Surveillance Protest Group Now Tops Obama Website

So a grassroots group of activists has been organizing on MyBo, Obama's official social networking portal, to protest the Senator's recent decision to back controversial legislation granting the president more spying powers. The effort hit a big milestone on Tuesday afternoon: It is now the largest self-organized group on Obama's website, topping networks that were launched over a year ago. The spying protest, "Senator Obama - Please Vote NO on Telecom Immunity - Get FISA Right," launched last week. (I posted about it on HuffPo and for The Nation here.)

Membership spiked to about 8,900 people on Tuesday, edging out a student group with roughly 8,600 members, and one organizer estimated that the growth rate reached a rapid four percent during the daytime. The group initially spread through the Obama network, since the site's platform instantly connects members through a dedicated email listserve. On Monday, for example, over 200 emails shot across the wire, reaching the roughly 2,300 members who opted to receive individual messages. The exchanges ranged from policy debates, like whether immunity was acceptable if the telephone companies acted in good faith, to organizing strategies, such as promoting the group on sharing sites like Digg. Then some activists open-sourced the project, creating a wiki-hub for additional actions -- from calling Obama's office to urging Keith Olbermann to promote the group -- and launched partner groups on other sites like Facebook.

"To reach number one, we're going to need all of us to start talking to -- and emailing -- their family and friends," wrote blogger Mike Stark in a missive to the group at 3:46am on Monday. "[Obama] said he'd open up government and respond to the people instead of the special interests," he added, "so let's force him to respond." Stark also recruited members at the blog OpenLeft, while the group began drawing traffic from coverage in Wired, The Nation, TPM, Time, and The New York Times.

The effort comes in a pivotal period for Obama, who is tapping his enthusiastic base for fundraising and voter turnout, yet shifting his message to prioritize general election themes. In many Democratic presidential campaigns, this is precisely the time when the base is ignored -- or even defied to demonstrate the candidate's independence and "centrism." Obama's base activists, however, are still getting heard.

They are reaching each other directly, through the campaign's network, and indirectly, with blogs and reporters covering their argument that Obama should not have backtracked on civil liberties. So far, Obama has not responded substantively, though his campaign was forced to acknowledge the "dialogue" under media prodding. But from the message boards, it looks like most group members want Obama to respond by reaffirming his original opposition to the White House spying bill, not simply acknowledging the conversation.

While Obama's advisers may view this week's activism as inevitable liberal tensions in a general election -- an odd gloss, given the Fourth Amendment's bipartisan credentials -- the key dynamic is the development of a sophisticated network of activists. After all, they're not asking the candidate to be more liberal, they're asking him to hold strong on his own promise to oppose the spying legislation.

Even conservative bloggers are impressed that the Obama Campaign provides an open platform for supporters to organize against the candidate's position. "Rather than react in accordance with the practices of most campaigns by shutting and muffling dissent," observed the GOP blog The Next Right, "Obama is providing dissidents (many of whom are supporters of his) the opportunity to organize on his campaign web-site." The blog contrasted the approach to top-down campaigns on the right. "Can you imagine a Bush campaign reacting like this? I can't."

Netroots activists are imagining -- and demanding -- an even more receptive response from Obama.

Ari Melber is the Net movement correspondent for The Nation, where this first appeared.

Continue the discussion at the Net Movement Politics Facebook Group.

Comments

[PeaSoupandHash]

You all didn't listen when many of us declared Obama to be an empty suit early on.

Now it's time for you to pay the piper.

[Tulka2]

Just to keep a little perspective...? I am old as dirt, but am told by my student friends that anyone with a little hacking knowlege can "wiretap" just about anyone else, anywhere in the world. Entities outside this country can listen with no fear of our courts at all. The FISA question, while philisophically interesting, is moot considering modern technology. Things are changing too fast for the laws to keep up. Are we really going to tar and feather Obama for what is essentially a gone issue?

[WineWonkette]

Interestingly enough, "mybarackobama.com" is closed as of July 3, 2008, reportedly to be Undergoing "Maintenance". Every OTHER part of the site is working, however.

[bubfranks]

yup, the emails to the SO-PVAF group stopped flowing about 2 hours ago

[JohnTalbutt]

Are folks aware that there was more wire tapping before FISA than afterward? When a court does issue a warrant it is still secret. Wire taps without a warrant are common and law enforcemnt is hardly ever prosecuted for it. The information obtained just can't be used in court.

