Obama votes no on FISA, FISA passes anyway.

[endarkenment]

What exactly does that gain us? The end state with respect to FISA is identical: the congress once again gives bush what he wants. Obama would be on the losing side, unable to muster congressional support to actually block the bill. Obama would appear ineffectual and weak. He is no longer the junior senator from illinois, he is our party's presidential candidate. Obama opens his campaign up to yet another attack point, as the McCain campaign would certainly attempt to make this an issue. Would you put it past the bush administration to have a prepared security event ready for the mccain campaign to exploit?

We have a congressional leadership that has demonstrated time and again that it will not take a stand on this or any other of the related neocon initiatives. There were many ways open to the leadership to not have this bill even come up for a vote. Pelosi and Reid were not interested in that, nor have they made any effort to stall or block any other items on the War Party agenda. This was true when they were in the opposition and remains true as they continue their miserable tenure in control of congress.

Voting no was simply a losing proposition for the Obama campaign. There was no upside to it other than the symbolic gesture, and the calculation made by the Obama campaign was that that gesture was too much risk to take.

[crankychatter]

1. I think Obama AND Clinton cast symbolic votes - NT

[Youphemism]

12. "Symbolic" means "Loser." I have no respect for symbolic leaders.

Symbolic leaders don't get elected. Smart ones do.

The FISA battle was lost in the House, and the 100+ Democrats who sold us out are the reason.

"I leave symbols to the symbol-minded." --George Carlin

[Marrah_G]

2. ........sigh

[Saturday]

3. What does that gain us? How about respect and leadership. nt

[endarkenment]

17. Yes he would get our respect.

The leadership part is a bit mixed. Unable to sway enough votes in congress to block passage, Obama the presidential candidate doesn't look exactly strong in the Obama votes no scenario.

[CTyankee]

4. You are right about the politics of this, and I agree with you. But it is a GOOD thing

to have here at DU a place for "stubborn" opposition to any erosion in our Bill of Rights. Having such opposition is healthy for the body politic. Obama knows what this is all about and needs to hear the loyal opposition. So I, for one, am happy that we have these voices on our Democratic forum, even if I see the realpolitik in the situation.

[FredfromSpace]

5. Obama voted YES on FISA

Get your facts straight.

He voted for amendments that failed, then voted for cloture, thus OPPOSING the filibuster he promised to support.

Then he voted for the final bill, siding with the Repukes, the DINOs, and a "delighted" GWBush.

He is as culpable here as HRC was on IWR.

[endarkenment]

15. Perhaps I wasn't clear.

Although you were the only one so far who misread it. In the scenario where Obama did as we wanted and voted yes, his campaign gets damaged but his progressive base feels warm and happy. I am unclear why that is what he should have done. Perhaps you can explain it.

[FredfromSpace]

21. Where is the proof that his campaign would have been damaged?

On edit: I guess I did misread you...oops...

On point: I keep hearing that repeated as a matter of faith.

But there is no evidence of it.

What we DO know is that his campaign has been damaged AMONG HIS CORE SUPPORTERS by his craven cave-in to Bush and corporate illegality.

Have you been following this?

[NorthCarolina]

23. I am quite sure that had he voted NO

Democratic voters would be in an "OUTRAGE" over an apparent support for the rule of law and the boards here on DU would be full of :wtf: postings, and it would have effectively diminished his standing among Dems and severely crippled his campaign. :sarcasm:

[endarkenment]

24. I am quite sure the McCain campaign and the corporate media

would be pushing the 'soft on terra' and 'lefty-defeatocrat' meme, the only meme they have besides (pssst... he's a black muslim) that has a chance of winning the election for them. And I am fairly sure that there will be a convenient terra event between now and november to amplify exactly this strategy.

But carry on with how important it was to symbolicly oppose a done deal.

And be sure to add lots of :wtf: and :sarcasm: and :rofl:

[NorthCarolina]

27. True, all that's left to them now is the FISA "Flip-Flop" meme

and we all know how ineffective the "Flip-Flopping" meme was against Kerry's campaign.

[MadHound]

6. By voting no on FISA Obama would at least be signaling that he is willing to defend the Constitution

By voting yes for FISA, Obama has signaled that he is willing to sell out the Constitution, and the people of this country, all for political power. That is a rather disturbing thought for many, many people.

[endarkenment]

18. Well it is not all that certain.

He might be willing to sell out the constitution. He might not. We know with McCain there is no doubt. I will continue to take my chances with Obama and consider this a tactical move on his part.

Passage was a done deal. His no vote would not have altered the outcome.

[Breeze54]

43. He already did.

:(

[fasttense]

7. He said he would support a filibuster of FISA. He didn't. n/t

[Youphemism]

10. He said that of an earlier version of the bill...

...You may not like the revised version -- I don't -- but don't act like it's a broken promise. Obama changed his position based on the assignment of oversight to FISA courts.

The bill Obama promised to filibuster is different than the one that passed.

