“Get FISA Right”: Obama’s Supporters Protest his Vote
By medusa on July 10, 2008 at 10:30 AM in 4th Amendment, Bamboozling, Barack Obama, Democracy, FISA, Hillary Clinton, National Security, WORMs
Barack Obama promised to filibuster the FISA bill, but instead, he voted for it, and many of his supporters are understandably concerned about his willingness to compromise our civil liberties. As Dawn Teo wrote for Huffington Post:
Last week, Obama supporters created a “Get FISA Right” group using the Obama campaign’s web-based social networking application. The group was an unusual addition to the website — formed as it was by Obama supporters for the purpose of protesting Obama’s position on the FISA bill…The group became the largest one on the Obama website within days, growing to more than 21,000 members in less than week.
Obama posted a response to the Get FISA Right group in which he reassures his supporters that:
…once I’m sworn in as President — to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.
Will Mitchell, an member of the Get FISA Right group on Obama’s website, hand delivered a letter yesterday to Obama’s Chicago campaign office, appealing to Obama both to reconsider his own support of FISA and to speak on the floor of Congress against the bill:
We ask that you back up your words with action by addressing your constituents on the floor of the Senate with the same oratorical power you used in Philadelphia to lay out your vision of a ‘More Perfect Union.’ The American people have just as much right to know of the dangerous precedent this Congress would be setting by granting retroactive immunity to those who “may have violated the law” and allowing spying on law-abiding citizens …. We ask you to reconsider your current position on the bill as a whole and strongly oppose a bill about which you said, “I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn’t have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush’s abuse of executive power.” In your statement you also wrote, “In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited.” We agree.
That was yesterday, and today we know that Obama voted in favor of FISA. Hillary voted against FISA, just like she said she would. She didn’t do it without consideration; our national security is amongst the New York Senator’s greatest concerns. But as she makes clear in her statement, the FISA bill goes against our constitutional rights:
Congress must vigorously check and balance the president even in the face of dangerous enemies and at a time of war. That is what sets us apart. And that is what is vital to ensuring that any tool designed to protect us is used – and used within the law – for that purpose and that purpose alone. I believe my responsibility requires that I vote against this compromise, and I will continue to pursue reforms that will improve our ability to collect intelligence in our efforts to combat terror and to oversee that authority in Congress.
The comments on Obama’s website make clear how disappointed his supporters are. Here’s one example of the many comments left by fellow Democrats, who believed Obama was a man of his word:
When Bush was elected in 2004 I was dejected, disappointed and totally deflated because I felt my country had let me down. We failed to send W back to Texas. How could that many Americans have deliberately voted for him? The effect of Senator Obama voting for the FISA bill today is similar though not as profound. I am dejected, disappointed and partially deflated because I feel that the Senator has let me down. I can not rectify his deliberate turn about and support of this bill. Since he clearly operates by making politically calculated votes, it makes me wonder how he would of voted had he been in the senate when the authorization to use force was passed. I think he may have voted for it. I also suspect that he would have voted for the Patriot Act since Senator Feingold was the only one to oppose it. It seems that Senator Obama is not the champion for my civil rights that I took him to be. I wonder how many of Bush’s executive excesses President Obama will reverse. Maybe very few since presidents seem loathe to relinquish any priviledges.
I am sadder but wiser now. He is no longer a champion for my rights. He is simply a presidential candidate….
by Ronald Scott
* More novels by 
* 
(
)
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
Pingback: Rove: Obama is the Democrats’ Nixon : NO QUARTER