I am not saying this is unimportant. But how about some concern for incipient fascism. What about the government financing armed rightwing mercernaries within the U.S. who have tanks, jets and helicopters and have sent armed men into New Orleans during the flood.

We can't defend the Constitution and not defeat Mccain. Dont be adjusting your collar while a noose is being slipped around your neck.

[JamesRiddle]

Obama is making a grave error. Apparently I am not the only one who thinks so. Almost to a person every one of my Democratic freinds ( none Utopian dreamers) are dissapointed to the point of not showing up for him in November. Not to the point of voting for McCain like some masochistic Hillary supporters but dissilusoned enough to stay home election day. Admittedly not a cross section focus group but a foreboding none the less.You know that inner voice that tells you it's too good to be true, grow up, don't be so naive? The voice or thought that lurked in the cranial recesses of even his most ardent early supporters? Well, it come to fruition. The brand new day rug is pulled from under our feet. Senator Obama, you are not going to win this thing with these newly discovered watered down views. If they are not really your opinions but the advice of a strategist do yourself a favor and fire that prehistoric hack. The blowback you are getting from your supporters ought to be sufficent enough to convince you to cut this homogenized crap out right away. What has positioned you to take the top slot in the corporation was the progressive reformer figure you cut. These new positions are not "playing it safe". They are poltical suicide.

[imusintheevening]

If Obama votes for immunity there will be a valid reason for activists to not vote in November.

[GravitonX]

Even Napoleon had a Waterloo...

[vonny]

I doubt we will ever unify over this election because the candidate who won, did NOT get picked as our nominee.
You know, it wouldn"t have been so bad if the DNC had not given Obama all the undecided votes in Mi.

Having Nancy Polosi, Coward Dean and the rest of that sorry low down crowd turning a blind eye to the way Hillary was treated.

Turn Florida"s voters into half people¦ but noooo they had to steal 4 delegates from Hillary and gift wrap them for Obama; that totally pissed me off.

I don"t give a crap now. If George Bush was running again I would vote for him, just to get back at the DNC.

A women scorned?? You bet your ass I am.
Soooo DNC, as Donna Brazill and the rest of you are saying,

get over it¦ PUMA

[stop7997]

Ahhh, for the days of back-alley abortions. I hear you sister!

[111]

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

Glen Greenwald's excellent post about the bs being used to justify Obama's about face. Obama's adviser claims that accepting telecom immunity is needed because "with FISA expiring, that it was better to get a compromise than letting the law expire." The fact is FISA isn't going to expire.

Greenwald confronts this lie and the adviser then claims it is the expiration of warrants issued under the Protect America Act that Obama wants to prevent.

Greenwald goes on to point out that Obama voted against the Protect America Act last year. These warrants that Obama supposedly wants to keep in place now would never have been issued if Obama had his way.

How sad.

[Tomlastliberalleft]

Our nations history is littered with the occasional tinkering all branches of the Federal government find necessary in time of war. During the cold war all sorts of actions (surveillance, wire-tapping, mail opening) were justified, as measures furthering the national security. FISA resulted from the public outrage over these activities. We do not live in the pastoral civility of the late 1800"s. What is pre-eminent here is the public"s reasonable assumption that the 4th Amendment is not wadded up and thrown out with the junk mail. This nation is at war and what that means to those who have been or will soon be in a position of leadership is a necessity to act in favor of both the citizen soldier and the citizen at home. Both have a reasonable expectation that the leadership is free to act such the "common good" is preserved. I feel Obama understands clearly what is a stake here and what needs to be done to allow for the protection of our principles. It may be possible to refine the application of the laws in the future to preclude the excesses visited upon the nation by the Republicans, to act now in such a way as play into the hands of the reactionary forces still with us is not the wise thing to do. The goal of this campaign is unification and to trend away from polarization. That is a historical process, proven many times to be our best course in troubled times.

[Beninn]

You may want to read and consider this, about BO and just what in tarnation he is up to:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/19/obama/index.html

The money that you're not sending to O b a m a might be better spent going to true progressive Regina Thomas's campaign:

http://reginathomas4congress.com/

[AnotherMcIntosh]

Absolutely outrageous!

I'll send her a check today.

[aubrey8]

Obama really was a fairy tale.

[Trollstakeyourmeds]

A lot of us knew that since the beginning. The rest are starting to find out.

