Obama, the man many have seen as a breath of fresh air, has backtracked on many of his most promising positions. One thing that sold me and many others was his statement that he would end criminalisation of pot on the federal level. He has since waffled on that stance and now says he is against decriminalisation
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124727.html (http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124727.html)
When asked by The Times about decriminalizing marijuana, the Obama campaign reiterated the candidate's opposition to legalization. "Senator Obama does not believe in legalization of marijuana, but agrees with President Bush that long minimum sentences for first-time drug users may not be the best way to occupy jail space or heal people from their disease," Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said.
My using pot is not a "disease" and I resent him siding with shrub on that issue.
He has done a total flip flop on his former stance in which he said he would use public financing. He has now said he will not accept public financing and the limits that go along with it.
He has also flip flopped on the fisa bill that would give immunity to telecom companies, retroactive immunity too. Hear that, cenacle?
link (//http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/25/obama_defends_his_fisa_positio.html)
Obama Defends His FISA Position
By Shailagh Murray
CHICAGO -- Sen. Barack Obama defended his support for a Senate bill that would rewrite intelligence laws and effectively grant immunity to telecommunications companies that participated in the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program.
Instead of a radical change from the deadly politics of the past, we are now back to an insipid choice between bad and worse. Sound familiar? No more clear choices, just D or R with little to nothing changing after the election.
Ya know, I'm just about a hair breadth away from not voting for Obama.... Not that I'll vote Repub :shock: - Of course, but I'm getting tired of his continued dance around a host of sensitive issues.... Besides his cowardice on the MJ issue, this stuff about FISA just really torques me the wrong way........ Damn, I wish there was a viable 3rd party....
You took the words right out of my mouth, Sal. I was in favor of Obama mostly because he promised a change from politics as usual. He seemed honest and a straight shooter.
I could ignore the snubbing of public financing even though he said differently a while back. I could hold my nose and overlook the sucking up to Israel and pledging allegiance to them over our own country. All the politicians do that. But the flip flop on pot really rubbed me the wrong way. That was a big issue to me. Likewise the fisa spying bill.
I'm not voting repub but it seems to be back to a lesser of the evils type choice. I said a while back I'm not going to take the lesser of two evils. If he will waffle this much before the election, what will he pull afterwards if he wins? I'm still thinking about it but may end up going third party.
cenacle, you must have stopped in by now. You were very concerned about the fisa bill. How do you feel about this?
I just got laid off from my job so right now I'm concerned about my rent.
As for FISA, I've read the articles you've read and of course I'm wondering what the fuck is up. Oddly, the vote hasn't come up in the Senate. There might be some behind-the-scenes finagling going on. I don't know for sure, just what I read online.
The most coherent thought I can offer right now is that politicians need to be pushed or they tend to pander to the middle. Whatever that is. It's up to us to get people in office to do what most of us want done, and to push them to do it.
A bit disappointed, wondering what fuckhead is telling him that giving in on FISA is a good idea. All I can say is we'll see where that bill goes, and then if he gets elected, what happens then.
Now I have to call the unemployment office to beg for a pittance. None too good a mood right now, all things considered. But I'm trying, somewhere in my heart I won't keep my mouth shut for long.
I just remembered: nobody here has yet seen the letter I wrote to Obama last week. I'll post it.
Sorry to hear about your job. That's when it gets personal, the rest is just politics. At least you aren't a subprime borrower being forclosed and evicted with your credit trashed, no money and no job. It could be worse and will get better.
"A bit disappointed..."
That is an understatement on my end. He was supposed to be something special, that was his appeal. A fresh face who had not sold out to the entrenched interests. Now, he sounds more and more like business as usual. Some will tell you that no one can get anywhere unless they sell out. Then I will vote for no one. You will pull the handle next to the "D" and hope for the best. I may sit out or vote third party.
I would rather vote for someone like Ron Paul even though I'm uncomfortable with some of his positions, just because he is 100% honest and does not change his stance when the wind blows in a different direction like most other politicians. I will put Obama in the catagory of "most politicians" unless he convinces me otherwise. So far, he is heading in the wrong direction. I could care less about the speeches, I want someone honest who cares about important principles. To go along with shrub and spy on the people is just despicable. Like you say, the vote hasn't come up yet.
