The Art of Selling Out.

Obama’s camp’s position on the FISA amendments* way back in October:

“To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.”

And December:

“Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd’s efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same.

And today:

The Democratic-led Congress this afternoon voted to put an end to the NSA spying scandal, as the Senate approved a bill — approved last week by the House — to immunize lawbreaking telecoms, terminate all pending lawsuits against them, and vest whole new warrantless eavesdropping powers in the President. The vote in favor of the new FISA bill was 69-28. Barack Obama joined every Senate Republican (and every House Republican other than one) by voting in favor of it, while his now-vanquished primary rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, voted against it. John McCain wasn’t present for any of the votes, but shared Obama’s support for the bill. The bill will now be sent to an extremely happy George Bush, who already announced that he enthusiastically supports it, and he will sign it into law very shortly.

Prior to final approval, the Senate, in the morning, rejected three separate amendments which would have improved the bill but which, the White House threatened, would have prompted a veto. With those amendments defeated, the Senate then passed the same bill passed last week by the House, which means it is that bill, in unchanged form, that will be signed into law — just as the Bush administration demanded.

Even JJP, some of the most ardently pro-Obama folks in the blogosphere, are pissed about his decision here.

What could possibly justify excusing Bush and the telecoms for what everyone seems to agree were illegal actions? Terrorism? Since when did we start wiping our behinds with the Constitution? I didn’t know that terrorism meant that laws on the book just don’t apply no more. Did you know that? …

Barack Obama should be standing up for common sense and morality in this case. He would get more points for standing up for the law and for our constitutional rights against illegal search and seizure. It’s no wonder that on his own social networking website, the most popular group is that opposing his backwards stance on the FISA legislation being voted on today. …

It’s a shame. I must admit I am disappointed that Barack Obama is not taking a stronger leadership stand for our rights as American citizens to be free of warrantless wiretapping. It’s more than a flip-flop. It’s a betrayal of his own supporters who’ve been pretty clear where they stand on the issue. Guess he’d prefer to allow George Bush to pull a thin veil of deception under the guise of “fighting terrorism” over his eyes.

I’m back to sitting on the fence with this cat, and may keep my ass there on Election Day.

*For those of you haven’t been following: FISA for Dummies.

G.D.

G.D.

Gene "G.D." Demby is the founder and editor of PostBourgie. In his day job, he blogs and reports on race and ethnicity for NPR's Code Switch team.
G.D.
  • Ultramagneitc

    I would suggest you real the bill carefully. While it grants protection from CIVIL lawsuits, it leaves the Telecoms wide open to CRIMINAL prosecution……

    And if this one issue is enough for you to decide NOT TO VOTE AT ALL, I suggest you take a good long hard look at McCain’s stanes on the issues and ask yourself who would you rather see in the white house.

  • Louis

    I get being a single-issue voter, and not to minimize the yuck factor here, but your single issue is telecom immunity?

    Priorities, son!

  • I thought this was going to be about Elton Brand. Anyway, we’re getting closer and closer to playing that game we as voters play ever four years, which is the lesser of two evils. So come November, I’ll look at this and other flip flops he’ll inevitably make, and stack them against McCain..and then a President will magically appear out of the rubble.

  • The telecom immunity as single issue is really about, um, the constitution and the rule of law. That’s a pretty major single issue.

    That said, get your ass off the fence and vote for the man come November, GD.

  • Louis: BPD pretty much hit the nail on the head. It really, really grates as he’d been so unmistakably clear about being against it a few months back; I haven’t heard a lucid argument yet as to why the passage of this bill is a good idea.His bizarre non-explanation for why he’s supporting it now doesn’t clear up anything.

    For the record, the immunity provisions, while pretty heinous, weren’t the most important things to me; the expansion of wiretapping privileges on specious grounds (and thus, executive power), however, does. Just because the guy who’s likely to wield those powers is on ‘our side’ doesn’t mean that he should have the capacity to do so as President.

    So yeah: immunity is just the shit-icing on the cake. Not only does this bill give this singularly incompetent administration one last chance to do something wicked and illegal in its final throes, it takes off the table the chances that private citizens can seek redress in the courts.

    Also, my personal calculus as to whether to vote for this cat (or not) is informed by some simple electoral realities; were I back home in Philly, obviously, I’d feel differently. But I live in a state that is absolutely going blue.

  • Tasha

    Battles vs Wars…we are still in one…

  • Tasha: That battle/war stuff doesn’t fly. See above. Me voting or not voting is entirely ceremonial; there are no stakes either way.

    Yes, I want Obama to win, but at this point, that has more to do with the fact that John Paul Stevens is 88 FUCKING YEARS OLD.

  • Nasty Nas to Nas Escobar

  • Lemu

    G.D – I’m not so much concerned about how this is affecting your vote come November, because I know at the end of the day you will make the correct decision, as I am concerned about what else Obama will “compromise” on.

    Him supporting this tells me that come October/November/December when Bush is giving out his pardons and immunity cards to all of his croonies, he might keep quiet and hoping not to stir the pot before the election with the fence sitters that might vote his way and post election with republican supporters. I hope in his search for a seat in the oval office that he doesn’t aim to please both sides of the party by making more “compromises” like this.

    I don’t mind people that change their mind for the better, but flip flopping just to peace it up, is and never will be acceptable. The fact the the Bill of Rights is being looked at as if it were out of date and negotiable is mind boggling. The question to ask is who will be the maverick (no pun intended) to right this sinking ship of a country before its too late.

  • Big Word

    It’s chess, not checkers.

  • BW: care to explain the strategy?

  • Big Word

    GD: Not really. LOL! I just think Mr. Obama has decided it’s better to be percieved as a flip-flopper than soft on terrorism. Most people really don’t think the government is spying on them personally anyway.

  • su

    There’s more to this FISA thing than you might think, for example, read this:
    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/07/15/complicity/