« "Badgering the refs" won't solve America's problems | agio's Blog | New McCain Ad Charges Obama is "Thoughtful, Interesting" »
Should Obama do more to stop the FISA bill?
Over at Salon, Glenn Greenwald has a rather critical piece discussing Barack Obama's relationship to the upcoming FISA "compromise" bill being floated by Steny Hoyer (D-Quisling).
I am a great fan of the Senator's, but this piece, and other sundry murmurings in the blogosphere are raising the question of what, if anything, Sen. Obama should do to stop this from passing the House.
There is little that he can do officially. But as the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party, is this his moment to sieze the bully pulpit (and smash it over Hoyer's head)?
Or should he be keeping his powder dry and concentrating on defeating McCain.
What is going on through Obama's head, I wonder.
I am a great fan of the Senator's, but this piece, and other sundry murmurings in the blogosphere are raising the question of what, if anything, Sen. Obama should do to stop this from passing the House.
There is little that he can do officially. But as the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party, is this his moment to sieze the bully pulpit (and smash it over Hoyer's head)?
Or should he be keeping his powder dry and concentrating on defeating McCain.
What is going on through Obama's head, I wonder.
Advertisement
It has to pass the Senate too, he can filibuster it there.
June 19, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I'm not up on the byzantine paths a bill takes through Congress.
If you're right, then I wonder if a filibuster, by Obama or any other Democrats can still stop this?
June 19, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
There should absolutely be a filibuster for this.
All those people that have been dumping cash into Obama's campaign? Most of them want this bill stopped. There's no better way for Obama to show that he really cares for them than to filibuster this.
(The same goes for all Democratic senators, and especially Hillary.)
June 19, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
There doesn't even need to be a filibuster.
Reid can keep it from even coming to a vote.
He's already expressed misgivings about the "compromise" bill, suggesting he'll vote against it.
But that's just covering his ass, since he has the power to actually block it.
Meanwhile, Feingold, Wexler, Leahy and Dodd are among those expressing strong opposition. Feingold accurately called it "a capitulation, not a compromise."
But rememember, this same Democrat-led Senate passed an earlier bill (which later died) granting limited telecom immunity.
As for the House, Pelosi appears to be holding her nose on Hoyer's bill. She previously called for the issue to be resolved by July 4.
She may vote no on the bill, but clearly won't do anything to block it.
Obama's silence (so far) suggests something shocking: that he too may have been kept out of the loop on what Hoyer was actually agreeing to.
Given the way the players are lining up -- Bush White House and DLC types on one side, progressives and quasi-progressives on the other -- this is indeed a crucial test for Obama.
The fact he and his team have been so slow to comment suggests a heated internal debate.
I think it's a given he'll vote no if and when this comes to the Senate floor.
The big question is whether he'll publicly use his newfound clout to pressure Reid into blocking it.
He doesn't want to suffer his first Senate defeat before even becoming president. But he also doesn't want to cave on an obvious issue of principle.
This past week, he's been studiously courting the "moderate" -- read craven chickenshit -- congressional Democrats.
Now, this looks like a shot across his bow to indicate he needs to pay these scum yet more obeisance.
The message is: piss off your most enthusiastic netroots backers, or piss off us powers-that-be.
A hard choice. I hope he makes the right one.
June 19, 2008 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well put, and thanks for the info on the bill's status in the legislature.
June 19, 2008 11:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for posting this. I love Greenwald, and wish his book had been featured here. He's sharp. What he said made perfect sense. We have to be willing to critique politicians. We should call Obama (quite literally -- Greenwald gives a number) on this one. His decision to act against a fellow democrat running in a primary is just plain wrong, particularly when the democrat he is supporting counters all of what Obama has promised he will deliver.
(How will Obama deliver on his promises without a progressive congress? Does he want yet another Lieberman? Look where that got him.)
Really, it's pretty darned sad. But remember, we may like Obama, but he is a politician. We have to stay clear on that one.
That said, I think it actually helps Obama if he gets progressive pressure. For one, he can't afford to lose the progressive base. Too often, Democrats woo progressives (and even moreso minority groups) and then dump them.
However, this "love em and leave em" policy doesn't work. I believe it is why Gore lost in 2000 -- because the Democrats abandoned their progressive base, so some turned Green. Moveon did help Kerry, but not enough to push him over the top.
Now, Obama is relying on the netroots.
Also, the more pressure we put on him, the more he is able to justify taking the liberal position, and the more "center" oriented he can look while doing so.
Anyway, kudos to you for writing about this. This one should on the recommended list.
June 19, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's also got worry about Barr attracting some independents to the Libertarian Party on issues like civil liberties. This is definitely a vote the bums out election but some of those bums include guys like Hoyer and the Democratic coward caucus. Obama won't be the only "mad as hell" choice on many ballots.
June 19, 2008 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the response. Greenwald has been one of the few truly reliable polestars these past eight, dark years.
June 20, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
YES
June 19, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The elections are rigged. There shouldn't be elections unless that is fixed (and not THAT hard to do, either. I live in Canada and I know the honest process and what it would take .. )
Who cares about the recycling of the Clinton adminstration, anyway. It was a DISASTER for some of us War on Drugs victims ! Don't anyone of you know anyone in jail for drugs?
www.wexlerwantshearings.com
How can anyone who reads be PRO Obama?
Promises are promises .. don't you remember 2006?
June 19, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is not perfect, but he's better than anyone else I could vote for right now.
June 20, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
lady here is a Republican Troll. She has been posting all through TPM negative comments on Obama. She calls him such things as the manchurian candidate and other such rude comments.
Simply put, pay this republican troll no attention. Do not feed her or talk to her.
July 3, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes.
This has been another edition of Simple Answers to Simple Questions.
June 20, 2008 8:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
The not so simple follow up is, "What?"
June 20, 2008 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the first step would be to speak out against it, and I wish he would.
June 20, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think he can do much about it honestly. So many Dems in the House have decided that they are going to be spineless, and I doubt Obama speaking out against the bill, yet again, would change anything. We all know his position on the bill, and so do they, but they don't care, they are just being spineless and afraid.
I'm sick of people trying to put this on Obama's shoulders. He can't magically fix everything, and despite his political mastery, he still has limited power. I'm assuming he realizes there is nothing he can do.
Really, him trying to tell Dems in Congress how to vote would probably just piss people off, and the majority of them would still vote how they were planning on voting anyway, making him look powerless.
Many of the Democrats in Congress have let us down, many haven't. All we can do at this point is give them a supermajority in November so they can start doing what they want to do, and we should also always be looking to upgrade spineless corporate Dems to principled progressive Dems. That's how this fight is going to go. Hopefully in January we can start to undo all of the damage of the last 8 (to 30 or so) years.
June 20, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink