Tuesday for Change is your weekly reminder that to get change, to elect Barack Obama, we must do our part to help.
End the Iraq War. Fix the Economy. Save the Supreme Court. Donate today.
DID YOU KNOW: Mark Begich, Democrat, is currently ahead of Sen. Ted Stevens? Yes, ALASKA.
Sorry to have to say this, but- If you care about the Constitution, do neither, unless the party and Obama somehow get their acts together before tomorrow on the FISA atrocity. Donate to ActBlue instead to help elect more REAL Democrats.
Asking me to believe in real change is ringing pretty hollow just now. Put up or shut up, Senator.
I’m broke as a joke and I kicked in (a little, anyway). If top ramen-eating college students can do it, I submit that none of us have any excuse.
Steve – I sympathize, but you live in a two-party system. (I know there are other parties, but they’re, for the moment at least, pathetic.) I’m sorry to have to say this bit, but even if Sen. Obama falls down on an issue or two for you (as he most assuredly does for me) does Sen. McCain better represent your interests and your vision of a better future? Sometimes, as in 2000, one just has to get behind the best candidate with an actual shot at the prize.
We can’t just keep unconditionally rewarding Democratic leaders who kick us in the balls- that’s what resulted in the decades-long rightward drift that got the country into the mess it’s in today. Bush couldn’t have gotten away with most of the damage he’s done without having plenty of Democratic enablers on Capitol Hill.
And one of Obama’s biggest selling points was supposed to be his regard for civil liberties, buttressed by his credentials as a Constitutional scholar. If he won’t take a stand on this ridiculous capitulation by Pelosi and Hoyer, what exactly will he take a stand on, and what can we expect him to accomplish in office?
To get better behavior, you have to reward good behavior and punish bad. I will not sell out my right to do my tiny pittance of that.
I will not give Obama a dime until he does the proper thing about this new FISA outrage and opposes it effectively, especially on the issue of telecom immunity. Period. Not a dime, not a penny. If he completely rolls over, he may not even get my vote.
Yes, because President McCain will cherish your civil liberties. Ah, the world of the idealist.
As I said, that’s exactly the attitude that got us where we are today.
Also, I don’t want to blindly trust ANY President with my civil liberties, and yes that includes Obama. That’s why resisting the further gutting of judicial oversight of executive activities is so critical.
If only there was a document somewhere that divided the powers of the government between three branches to ensure checks and balances of each one and detailed the protected rights of citizens…
And if only the guy running for President who taught law students about that document for years were willing to defend it…
Parthenon: Sometimes, as in 2000, one just has to get behind the best candidate with an actual shot at the prize.
No. They have to earn my vote. It doesn’t come because they are the lesser of two evils. I firmly believe that if people actually voted for the person they wanted, rather than the less odious of the two major party candidate, we would not have a two party system.
Steve LaBonne: We can’t just keep unconditionally rewarding Democratic leaders who kick us in the balls
Hear! Hear!
The Democrats were elected to majorities in the House and Senate largely to oppose the lawlessness of Bush and to rein him in. If they won’t do that, they should not continue to be rewarded. Period.
OW: Yes, because President McCain will cherish your civil liberties. Ah, the world of the idealist.
Yes. We should always avoid taking a stand because hoping for real change is pointless, foolish “idealism”. And when someone comes along who says they will bring real change, well, we shouldn’t hold them to that. We shouldn’t expect them to even try.
And if only the guy running for President who taught law students about that document for years were willing to defend it…
Show me where he’s not.
So, basically, it’s about whether Obama will filibuster the bill? Feingold and Dodd are filibustering it, it’s not inconceivable to me that he will ultimately follow suit.
Show me where he’s not.
In his active participation in making sure the current FISA bill does not pass the Senate.
That’s nice and all that you don’t want to vote for the lesser of two evils, but forgive me in January if I don’t sing your praises while watching President McCain being sworn in.
You can get behind Obama and hope your support convinces him to come closer to your ideals, or you can put Republicans in office and expect that what is left of the Constitution is rendered null and void. It’s that simple.
