Shame on you, Barack
Today Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by a wide margin. There’s a lot of background here, so feel free to Google FISA, or search for it at Glenn Greenwald’s blog at Salon.com, at DailyKos.com, or elsewhere. In a nutshell, the government now has the right to spy on anyone it wants without a warrant, and no reason other than they don’t like the way you look. The bill also grants immunity to telecom companies who broke the law by assisting President Bush in illegally spying on American citizens.
After weeks of remaining silent on the issue, Barack Obama capitulated today, saying he supports the non-compromise foisted by Steny Hoyer, Nancy Pelosi and the other charlatans who purport to represent the interests of their constituents.
I’m a big believer in both social justice, as well as preserving civil liberties. Obama’s campaign painted their man as the rare candidate ready and willing to stand up for those principles. Now 300 million of us living in this country will have to censor ourselves–in our phone calls, our emails, and all other forms of communication–for fear that Big Brother might bust down our door and lock us up because Dick Cheney (or Obama himself, apparently) had an itch that day.
Bad form, Barack. You may be the lesser of two evils in this election, but you still have a long, long way to go to prove that you’re not just another soulless politician, beholden to the whims of Washington’s special interests, and the tenets of absolute government power.
This entry was posted on 20 June 2008 at 8:23 pm and is filed under Random commentary. You can subscribe via RSS 2.0 feed to this post's comments.
Tags: Barack Obama, FISA, Reprehensible legislation, Warrantless wiretapping
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
25 June 2008 at 7:03 pm
I think you’re overreacting. I agree that the phone companies should be held liable for breaking the law, but it’s not an issue of the utmost importance. You pick your battles sometimes, and this is one he might have felt better off letting go for purposes of the general election. The other issue is his refusal to visit some mosques (after all, he’s been to plenty of synagogues), but come on, that’s a perfect photo op for the right wing to deliver to its base. If you’re Obama, you’re trying to get elected, and at that point, we can judge him by his actions. But I think it’s a bit overblown to expect him to stop being a politiican while he’s running for president. It’s not like he’s race-baiter or swift-boating anyone – he’s just making a calculation.
I don’t think it’s necessarily a slippery slope where all our liberties will be cast aside for political convenience. I’m glad the blogosphere is up in arms about it so Obama has that feedback, but it’s not really changing my opinion of him.
26 June 2008 at 10:20 am
It bothers and worries me that Obama is willing to sell out on this to get elected. So what, he’s going to be a bastion of good judgment the minute he takes office? Presidents in office are often perfectly happy to do things for political means too. I’m not sold.
The bigger issue for me goes way beyond Obama. The Dems hold the majority in Congress. The FISA amendment is obviously a sham that gives the government the right to spy on us without a warrant any time it wants. What sane person votes in favor of this? Someone who’s taken big bucks from telco lobbyists, someone who covers for his political allies, someone who foolishly values “not looking weak” over good sense, when it fact caving on the issue is the weakest, most cowardly approach he can possibly take. It’s bad form on everyone’s part.
“Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.”
–Ben Franklin
26 June 2008 at 10:49 am
Money quote from today’s Glenn Greenwald column:
It isn’t that difficult to keep the following two thoughts in one’s head at the same time — though it seems to be for many people:
(1) What Barack Obama is doing on Issue X is wrong, indefensible and worthy of extreme criticism;
(2) I support Barack Obama for President because he’s a better choice than John McCain.
26 June 2008 at 1:41 pm
To me seeing Obama as the lesser of two evils isn’t acceptable. “Lesser of two evils” is a cynical and defeatist way to go about politics, and sometimes it’s better to have the greater of two evils if only to bring about radical reform. Lesser of two evils isn’t going to cut it this year.
So I reject the Greenwald assertion. Either Obama is the real deal, or honestly I don’t give a shit one way or the other. I believed he was the real deal, and I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one. If it turns out he doesn’t have a good reason for this, or it’s more than just a miscalculation and symptomatic of a larger trend, well, then fuck him. And fuck our government – I’m moving to Europe as soon as I can do so in style. But for now, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and accept that he’s not going to handle every issue perfectly and sometimes he’s going to go along with things I don’t agree with.