I see shrub is signing the bill funding Iraq and Afghanistan. Didn't I tell ya? And little to no publicity on that. Just enough demos "happen" to cross over each and every time to give shrub whatever he wants. What's the difference Mccain or Obama if they serve the same masters?
You ask valid questions and I can't really answer them, of course. I'm willing to go along for now, see if the progressive movement that got him this far can get him back on track. I see large differences between McCain and Obama, but again I'm not telling you you're wrong, or that I disagree at this point. I would just say that the election is in November and we need to see how things play out on FISA and the war and other things.
I never doubted the war funding would happen, but the good news is that there was a major new GI funding bill attached to it. Bush and McCain went up against it, and then they backed down, and now are trying to take credit. The GI funding is for soldiers to go to school, like what existed after World War II. I think it is a victory in the midst of a lot of defeats.
But as for the funding itself, the Democrats are letting it happen, seem to have decided that various circumstances don't allow them to oppose it.. Most of them anyway, the cowardly majority. Not enough oppose it to bring it down.
What I'm seeing happen, and I think it will continue, is a schism between the Democrats and the progressives who have traditionally allied with them. I've mentioned this before. It's still under the radar, but the FISA thing really has brought it closer to the surface. Blogs like Daily Kos and the Huffington Post, which had gone big time for Obama, got pissed as you and me at him for what he said.
Thing is, there is no progressive party, no progressive candidate who is separate from the Democrats, at this point. Bob Barr and Ron Paul and Nadar are third party candidates, but they would not get my vote or the vote of those like me. Is a progressive alternative going to emerge to counter the Democrats' assumption of progressive support? That is the question I am hanging onto right now. If Obama gets elected, and sells out the people who put him there, it will get ugly fast. But you should read my letter to Obama, posted on this forum separately, to hear what I have to say on that.
Anyway, Stoney, I'm in "wait and see and watch closely" mode. That's all I can say at this point.
Good points, cenacle. I have not totally solidified my position on things. I'm just very very disappointed by those two flip flops. Those are deal breakers to me. Not only are they important, they go to the character of the man. I may end up voting for him but not just to pick the lesser of the evils. I'd rather go third party than that.
I read your letter. It's a little dated with the "you *will*" go against the fisa bill and so on. Will he even pull us out of Iraq? I don't recall him saying so and as we've seen, he can change his stance in a heartbeat. We shall see.
Have you considered self employment until you get back in your preferred field? Even doing lawns can be lucrative or minor repair work if you are good at that. Lots of other things too. If you are a good talker and self motivated, sales pays very well.
[Stoney and all--this essay is the kind of blowback Obama has been getting lately from the progressive movement online. Worth reading...]
Seven Things Barack Obama Should Do to Keep from Blowing It
by Arianna Huffington
Published July 2, 2008 at the Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-h ... 10549.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/eight-things-barack-obama_b_110549.html)
ASPEN - I took part in an interesting panel last night at the Aspen Ideas Festival, discussing the ins and outs of Barack Obama and John McCain with David Brooks, Stuart Rothenberg, Jim Wallis, Jonathan Capehart, Amy Goodman, and Jonathan Alter moderating.
I was particularly interested in the takes of Brooks and Rothenberg. They were smart, knowledgeable, eloquent... and utterly wrong.
Brooks was even-handed with both candidates. He suggested that McCain's biggest failing was his weakness as a manager (I said I was far more concerned with the disastrous direction in which he wants to lead the country). And he criticized Obama for lacking the "Senatorial skills" of either McCain or Hillary Clinton. (In an unrelated riff, Brooks let the audience know that, based on an off-the-record conversation with President Bush, he could categorically assure us that we would not be bombing Iran.)
Towards the end of the panel we were all asked whom the nominees should pick as their VP. One of Brooks' recommendations for Obama was Tom Daschle because the former-Senator understands how to get things done. In Brooks World, the presidency is all about keeping the machinery greased and the cogs of government running smoothly. It's leadership as McDonald's management: keep serving up the tried and true, with maximum efficiency.
Rothenberg -- astute, detailed, and supremely confident -- dipped into his political analyst's bag and pulled out a steaming chunk of conventional wisdom, echoing his recent declaration that "This whole election is about swing voters. Whoever wins them, will win the election." Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, that's right -- from countless inside-the-Beltway pundits and Democratic strategists in every election the Democrats have lost, going back a generation.