It’s worse than just what he does about this (nothing being my guess) in the Senate. Worse even than his admission that he’ll vote for this turd if Reid can’t get telecom immunity stripped from it (doubly bad, since a) Obama knows damn well that won’t happen, as Reid has already admitted, and 2) it’s a crap bill even without immunity- it’s a total capitulation to the Rethug wish list.)
No, here’s the worst thing. Do you really think that Pelosi and Hoyer would have pulled this stunt in the first place without clearing it with the party’s Presidential nominee? If so, I have a bridge for sale.
Show me where he’s not.
In his active participation in making sure the current FISA bill does not pass the Senate.
I don’t get that, Sean. Are you saying that by making sure the FISA bill does not pass, he is not defending the Constitution?
Does anyone have a link handy to the bill? I’d like to check it out.
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/35731res20080619.html
Well the idea is you can do all the tearing down of Obama you want after he becomes president. Somehow liberals think its a good idea to do that sort of thing before the guy even gets into the White House in pursuit of some sort of purity.
Umm, no. After he’s in the White House, it’s too late . Yet again, the mentality that has fed this steady rightward ratchet.
By the way, this was also really dumb politics. No polls show the public clamoring for this nonsense. Pelosi and Hoyer asininely split their own caucus (a majority of which voted no) to hand the Rethugs everything they wanted in their wettest dreams. Obama would not be diminishing his prospects by doing the right thing, quite the contrary. That’s exactly what makes this so inexplicable and offensive.
I’m familiar with two schools of thought with regard to Oliver’s above comment – one I’ll nickname the ‘Alterman’ school, which gives thanks to Ralph Nader for the Iraq War, massive deficits, the Katrina response, et al. The other I’ll nickname the ‘Tom Tomorrow’ school, which argues that one ought to place the blame on Gore’s shortcomings as a candidate, rather than on the rebels who voted enough for Nader that Gore lost the states he needed.
I can’t help but fall in with Alterman on this one.
None of which is relevant since what we’re talking about is that Obama just joined the House leadership in a sellout which will NOT benefit the party of Obama politically. Worst of both worlds, in other words.
It’s also irrelevant because he HAS my vote, sadly on the usual “least worst” grounds (same as with Gore). And whoever still wants to give him money, knock yourself out. But I have very right to withhold mine and I will do so.
That should have been, “party OR obama”.
It’s also irrelevant because he HAS my vote, sadly on the usual “least worst” grounds (same as with Gore).
Well good. You’ve got a pragmatist in there after all. Do you think ‘protest votes’ for candidates that have no shot also feed that ‘rightward ratchet’ you spoke of earlier? I agree that when only two people have a chance, that’s a crap system, but there has to be a better way to change it than giving one’s vote away. It seems to me that in the past, the only American third parties of any relevance have been when somebody who was already a major player split off to form a third. They don’t really seem to grow that well from the bottom up.
It can be difficult to thread that needle, I agree. I thought hard about it and, while I can’t justify withholding my vote dues to McCain’s sheer awfulness, I decided to send the campaign a message via their website saying that I was not sending any more money, and why. I also understand they’ve gotten quite a lot of phone calls to the same effect. They need to at least hear that a lot of people are seriously upset about this.
And I think the money is better spent on ActBlue anyway- theirs is the kind of effort we need to get a Congress that will stop pulling this kind of shit, and without which even the most progressive President can accomplish very little.
What we cannot do is just sit back and accept that this is the best we can ever expect from the party.
OW: Well the idea is you can do all the tearing down of Obama you want after he becomes president. Somehow liberals think its a good idea to do that sort of thing before the guy even gets into the White House in pursuit of some sort of purity.
I am getting so tired of being told that I have to vote for the guy who doesn’t stand up for what he claims to stand for because at least he’s better than the other guy.
I’m getting so tired of being told that I can’t complain about a candidate because it plays into getting his opponent elected.
I’m getting so tired of being told that I have to wait until someone is in office before criticizing them as if they will suddenly become more of what they claimed to be AFTER elected despite history showing the exact opposite to be the case.
As noted by others, voting for this version of the FISA bill is just plain stupid. It isn’t popular, it isn’t right, there is no upside to the Democrats for voting for it and significant upside can be made of their voting against it.
