposedly running AGAINST. I am glad that you have faith, but he really pissed off the agnostics.

[darthdarcy]

Time will tell just how much our nation and society will change due to this terrible Bill...

[coba]

these net root people are slowly reminding me of the hillary supporters saying there going to vote for mccain,,,,delusional. the net roots need to get over it. sensico.wordpress.com

[mikesw]

This isn’t about Telecoms avoiding a slap on the wrist.

This is about not holding our elected officials accountable for what they do. This is about keeping big government shielded from public scrutiny. This is about failing to staunchly support the 4th Amendment. This is about not upholding U.S. law and the unique form of government we enjoy in the U.S.

There is nothing ‘centrist’ about waffling on these issues.

Frankly, those who believe we should just ‘get over’ the abuses of the past (and the open door for abuses in the future) betray the very ideals on which our country was founded and demonstrate how elastic their own expectations for freedom, rule of law and the United States of America are.

[buckygreen]

Well said. Thank you.

[JiminNC]

Clearly you don't know what "this is about" since you seem to think the FISA bill has exonerated anyone in the government, or the telecoms for the matter, from criminal prosecution. The 4th ammendment is not concerned with civil liability and lawyers getting rich at the expense of the taxpayer. (And you can bet that is who would be bailing the telecoms out if civil suits were allowed by everyone whose 4th rights have been violated by Bushco).

This is not over and the 4th ammendment in unscathed.

[texanna]

Really? And just who do you think is going to criminally prosecute any of the Bushies? The DOJ? I don't think so! Furthermore, Shrub can give that last minute blanket pardon to the criminals involved which pretty effectively shuts the lid on that criminal prosecution thing. Now, don't you feel all warm and fuzzy about how easily Obama gave your right to privacy away for his political aspirations. There is a whole of company under this Obambus.

[mikesw]

Unless you believe that Obama, as President, would support a criminal investigation of telecommunications companies, yes, this law does close the door on finding out what was done and holding people accountable should they have broken U.S. law.

But, unfortunately, there is no reason to believe this will be the case.

For months now, Sen. Obama has staked his campaign (and need I say reputation) on transcending traditional partisanship in order to address the multiple challenges America faces today and in the future. Face it. There is no really chance that he will dig up past illegalities about a GOP administration; this would be perceived as a witch hunt and undermine any serious bipartisan efforts. A criminal investigation is about as likely to happen as President Bush’s impeachment after the Democrats took both the House and Senate in 2006.

[nippersdad]

The ACLU and associated groups which had cases overturned by this Bill are NON PROFITS. For the clearly uninitiated, that means that no lawyers were going to get rich off of the taxpayer.

Further, the bar for criminal prosecution is beyond a reasonable doubt; a VERY high hurdle to surmount. Particularly insofar as Congress won't even enforce it's own subpoenas for the information that would be needed in the face of virtually everything being locked up as a state secret by the Executive Branch. Criminal prosecution will never happen, civil suits were the only opportunity we had of anything coming to light in this matter. Government officialdom, therefore, has effectively been immunized from prosecution.

So, who was it who "clearly" didn't know what this was all about, again?

[holeybuybull]

JiminNC, I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

[NjT of DC]

Maybe next time the Telecoms won't be so willing to risk their livelihood for the sake of American lives. They cooperated as an act of patriotism in the interest of national security at a surprise moment in history when thousands of civilians had been killed by unknown assailants.

So let's keep barking about how they should be "punished" now for violating our privacy. Maybe next time we need them, the Telecoms will hesitate and drag things out to the fullest legal extent.

The constitution was written 221 years ago (amended along the way) by men as imperfect as we still are today. With not even a typewriter and with the biggest known national security threat probably being launched cannon balls-- founding fathers had no concept of the instant mass vulnerabilities of today's technology: nuclear missiles, computerized infrastructures, global communications, Internet....

So let's not get so high-minded about protecting our "rights" while ignoring that many of those same rights make us vulnerable to retaliation. Not everyone on the planet shares our values and some feel compelled to defend their "rights". And many don't take kindly to hearing their cultures disparaged and threatened by us daily with our free speech and free press and with loosely spouted threats.

Sometimes quick common sense in modern times will trump the brilliant but limited wisdom of a few men who sought to unite a nation but who still weren't even evolved to the point of treating every human being as their equal.

[buckygreen]

Well that was a very long way around saying the Constitution and the rule of law are anachronisms in the 21st century "modern" era of Warren Tar. Many would beg to differ.

But lets get one thing straight: the telecoms went along with this lawbreaking for two reasons, fear and greed. Patriotism had nothing to do with it.

[brighterside]

I don't see where greed has anything to do with this.

As far as I know the telecoms won't be making bank by eavesdropping. But I guess you know something I don't.

[111]

the telecoms were not acting because they are patriotic, they participated because that's how they get the government to grant them favors.

the administration had detailed information gathered by our Intelligence agencies and from overseas predicting the attacks within the US using planes as bombs and giving them a time frame. THEY CHOSE TO IGNORE IT. This is why there were hearings. Bush and Cheney agreed to testify as long as they could testify together, not under oath and there would be no record of what was said. There was plenty of testimony detailing the information that was provided but not acted upon. Do the Google.

This is the Total Information Awareness program that obtains, references, indexes and stores data on every American - J. Edgar Hoover's wet dream. Do the Google.

This is not to protect Americans, it is to control them.

Obama knows that FISA was not expiring and was fine as it was. He has trampled the Constitution along with Bush.

Now you can back to sleep.

[RTIII]

You are definetly one of the people Ben Franklin warned us about. You are NOT a patriotic American. You're a fearful coward who would be a traitor to the nation because of your fear.

There is NO reason to give up our rights in this or any other instance, especially when there was absolutely nothing wrong, nothing broken, about the system as it was before 9/11.

You ALSO conveniently forget that the spying began BEFORE September 11, 2001, and therefore your whole "surprise moment" argument is shown for the farce it is.
.

[holeybuybull]

Yes, the sooner we destroy "America", the less we'll have to worry about those nasty "terrorists" who want to attack us for our "freedoms".

[geobushono]

have you picked out a scepter?

[Wildcatdiva]

Move on!

[mindlessmissy]

.org ... Lol

[poropo]

Arrianna you should find something good to write, i dont think anyone is intrested

[deadbolt]

On the contrary, I am very interested in this issue and feel that it doesn't get enough coverage. The fact that Senator Obama threw us all under the bus to make himself look strong on terror is completely unforgivable. The Constitution is no small issue and when it is ravaged the way it was last week it is very newsworthy. Obama symbolizes all that is rotten and broken in our government. He campaigned as a progressive. I supported and donated to him as a progressive. He unequivocally stated that he would not vote for the bill if it contained immunity and went ahead and did it anyway. It is not a coincidence that Senator Obama has accepted more than $220,000 from telecom companies this year alone. He's a fraud, no more no less.

[rollingdivision]

He only cares about getting elected, nothing else.

[SMP]

Have you read the ENTIRE bill??? If you havent...I suggest you do so............Then make an EDUCATED decision on what kind of security we would have without the FISA bill.

I dont agree with the immunity part, but for my safety and the safety of others, I can make that sacrifice. Can you????

[JohnTalbutt]

Please note that you have attracted a wing nut with your over the top BS. If you thing that this is a historic violation of the 4th Amedment you should have been in the U.S. during the past 50 years. If you really care about the Consitution then welcome to the fight.

[edwarvir]

deadbolt it's impossible for Senator O to please everybody. So all of
you naysayer take your votes and.....................S them time will tell if he is a fraud