But, as we've seen, Barack Obama is not immune to the seductive call of the Conventional Wisdom sirens. And it's a call that's only going to get louder. He'll hear it from the chorus of pundits standing outside his window -- folks like The New Republic's Noam Scheiber, who today counseled Obama that being labeled a "typical politician" is a very good thing for him because it will assure wary voters that he won't do anything rash.
He'll hear it from some of the advisors inside his campaign. Folks like the aforementioned Daschle, for whom caution is part of his political DNA. Don't forget, as Senate Majority Leader, Daschle had gone along with the president's desire to hold the vote authorizing war with Iraq before the 2002 elections because he and many other Democrats believed an early vote could help shift the focus off the war and onto the economy, which they felt was their strong suit. And we saw how well that strategy turned out. Daschle was also the poster child for Democratic spinelessness on the war, going from supporting the use of force to questioning it to ultimately supporting it with his vote because he felt it was crucial for America "to speak with one voice at this critical time." And we know how well that turned out, too.
Obama will also hear the siren call from inside his own head. According to Brooks, Obama's overriding personal characteristic is caution.
So, to counter the conventional wisdom pundits, the cautious campaign advisers, and his own inner cautiousness, I'm offering Obama the following suggestions for staying true to the vision and message that took him from longshot "unlikely candidate" to presidential frontrunner -- and for avoiding the fate of the many before him who fell prey to the misguided belief that the path to the White House runs down the middle of the road.
1) Load up your Kindle with passages from leaders who were looking to fundamentally change the country and following an inner compass, not the latest focus-group results. Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King would be a good place to start.
"Some men see things as they are and ask, 'Why?' I dream of things that never were and ask, 'Why not?'" (RFK)
"There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right." (King)
2) Load up your iPod with passages from your own speeches. They've inspired others; now let them re-ignite the inspirational leader in you.
"This campaign can't only be about me. It must be about us - it must be about what we can do together. This campaign must be the occasion, the vehicle, of your hopes, and your dreams. It will take your time, your energy, and your advice - to push us forward when we're doing right, and to let us know when we're not. This campaign has to be about reclaiming the meaning of citizenship, restoring our sense of common purpose, and realizing that few obstacles can withstand the power of millions of voices calling for change.... That's why I'm in this race. Not just to hold an office, but to gather with you to transform a nation."
3) Get your campaign to give you a printout of the names of the over 1.5 million people who have donated to your campaign (at an average of $197 each). Give that list a read every day; feel the heft. And remember -- sorry, Stu Rothenberg -- that the tried-and-untrue swing voter strategy is what has led to the Democratic Party's prolonged identity crisis. Forget the fence sitters. Instead, continue to speak to those who have turned their backs on the electoral process -- those who are struggling without health care, without decent schools, without jobs, without hope.
4) Tape to your mirror the poll results from July 2004, where Kerry was up by six, and June of 1988, where Dukakis was up by 15... and don't get complacent.
5) Go to YouTube and watch the concession speeches of Kerry, Gore, and Hillary Clinton, each of whom decided to run to the middle in an attempt to attract undecided swing voters.
6) Don't let the daily petty squabbles of the campaign distract you from the core message that this campaign is not a referendum on John McCain's war record or the level of your patriotism -- but rather on the future of America. Are we a nation driven by hope and promise or a nation driven by fear?
When Bobby Kennedy was agonizing over whether or not to run in 1968, he told one of his advisors: "People are selfish. But they can also be compassionate and generous, and they care about the country. But not when they feel threatened. That's why this is such a crucial time. We can go in either direction. But if we don't make a choice soon, it will be too late to turn things around. I think people are willing to make the right choice. But they need leadership. They're hungry for leadership." Forty years later, we are starving for it. Real leadership, not a poll-driven facsimile. Not swing-state, swing-voter leadership. Leadership defined by an ability to capture our imagination and a willingness to challenge us. Leadership geared to transforming the country through the audacity of hope instead of keeping it mired in the politics of fear and division.
7) Heed the old Texas advice of Dandy Don Meredith and Molly Ivins: "You got to dance with them what brung you."
Voters longing for hope, inspiration, a new kind of politics, and fundamental change are "them that brung you" to the big dance. Don't let the pundits, the advisors, and the cowards convince you to let someone else cut in.
That's very nice, cenacle. But what is all this "progress" he is going to bring us? He has kept mum about pulling out of Iraq, so I guess he will be in no hurry to do that. That was one of your big issues at one time. He is in favor of the fisa bill, that use to be one of your big issues too. He did a 180 in his stance on pot, I think you use to care about that as well. My question is, what will he do for us that is "progressive" and that we should care about?