Can anyone give me one legitimate reason why Democrats voting FOR this bill makes real sense? So they won’t look weak on defense? I call BS. The defense issue has been shifting to the Democrats side with more people thinking the Dems are better at national security than Repubs. They aren’t going to maintain that by adopting the Rebup view and looking like a bunch of capitulating spineless liars yet again.
Not only that, but the ability and willingness to make that argument was supposed to be one of the main things that made Obama a better candidate than Clinton! Certainly it was one of the biggest reasons why I supported him (second only to seeing the necessity of cleansing the party of the Clinton mafia.)
Some of you purists seem to think that the rest of us Democratic voters are just overjoyed about Obama giving in on this issue. I sure as heck am not, and I really don’t think Oliver or anyone else here is. This really is a capitulation that has disappointed me.
Yet, it’d be good to look at the practical implications of when you vote, rather than just “party purity”. I’ve never felt guilty from votes I’ve made.
You’re not saying anything really different from what I said. As I noted, of course I’m voting for him, the alternative is too awful to risk doing otherwise. But my enthusiasm, including willingness to part with hard-earned cash, has evaporated.
The defense issue has been shifting to the Democrats side with more people thinking the Dems are better at national security than Repubs.
That may not necessarily be true.
Ben: I’ve never felt guilty from votes I’ve made.
Neither have I. But, then, I’ve always voted for someone I wanted in office. I’ve never voted for a lesser evil.
Steve LaBonne: But my enthusiasm, including willingness to part with hard-earned cash, has evaporated.
Word. Even if he still has my vote, he’s lost my cash and a significant amount of my willingness to campaign for him.
Steve LaBonne: But my enthusiasm, including willingness to part with hard-earned cash, has evaporated.
Sean D. Martin: Word. Even if he still has my vote, he’s lost my cash and a significant amount of my willingness to campaign for him.
Welcome to the world of conservatives (I mean the real one, not the mythical one full of evil, stupid, racist, warmongering, Dobson-following Bushbots that Oliver so loves to characterize). Why do you think that McCain is having so much trouble getting support from the conservative base?
Sure would be nice if the respective parties could offer up candidates who truly represented change and a new wave in politics, rather than the usual politicians more interested in saying and doing anything they need to garner votes rather than sticking to their positions and principles.
Welcome to the world of conservatives (I mean the real one, not the mythical one full of evil, stupid, racist, warmongering, Dobson-following Bushbots that Oliver so loves to characterize).
Yeah, where would I get a crazy idea like that from?
And this idea – on both sides – that somehow the nominees don’t reflect the people is the biggest load of bull. Both sides had big turnout in the nomination process, and on the Democratic side unprecedented turnout and a long and brutal nomination. Quit pining for the mythical pony nominee that’s never coming.
I think you guys are making too much of it, personally. I mean, you still like Dustin Hoffman even though he was in Ishtar and Sphere, no? We can cut a a modicum of slack here and there. That being said, I don’t like the new FISA bill either, nor do I think telecomms should get off if they broke the law. However, i remain fairly confident and faithful (and faith is not something I have an abundance of) that a new administration and a freshly fumigated Justice Department won’t let them slip quietly into the night if laws were broken.
I still wholeheartedly support Obama and will donate again when I can, to ensure that that happens.
I think you guys are making too much of it, personally. I mean, you still like Dustin Hoffman even though he was in Ishtar and Sphere, no?
As far as I know, Hoffman’s work in those movies had no effect on my privacy and didn’t do anything to help criminals violate the Constitution.
Yeah, where would I get a crazy idea like that from?
And linking to Bush’s bio make your case how? See, this would be the part where you mistakenly assume that all conservatives slavishly worship and adore Bush and everything he says and does. Thanks for proving my point.
Quit pining for the mythical pony nominee that’s never coming.
In other words, we don’t care that you don’t like, respect or agree with him/her, shut up and support the candidate that your party betters have deigned to shove down your throat.
I’m sure you would still feel the exact same way if Clinton was the Dem nominee.
Like I said, Sean, I have a modicum of faith in a new administration.