Obama explains FISA vote

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Cleverboy, Jul 5, 2008.

  1. Cleverboy macrumors 65816

    Cleverboy

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    #1
    Obama's response:
    Posted on my.barackobama.com and Huffington Post:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/my-position-on-fisa_b_110789.html
    http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rospars/gGxsZF
    General thread on FISA:
    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=504044

    Harry Reid's opposition:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/24/reid-wont-support-fisa-co_n_109036.html
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/201032.php
    Struggle, struggle. Trying days. Ponder, ponder. Shades of gray.

    ~ CB
     
  2. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #2
    or not. so much for the 4th amendment. obama is becoming just as bad as mccain? what happened to "change"? :mad:
     
  3. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #3
    Obama's stance on FISA is crap. It's a cheap dodge, an election-year pander to try to attract enough "Obamacons" for victory. Obviously I recognize that now that the primaries are over, it's time to tack to the center; but tacking to the center doesn't mean pissing on the Constitution.

    And of course he's doing it to avoid being painted as "weak on terrorism" by the mighty GOP wurlitzer that is being cranked up. But the issue isn't as potent as the GOP would like to believe. Recent victories by Democrats in red territory dispel that myth. The GOP made it a point to criticize these Democrats on their FISA stance -- and the Democrats won anyway. So not only is Obama selling out his supporters, he's doing it for no good reason. The public doesn't support telecom welfare.

    But the GOP still gets these results from some candidates through fear of attack ads. Sad.
     
  4. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #4
    Wonder what he'll cave in on next? He'd better be real careful. He's going to start losing people like crazy if he keeps this up.
     
  5. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #5
    Funny that it's only the Democrats who feel the need to tack to the center. It's sad that I'm a member of a party of panderers.
     
  6. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #6
    what do you think mccain has been doing with all his back and forth? its called pandering too.
     
  7. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #7
    Oh, don't get me wrong--I know.

    I guess, I should alter what I said: Every credible presidential candidate is a panderer, and much to my chagrin, each panders to the right of his political views.
     
  8. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #8
    He won't lose that many people. Seriously, how many people who are criticizing Obama from the left are going to vote for John McCain? Not many. Anyone who's afraid Obama will not get the troops out of Iraq fast enough, for example, isn't likely to vote for John "100 more years in Iraq" McCain.

    As for me, I'm not giving up on Obama anytime soon. I simply refuse to carry water for him, or anyone else for that matter. When he does something I don't agree with, I'm not going to be shy about saying so. That doesn't mean I previously worshipped Obama, viewed him as a savior, or had him up on some kind of pedestal. He and I are going to disagree on many issues. But I know I'll agree with Obama more often than I will agree with McCain.
     
  9. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #9
    I definitely agree with this post. I'm going to vote for him, because he's better than the other option, but I don't consider him to be the historically transformative politician that the buzz would suggest. My fear is that his support is rooted in so much teenage irrationially-idealistic fervor that his not unexpected pandering will dampen the turnout.
     
  10. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #10
    He's already lost a lot of people I know. They're either voting for Nader or sitting out. I can't blame them after this and the faith-based initiative thing. I'm getting more worried myself. And we're not talking pot-smoking hippie kids. The people I'm talking about make well into six figures or higher and are my age or older. It's sad, but nothing I say can convince them. Their opinion is that if McCain wins, the dems blew it again and maybe next time when people have had enough, they'll stand up for what they believe in a bit more. I'm not saying I agree with this, just telling you what I'm hearing.
     
  11. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #11
    it really is a shame that all 3rd party initiatives barely try a thing. if the green party or any third party entered the system from the bottom and worked up you'd see the repubs and dems wake up a bit methinks.
     
  12. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    But see, the bet by the Obama camp is that he'll lose a lot fewer of those types than he'll gain among conservative-leaning independents.

    The hard-core party faithful will vote their party. Right now there's at least a statistically significant edge to the Democrats on the basis of party identification. That's roughly 2/3s of the electorate with a slight but distinct advantage to the Democrats. But the other third decides the elections. Win the independents, win the election. Obama is betting that independents find a "tough stance on terrorism" (aka caving on FISA) more palatable than the alternative.

    I don't agree with it. I think he's wrong that it's as serious a vulnerability as his campaign obviously thinks it is. But I think he looks at the numbers and thinks they work better for him this way.

    But still, when he's wrong, he's wrong; and he's wrong here. Telecom amnesty is not a hard sell. The GOP is going to attack you as weak on terrorism no matter how cravenly you cave to them, so stiffen up that spine and don't sell out the Constitution in an attempt to avoid the inevitable. Make the issue into something akin to Nixon's claim that "if the president does it, it's not illegal". Most Americans would reject the notion of the POTUS as king, able to order citizens to break the law in secrecy and with no repercussions.
     
  13. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #13
    You took the words right out of my mouth.

    The only person I'm going to agree with 100% of the time is me, so until I'm running for president, I can't vote for someone whose views are identical to mine. But I agree with Obama a hell of a lot more than I agree with McCain, and I think that despite his stance on FISA and faith-based initiatives, he's still going to do a lot of good for this country that McCain or no republican ever will.