Universal health care has become a slogan and a cliche. It seems to be code words for putting the govt in charge of it all. I do not see that as a solution but rather as another problem in the making. What progress is he offering?
Then there is the pending invasion of Iraq which Obama has not ruled out. His slavish devotion to Isreal seems to portend going along with their wishes and they have made no secret of the fact they plan to invade along with us. Or watch as we do the dirty work, either one.
Your focus seems to have shifted to how will we get him in rather than what will he do that is worthwhile once he gets in. Mccain tells us he is a maverick and will being about change. Obama has deserted us on two major core issues which brought me to his side. Why should I care if he gets in or not?
And this talk about don't work toward the middle is suicide talk. Without the middle he is toast. Playing to the extremists has never worked.
This essay has some telling ideas in it, and I posted it as an example of what I am reading online that is disturbing, blowback emerging from Obama's recent statements. So take it or leave it on that basis.
From what I can tell, Obama isn't publicly in favor of legalizing MJ, though I have read he supports decriminalizing medical marijuana. That's about the best we're going to get right now, as any further endorsement would be thought of as political suicide. From what I can tell, the decrim movement has given up on the feds and is going state by state. They might be hoping for a Supreme Court showdown at some point.
As for the war in Iraq, Obama has said the US begins withdrawing in Jan 2009 when he takes office. As for the Israel situation, in truth that comes down to Israel and its neighbors figuring their relations out. I do not believe anyone is going to invade Iran any time soon.
Finally, health care. I support universal health care. I hope we get there sooner than later. I have a wife with medical issues that, without healthcare coverage, would put us on the streets. That's a personal situation but I know others who face it too. There's no reason the drug companies and insurance companies should be eating the poor and the sick alive for their gain.
Don't know what else to say, Stoney. I'm hoping the man gets elected cuz McCain is a fucking lunatic, and will keep Bush's crime family intact, while enough Dems will continue to turn ass high to the boot to drive this country into the fucking shit heap for good. I believe Obama will do a lot of good things if he gets in. He won't be perfect--I've posted my opinions on that here already--but he will be a lot better.
That's my hope, that's what is getting me through my days, I'm keeping it for now.
I agree that Mccain does not sound good but he is selling himself as a moderate, which is what Obama better do.
"From what I can tell, Obama isn't publicly in favor of legalizing MJ, though I have read he supports decriminalizing medical marijuana."
No, he does not support decrim. Read the link from the first post.
"As for the war in Iraq, Obama has said the US begins withdrawing in Jan 2009 when he takes office."
That means little to nothing. He could pull 1000 troops a year and keep that wishy washy promise. I want something more solid.
"As for the Israel situation, in truth that comes down to Israel and its neighbors figuring their relations out. I do not believe anyone is going to invade Iran any time soon."
I'm glad you don't believe it. Isreal has stated otherwise. Do I need to c+p all the statements to that effect?
"Finally, health care. I support universal health care. I hope we get there sooner than later. "
You want the govt to run it???? What has the govt run from year zero up to now that it hasn't botched? SS, post office, FDA...? Tell me even one thing it hasn't botched.
I dont need the cut and paste, thanks. I just keep remembering Bush coming into office talking about the need for "compassionate conservatism" and reaching across the aisle. He lied. Maybe Obama will too, but as I've said, I'm keeping some hope that his background and record of service is reason to be optimistic.
As for healthcare, tens of millions don't have it. Many that do, can't actually afford to use it. There are plenty of commercials for fast food, for the junk they want people to shovel in their mouths from childhood on, but only lip service to health, to taking care of one's body and mind. My family was poor and large, and I had no clue about health. Never hardly saw a doctor. Too expensive. Fuck if things could have been different. So why not for new generations? I see no reason.
Tell me any human being on this planet should not get healthcare because it's too expensive. I hope you can't, Stoney.
As for some kind of privatization, I don't believe it will work. Unlike the movement toward green energy, which has the profit motive built in as incentive, that can't be the way with health. Healthcare should be free. If my dad had it, he would not have died such a long, painful death, the result of a lifetime of casual abuse like cigarette smoking and poor diet.
I see the way our society fats up its millions, consumes their energy, and spits them sick and in pieces into the ground. However it happens, it needs to happen.
