Hillary: Don't Expect Your Bashers to thank You for Doing the Right Thing on FISA

In January Democratic presidential contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton plainly and unequivocally said that they were deeply troubled by the Foreign Services Intelligence Act. They said it was far too weak in providing protections against the rampant abuses in domestic intelligence gathering operations. They were troubled most by the loose controls on warrantless wiretapping and the provision that granted immunity to telecommunications companies that engaged in reckless and borderline lawless surveillance of any and everyone who was deemed a potential terrorist threat. Clinton and Obama swore that they would not the support the bill with the dangerous lack of civil liberties safeguards. Both voted no on cloture.

But that was in January. Clinton kept her promise and voted against the bill. This is what Clinton said, "Congress must vigorously check and balance the president even in the face of dangerous enemies and at a time of war. That is what sets us apart. And that is what is vital to ensuring that any tool designed to protect us is used - and used within the law - for that purpose and that purpose alone."

Obama said nothing of the kind. How could he? He broke his promise and voted for the bill. Though he got some flak from the left, his fervent backers kicked into gear and did their customary double loops to massage, rationalize, pretty up, and apologize for his broken promise on FISA.
Clinton's opposition statement was straightforward, direct, and did not digress one bit from the words she used back in January to oppose the bill. But while Obama drew praise for his stated opposition in January and apologies for his reversal in July, Clinton drew deafening silence from the still legions of Clinton bashers for her courageous and principled stance.
.

Clinton had absolutely nothing to gain politically in voting for or against the bill. She is not running for office. She did not have to pander to conservatives, the defense establishment, the telecommunications industry, or the wide segment of voters jittery over a terrorist attack. She certainly didn't have to pander to Move on.org, the Nation, the Daily Kos, the Huffington Post, and the other relentless Hillary critics on the left. She voted conscience and principle. These are the two things that her rabid critics on the left and the right still take giddy delight in smearing her on as sorely lacking, while praising to the skies her opponent for allegedly having these qualities.

Clinton again proved them wrong. She made their Hillary bashing look even more silly and ridiculous. Message to Hillary: take heart you did the right thing, but don't hold your breath waiting for your critics to unloose their blinders and thank you for it.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His forthcoming book is How the GOP Can Keep the White House, How the Democrats Can Take it Back (Middle Passage Press, August 2008).

Comments

[Freesia2]

Hats off to her for her FISA vote. I'm not sure it warranted a whole defending article, bashing readers or Obama supporters before they even clicked, but then I don't see her as victim or a martyr, a woman in need of a knight in shining armor. Just a person who lost a primary.

Loosened my blinders..­.Nope.. Still just a contendor in a primary who lost. And voted well on FISA. Wish she'd have done the same on Iraq.

[bgregs]

Hey Earl, I think I'm offended!!! I've ALREADY thanked her for her great service to this nation!!!!!

[arthuride]

flip-flops are standard for political candidates. What the USA needs is not more politicians but statesmen. Hillary and Al Gore seem to be the only two who qualify as statemen. Now they would be a dream team.

[chicagojosh]

She's not running for president anymore, so she voted against immunity.

This isn't an apology by an Obama supporter, this is an explanation from a moderate American who wants someone running this country who realizes they of all people MUST find a middle ground when considering legislation.

[CitizenE]

Here it is Earl. I, an Obama supporter in the primaries, say good for Hillary Clinton. She was correct on this issue, and Obama should be critiqued for his vote, and his feet held to the fire on this issue if/when elected. But an even bigger and better huzzah for Chris Dodd, for leading as he consisitently has done in the Senate in way neither Obama nor Clinton have been able to muster the fire to do so. Now the real question I have for the "I Told You So, Sour Grapes" group of Hillary Clinton cult, such as yourself, is, she didn't win the nomination; when are you going to grow up and get over it?

[jmpurser]

Wow. A "bashers" post from the "left". Or at least from a Hillary supporter which come to think of it isn't really that shocking.

Earl, those of us who disagreed with Hillary and wanted pretty much anyone else to be the Democratic party candidate had a lot of reasons for our stance most of which had nothing to do with "bashing" her or anyone else with anything but her own record.

You are making a classic bush defense for Hillary. What does that tell you about your underlying cause?

[BillZBubb]

The truth is that Hillary Clinton is to the left of Obama on a number of key issues. So many people got duped by Obama's "anti-war" message and his smooth persona, that they perceived him as they wanted--as the progressive candidate. He's not that. In the primaries, of course, his campaign did everything to promote the progressive image, while in private planning a more "centrist" policy. The old bait and switch got them a big win in the primaries.

What is troubling is that so many progressives didn't see that Obama's insistence to "work with the other side" precludes any serious progressive initiatives. The other side doesn't play that game.

Certainly after FISA, AIPAC, faith based boondoggles, etc. some progressives must be having second thoughts about Obama. Unless the Kool Aid is too strong.

[MyNameIsJames]

If HRC had chosen to lead a filibuster then I would agree with you. HRC was a deeply flawed candidate and now we are seeing that Barack Obama is also.

I think that an Al Gore would have been able to make the case against both the Iraq War and FISA and still maintained high support across the nation.

[ColoradoAngryRU]

Well of course she voted against it. She had absolutely nothing to lose in doing the right thing unless it was a donation to her next campaign from the telecoms. I will thank her for doing the right thing, but the problem here lies in the fact that those who voted to give the telecoms immunity received a great big check from the telecoms. This has to cease! By the way,. I guarantee you, had she been the nominee, she too would have voted for a great big check.

[BusGreg]

Right on the button. As far as the rest of the bums in Congress are concerned, it is high time to throw them to the curb. Anymore a vote for the "lesser" of two evils doesn't make it past the smell test. As long as there is a (R) or (D) next to the name I'll keep looking for a third party candidate or Independant rather tan voting for (D) just because (R) is an even worse choice.