[dixieluke]

While I may not agree with Obama's vote on FISA, I can tell you that I've uncovered many Republicans who are invading the Obama sites to stir up trouble on this. I believe there may be thousands involved. While Obama supporters are indeed concerned and upset about this vote, I've personally uncovered several on the Obama sites I've searched. My job requires a lot of research, and I have many resources available to me. It doesn't take a lot of sleuthing to find them. Indeed, the clues are in the open. Some of ones I uncovered were claiming they were asking for their donations back or withholding donations. I understand if some Obama supporters are deeply concerned, but the Republicans are all over this inside the Obama listings, and Obama supporters need to be savvy about who is stirring the pot. While there are legitimate concerns, there are many, many Republicans who are using this as a covert way to elect McCain.

[Beninn]

dixieluke, let's say that there are Republicans and not Democrats "invading sites to stir up trouble on this". What are they doing? The only incorrect information being published about this on websites is that it's no big deal, or that BO is somehow on the correct side of the issue which is patently absurd.

This is a problem for BO, but it's an even bigger problem for us, for Democrats. For the last couple of weeks, BO has made one detour after another, abandoned not only his base of supporters, but gone completely off his campaign's message.

[Mogamboguru]

You are absolutely right. I cosign that.

[Brooklynindy]

Dixieluke, I'm skeptical about your claimed ability to "uncover many Republicans who are invading..." Please. Don't exaggerate.

Count me as a genuine Obama supporter who is withholding donations. I'm the real deal. Research away, you who "have many resources available to you."...

[MargaretO]

I suspect you are correct with some of them. As we all know from a former election, the Repubs are not above paying and flying in a bunch of operatives to throw an election their way. Remember Florida?

Then, some are so far left and so unwilling to listen to anyone else that they have the same tactics that the far right utilize all the time. Unfortunately, the far lefties ruin it for all Dem's by their actions. It's their way or the highway. They are just as unpleasant as the far right.

Progress doesn't happen by ramming your opinion down your opposer's throat and expect them to like it. Even when they internally know you are correct. Progress happens when you negotiate. Bush's era happens, when you don't negotiate.

Barack Obama has always been very upfront about his bipartisanship. He's always been upfront about bringing everyone to the table. From wanting to take the correct position of having dialogue with our enemys to working to come to agreements with all parties of this country. He's been upfront about it all. He's never promised to be able to flip a switch to make all righties turn left. Taking a hard line stance on everything that comes our way is not going to make progress. Small steps can start more successful turns.

I'm backing Barack Obama all the way, to have the wisdom to negotiate the path away from the disastrous Bush era.

An independent, 54 yo, white female.

[Trollstakeyourmeds]

WHAT?? You mean you aren't blaming the Clintons? WOW! Will wonders never cease.

[j0em0mma]

Please take a look at this:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/2/135358/9498/696/545443

and maybe the other 360 stories on the site... it might become clear why this is a big deal.

[mikesw]

I'm not sure how failing to defend vigorously the 4th Amendment or to hold accountable those who may have broken the law is a "move to the center".

This is a right or wrong issue. I don't see much of an ideological spectrum here.

The best one can argue is that Sen. Obama is some sort of legislative pragmatist willing to settle for less.

[Mogamboguru]

One wonders,

how much the big media outlets may have donated to the Obama-campaign lately, to make his switch of opinion "possible"...

[marthlois]

http://www.truthout.org/article/congressional-resolution-demands-bush-act-iran
This is some serious s.@T!!!! CALL YOUR REPRESENATIVES BEFORE THIS
SLIPS THROUGH as another Bush avenue towards war. PLEASE!!

Congressional Resolution Demands Bush Act on Iran
Monday 23 June 2008
A non-binding resolution to demand that President Bush impose "stringent inspection requirements" on trade with Iran - language that leaves the door open for a military blockade - will likely come to the House floor this week, according to sources close to Congressional leadership. The legislation, H.Con.Res.362, which is paralleled by a similar Senate bill, has gained bipartisan support rapidly, with more co-sponsors signing on by the day. Once it hits the floor, it's bound to "pass like a hot knife through butter," a staffer in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office told Chelsea Mozen of the nonprofit Just Foreign

[Sargoth]

This is exactly the sort of thing I feared from Obama. He talked the big talk to get the liberals behind him, but now he's running to the right for the general election. The man can't take a stand and mean it; he's shrewd as hell and will manipulate the People to get into office. Once he's there, who knows what he'll really do.