I don't share your libertarian distrust of the government. It can work, as shown by Social Security, the Civil Rights Act, social programs like Food Stamps and WIC. I'm presently getting unemployment, which is not really enough to live on for long, but it's helping a little to ease my stress while I'm hitting the bricks every day. Government can work well, or badly.
As for Obama, here's what I think right now. He needs to get back to DC and do some senator-ing. Says he will work to strip telecom immunity from the FISA bill, I'm eager to see him do it. Says he will start getting us out of Iraq in Jan 2009, I'd like to see him huddling up with the generals and issuing some statements on what he learns. This election is so far away, the man could spend months in DC doing his job, showing his leadership, and still campaign in every red and blue state there is. That's what I would like to see happen.
The following is Barack Obama's statement on his position on the FISA bill
posted at his website (http://my.barackobama.com/page/communit ... ars/gGxsZF (http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rospars/gGxsZF)):
I want to take this opportunity to speak directly to those of you who oppose my decision to support the FISA compromise.
This was not an easy call for me. 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. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.
But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. 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. As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility
The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The (PDF)recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.
The ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States is a vital counter-terrorism tool, and I'm persuaded that it is necessary to keep the American people safe -- particularly since certain electronic surveillance orders will begin to expire later this summer. Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I've chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention -- 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.
Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions. No tool has been more important in focusing peoples' attention on the abuses of executive power in this Administration than the active and sustained engagement of American citizens. That holds true -- not just on wiretapping, but on a range of issues where Washington has let the American people down.
I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago, that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I'm not exempt from that. I'm certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable too. I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country. That is why we have built the largest grassroots campaign in the history of presidential politics, and that is the kind of White House that I intend to run as President of the United States -- a White House that takes the Constitution seriously, conducts the peoples' business out in the open, welcomes and listens to dissenting views, and asks you to play your part in shaping our country’s destiny.
Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.
So I appreciate the feedback through my.barackobama.com, and I look forward to continuing the conversation in the months and years to come. Together, we have a lot of work to do.
I read his statement carefully and have thought all night about what he is saying. He seems comfortable with the differences between the bill's version from last year and the changes made since. He also claims he will fight to have the telecom immunity stripped from the bill.
First thought: I want to see how hard he fights on that, and who backs him on it in the Senate. It will show us a preview of what his leadership might be like, and how effective. It will also show us if he is being straight, and is willing to really get into the thick of it to stop the telecom giants from breaking the law and getting away with it.
Second thought: If my first thought has any merit, then we will be able to measure the man in action as opposed to the endless words we hear. I'd like to see a fight on this. I'd like to see Obama mix it up with the Republicans. Hell, I hope McCain shows up and there is a scrap or two between them. It could get interesting when this comes to happen next week.
Third thought: or not. Could all be smoke up our collective asses. But we'll see, won't we? I'll have most of my attention on jobhunting next week but I'll be watching what goes down or doesn't in DC. Many will be watching. The whole world? Probably not quite.
And in today's paper headlines, he says he is NOT going to withdraw the troops in the timetable he was suggesting. He says now that he will "slow" the withdrawal. That makes three stikes and he is out, in my book.
1. He is against decrim for pot
2. He supports the fisa bill
3. He is not going to withdraw troops like he said
And the weasel worded statement you copied does nothing to ease my concerns. You may buy it but all it says is that this bill is "better" than the other one. Well gee, life in prison is better than execution for smoking pot so we should be in favor of that too.
And I heard that Obama's wife's thesis at Princeton U expounded on her hatred toward whites. The media has continually harped on the fact that she gave no speech on the subject. That may be true but they very carefully avoid mentioning the thesis. I heard that all other thesis' can be viewed by the public but that one has been pulled. I can't swear that is all true but that's what they are saying on talk radio.
You may be resigned to pulling the lever next to whoever has a "D" next to the name but not I. I will no longer choose between bad and worse or lesser of the evils. I'm going to vote third party. You will never get any honesty out of the demos or repubs. It just aint gonna happen.
I did a little more research and found that the Princeton thesis is not as strong as alleged by her opponents. It shows some feelings of alienation but I don't think this should be an issue. Here are excerpts from that thesis
"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. "I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second"
That sounds more like her. The smear was similar to the 'Obama is a crazed Muslim' emails going around. Most people don't care about any of that this year. Too much way more important matters to worry about.