[Marrah_G]

22. Holy cow , you must be dizzy

[bunnies]

11. There was no filibuster. Kinda hard for him to support one. nt

[NorthCarolina]

13. For whatever reason, it appears that only Republicans

know how to wage an effective filibuster. For my money, I believe the reason Dems appear so weak and ineffective is a direct result of DLC and Blue Dogs being complicit with GOP ideals. We do not really have two parties that represent two distinct political ideologies, rather we have two parties that basically represent the same form of corporate ideology. Nothing will change until voters realize this and actively work to rid the Democratic party of conservative DLC and Blue Dog influence by supporting progressive primary challengers at every opportunity.

[endarkenment]

20. That I completely agree with.

There was no fillibuster as it was a non-starter. Our party, as we have learned, is ineffective in opposition even when it is nominally the majority party in congress. It sucks, but it is not Obama's fault that it sucks. He needs to focus on only one thing: getting elected. He cannot fix our congressional party problems. His campaign evaluated the merits of his vote with respect to the election and made the choice accordingly.

[Breeze54]

44. Especially when he voted against one!! n/t

[peace13]

8. It would have shown that Obama supports and protects the Constitution.

That is a pretty big statement. Now we 'faithfuls' have to hope that Obama will respect the Constitution when he becomes president. We have to HOPE instead of know!!!!! Always hoping.

[endarkenment]

16. Great. And suppose in doing that he loses the election?

We get to feel all warm and fuzzy and also get to deal with another four years of neocon hell and everything else that comes with a McSame presiduncy.

[peace13]

25. During the primaries

the message was that Obama was a different kind of politician. If he is not that then there are some of us that need to be re-educated or maybe you could just tell me how to think and feel. I work my butt off for Obama and I can question him if I want to. I don't think that it will bring a neocon hell down on you. It is Obama not explaining his basis for such decisions as his FISA stance that will bring your fears to fruition.

[MarjorieG]

35. He's explained so that we have something better no controls (as well as election protection)

[peace13]

40. I'm sorry.

I don't understand what you are saying.

[leftofcool]

9. Keep spinning it all you want to

He voted with Bush and company, just like Pelosi and others. End of story!

[Youphemism]

14. Keep whining all you want to...

...at least you'll be whining to a sitting President who can do something about it, rather than a politically correct might-have-been, who can tilt at another windmill for you.

[Skittles]

33. LOL

you're still spinning

[demokatgurrl]

19. It shows he has the guts to take a stand

it gives some people something to think about.
It gives him the chance to be right, if not with the majority. That has some value, doesn't it? Remember when he spoke out against the war? He COULDN'T vote against it then, but aren't you glad he was right? Didn't that affect your decision on a candidate? it was his biggest difference from Clinton (assuming, of course, that he would have voted against the war if he HAD been in the US senate which I am starting to doubt).

[Enrique]

26. you can't blame "congressional leadership" without blaming Obama too

he is the party's nominee, he could have pressured that congressional leadership and he chose not to.

[endarkenment]

29. and you think that wasn't considered?

[Roxy66]

28. I think Obama is way ahead of all of us on stategy.....he knows what he is doing.

[knixphan]

30. I agree.

[LWolf]

31. It gains us confidence that we can count on him to

support and defend the Constitution, to take a stand for what is right, and fight for it, when necessary.

People are so admiring of his willingness to fight hard when campaigning; why the hell wouldn't we expect the same thing in Congress?

[MarjorieG]

34. I count on him to win, and review all the abusive legislation as he's promised. Hear Bush today...

As he announced this new important tool to fight terror, to give tools to those who need them. Terra..terra...terra.

It was an unfortunate and necessary move.

[LWolf]

37. I can't join you on the promises part.

It's not about Obama;

I don't "trust" politicians to keep campaign "promises." It's this part of the job description: "Politicians."

[Skittles]

32. it is extremely disconcerting

that someone on a DEMOCRATIC board just DOES NOT FUCKING GET IT

[Marie26]

36. Well I guess Hillary should've voted for the IWR, since

it'd pass anyway. Or Obama should vote for the military commissions, or torture, or corporate tax cuts. In fact, Democrats should just vote with the Republicans all the time, in a show of unity. The Republicans seem to get what they want passed anyway.

[endarkenment]

38. Uh no - Hillary was not the presidential nominee

and was in no position to potentially undo the damage done even if she were to someday be the presidential nominee. There is a big difference in both the issue and the situation.

Obama is the presidential nominee and could very well be in a position to undo much of the damage in this FISA bill, given a working majority in congress and a democrat in the white house. We will still be up against the bi-partisan War Party, and who knows, perhaps Obama is in the War Party too. On the other hand, I know where McCain stands, I know with near certainty what his administration will do on this issue.

But what do you suggest? What do all of you suggest we do?

I have heard all of you with all your righteous indignation, and I agree with your sentiments. I too would have preferred Obama to have voted no.

So what do you all suggest we do now?

[Marie26]

42. Grin & bear it. nt

[endarkenment]

39. Ok I agree the YES vote sucked. So what now?

Seriously, what now? What is the point of all of your indignation? What constructive realistic steps do you all suggest that will result in an improvement of the situation?

[dailykoff]

41. Let's make sure he doesn't give away the rest of the store

as he appears eager and ready to.