    With so much at stake this election, this simply isn't the time to be a one-issue voter. It's either continue the disastrous policies of the past 7 years that have sent our country down the toilet, or elect for some kind of change. Perhaps if McCain was the moderate he was in 2000, being a one-issue voter might be a bit more acceptable, but this year, it just isn't. You have to look at the bigger picture.
     
  14. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #14
    Oh- I know why he did it. That much is obvious. The people I'm talking about know why he did it too. They've just had enough I suppose. I don't wish to see a repeat of the 2000 election, and I'm afraid we could- because right now, Obama's looking pretty spineless to a lot of people.
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    Spineless and stupid to boot for buying into the idea that it would hurt him so badly.

    But the enthusiasm gap between parties is still pretty stark. Obama's still up in the poll snapshots. I'm not seeing the broader pain.
     
  16. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #16
    not yet at least. but its a dangerous line he is walking. and thin.

    i'm beginning to feel more and more apathetic toward him every day. yes i will more than likely vote for him, but its only because he's not mccain, but i do ask myself when things like this happen: is he really all that different than mccain? at least in principle.
     
  17. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #17
    In a word, yes. How, for example, would a McCain SCOTUS pick be different from an Obama SCOTUS pick? How would a McCain economic package look, from the perspective of a middle-class voter, versus an Obama economic package? How would a McCain foreign policy differ from a George W. Bush foreign policy, and how would that differ from an Obama policy? The list goes on and on.

    People asked themselves whether Al Gore really would be all that different from George W. Bush back in 1999. In fact, that was Nader's campaign premise. I think we can today safely say that their paths would have been radically different as president. So too, with McCain and Obama.
     
  18. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #18
    i'm not arguing that. i said principle. i guess i could have worded it better. but spinless and pandering is something they're both doing. which is to say i guess are their personal principles all that different? do they have no scruples?
     
  19. danny_w macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #19
    It's unfortunate for all of us that Obama is showing himself to be nothing more than a politician after all. He had a lot of people hoodwinked before the primaries were over that maybe he really was a serious candidate that eschewed politics for what is right. Now we know better. Like any "good" politician he changes his views to suit the audience, and to get the most votes in any way that he deems necessary. That is not the Obama that I voted for in the primary. Perhaps he is still better than McCain at this moment in time, but he is rapidly changing that position every moment.
     
  20. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #20
    Perhaps I wasn't being clear enough. Obama's personal principles will guide him in his selection of a SCOTUS justice, just as would McCain's, and just as George W. Bush's principals influenced his SCOTUS picks. Bush's strongly pro-business SCOTUS picks reflect his personal principals.

    The president's personal principals will shape their economic packages, their foreign policies, and many other aspects of their campaign.

    Spinelessness and pandering are only two principals out of many. And since both candidates seem to have both in spades, it falls to other areas where there are differences to evaluate them.

    And if you voted for Obama under the impression that he was some kind of perfect progressive, you are just as mistaken as those who voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004 under the impression that he was a perfect conservative.
     
  21. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #21
    i see where you're coming from, and i'll concede on some of the points, sure. but this still doesn't make me wonder just what else he will cave on.

    and i have never thought Obama was super-progressive, just better than this.
     
  22. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #22
    Bingo- I didn't think he'd be this bad. And I think a lot of others thought the same.
     
  23. Cleverboy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Cleverboy

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    #23
    I just don't see where its "spineless" to make a judgement call that isn't perfect. It's extremely difficult in either case. I started this thread by noting Obama's explanation. I think it behooves everyone who disagrees to constantly articulate the bumper-sticker version of why, in the clearest, most succinct way (so that we're actually arguing substance, and morons don't dumb down the discussion by labelling people "apologists" when there is clear room for substantive disagreement on the approach to this problem).

    I mean, ultimately, is it the idea of deferring the telecom immunity as an amendment, and having a clear impression of the amendments chances? If certain surveillance laws weren't expiring this year, I'm sure many Democrats would happily block this bill... but the security of the country seems to say otherwise. Bush is making this a game of chicken, like he usually does, and all you need is a vote against FISA, expiring surveillance provisions, and a terrorist attack on U.S. soil... however small and you probably have the election in Republican hands. If those provisions expired next year, and there was breathing room for our intelligence agencies to do their job... I'm sure it'd be a different story. Instead, we're left splitting hairs when lives might be put in jeopardy. Laid at the feet of a suddenly toothless stand on principles, and a rotten President that orchestrated yet another bizarre party victory.

    It's like each party is constantly placing flaming poo in front of the other's door, and watching for hillarity to ensue. Obama doesn't step in it, and tries to take a pragmatic, though hardly decisive approach, and he gets "spineless". Meh. This is politics. Why tear down a good candidate because the game is rigged. Hate the game.

    ~ CB
     
  24. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #24
    Because we were hoping he'd change the rules. That's what he's been campaigning about the whole time- "change we can believe in". Now it looks like "more of the same we can't trust". That's not our fault- that's his.
     
  25. danny_w macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #25
    I guess change was too much to hope for, but it was a nice dream while it lasted.
     

Share This Page