I want to trust Obama, I really do; I sure as hell don't want McCain, but I want to see Obama take a stand. Trust needs to be EARNED. I feel like the Democrats have never really done anything to stand up to Bush and his way of conducting business. If Obama caves on FISA, then Bush just makes the left look like spineless fools again. Compromise is wrong in this case. Obama should stand up for freedom, if that's what he believes. Otherwise it's not "Change We Can Believe In," it's the status quo.

At least he's allowing detractors to voice their opinion. That makes me feel a little bit better, but he could still go either way with this. If it gets to be too much, he could shut them down or change his tune.

[shotdsherrif]

By "running to the right" don't you perhaps mean running to the center?
Is it possible your view is so skewed that you can't tell the difference?

[j0em0mma]

nope

[JMorgan]

He came from the center, gave leftists within the Democratic Party what looks now to be false hope that his was a grassroots, bottom up movement, and has been running to the right since he secured the nomination.

To my way of thinking, getting bogged down in "he's running to the center", "no, he's running to the right" is but a useless distraction from the fact that he's clueless about the basics that Democrats hold sacred: Civil Rights protections.

This has, justifiably, made Democrats from every interest group suspicious of just who is this man and what other of our values is he so cavalier about trading away?

[Drewkowski]

If you are to the left, isn't the center to the right of you, genius?

[jacqmac]

Senator Obama stated that he would filibuster the FISA bill SPECIFICALLY on the immunity clause. UNfortunately (?) Senator Obama became the Democratic nominee for President during the time that this bill was run through the House (SEVERAL of his supporters voted against it) and into the Senate. A list of 15 Democrats was recently published here on Huffpost as having the 'balls' to filibuster against cloture. I am virtually POSITIVE that Senator Obama would have done the same thing IF he weren't BUSY RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT! Therefore, he had 15 SURROGATES representing him in the Senate. He has NOT backed down from any position that he ever held on FISA. He has granted us the statement that even this compromise was NOT PERFECT, that it was NOT what he WANTED. However, he has also clearly pointed out that this bill is better than NOTHING which granted even FURTHER illegal moves to Telecoms, with NO regulation or even a THREAT of regulation of their moves. Obama can't 'pardon' or 'convict' or 'prosecute' ANY of these Telecoms for criminal acts IF HE'S NOT PRESIDENT! And folks-he's right! "Joe Average American" is NOT staying awake at night thinking about war crimes. He's too busy worrying about how to pay for the gas to get to his dead-end low-paying job so he can buy more gas and food and clothes for his wife and kiddies....get it? got it? GOOD!

[doglove]

The laws of this country work for everyone or they work for no one. Are you willing to be okay with it when he pardons Bush Crime Family for war crimes?

He specifically said he would not do this and he has announced he will vote for this bill. He LIED. Let's use the real word this time around. All the dancing around with Bush, and 'misled, manipulated intelligence, blah, blah', when they should have been saying "he lied".

This is not generic, right, left, center stuff, he said he would NOT GRANT IMMUNITY to these criminals, period. So everyone in congress should just vote the way the republicans want them to and then say "when I'm President, I'll change it"??? At this rate, he probably never will be president.

[doglove]

Who benefits from this? Bush and his spies. You don't think it would be a better statement for democrats to stand up to republicans, than to absolve them from their criminal intent? Isn't this what we have been waiting for for seven years - accountability? No more rubber stamp, no more abuses of power? Bush is the most criminal president in my lifetime and I lived through Nixon. So, who is Obama placating with this? Does he want to be like Joe Lieberman and be elected by the republicans? Another Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid? Soon he'll be saying "prosecuting any of them is off the table", just like Nancy.

The reason our country is such a mess is because of compromises like this. Because the democrats never stand up for what is right, and now this time for the law of the country. What happened to "change" and "no more politics as usual'? You are saying politics as usual is fine, as long as it is Obama.

I laughed my ass off when he said , "it'll be okay, because this time it will be ME watching, and I won't abuse it".

Famous last words of all dictators.

Now he is going to expand Bush's faith based initiatives?

IHe does not deserve to be president. Next week he'll start pulling out on his anti-war stance, soon there will be nothing left. There goes your American Idol president, but what a swagger what confidence. Gee, that sounds so familiar.