I'm all for going after hoyer, rockafller, di fi and all the blue dog republcains posing as dems. I'm all for going after those making money from the telecoms, selling out their country for profit, the traitors.

But that is not obama. Be careful you do not merge the lines between him saying nothing, and those doing the gop's dirty work. you might say he is enabling them, and true. But you must understand their are conseqeunces to actions. Fox news and the republcain propoganda would rip him a new one, for months. The sell-outs with the power now, might turn on him.

compromise. Not that we should stand down. But onyl children get everythign they've ever wanted. We have gotten much power, and in nov we get all of it. don't screw it up before nov.

If we have to let them spy on us for a few months so be it. Already for 8 years, what's a few more months. :) I say drag it out until nov

I had a lengthy conversation with the nice lady who answered the phone at the Obama contact number furnished by Mr Greenwald. She wasn't clear on why she was getting this surge of calls about FISA. Below is the email response I received shortly after ending the call:

"Thank you for contacting Obama for America about proposed legislation to give phone companies legal immunity for past wiretapping. Senator Obama has opposed this legislation and stood with Senator Dodd, cosponsoring his amendment to remove this special interest provision from the bill that came before the Senate.

Senator Obama believes strongly in accountability, and when he is President, there will be no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens; no more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime; no more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. Our Constitution works, and so does the FISA court. By working with Congress and respecting our courts, Senator Obama will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom."

What will I accomplish by voting for Democraps!? They do NOTHING differently than the GOP did or would do...and DON'T say "abortion!" At this point, that particular item is WAY down the list. I care a f*ckload more about every single word in the Bill of Rights. I care a f*ckload more about the Constitution and the Rule of Law than I do about that particular item right now.

Before you go off half-cocked, please remember that a woman's right to abortion (or not to have an abortion) was decided on constitutional grounds. Therefore, the issue of abortion is just as much a constitutional issue as is the current issue. We don't get to choose which parts of the Constitution are important and which parts are not.

If you want the next Supreme Court justice to be appointed by John McCain's handlers, vote against Obama. That way, in four years, you'll much have a stronger case.

One thing I am noticing as I read these comments, is that many folks have an extremely strong case of "I want it, and I want it now!" syndrome. Our government didn't get into the shape it's in overnight and it most assuredly won't be changed (corrected) overnight either.

All we can do is what we can do. If we fail to stop telco immunity from becoming law, all we can do is move on to the next issue and do what we can. While once immunity is granted, that genie will be out of the bottle, there's nothing which says that the next President cannot petition Congress to change the FISA back to something more palatable to most of us here on this board. While immunity will probably stop the telcos from being held responsible for their activities, it won't stop the next Congress and the next Justice Department from investigating the activities of this administration and doing what is necessary to bring the lawbreakers to justice. Sure, Bush can issue a blanket pardon to everyone in his administration who broke the law or violated the constitution, but he cannot pardon himself and he cannot issue pardons which will protect his miscreants from the international courts.

You know, i was wondering why the Republicans would support a law that would only benefit the next president, who was sure to be a Democrat.

Maybe the reason is because, no matter which one wins, it will be "One of their own" in the White House.

Nobody has suggested "voting for McCain." People like myself did say that, if Democrats pass this Orwellian legislation, we must try to defeat Obama. But a vote against Obama is not a "form of protest" as you called it. Instead, it's a straightforward vote on the issues. Look at it like this: Because McCain is the candidate of the Republican party, and the Republicans are against freedom, we must defeat McCain. It's just the same with Obama. Because Obama is the candidate of the Democratic party, and (as we'll know later this weekend) the Democratics are against freedom as well, we must defeat Obama too. This is not an appeal to cast some sort of disgruntled "protest vote". If Democrats pass this legislation, then to say that the Democratic candidate must be defeated is simply to say that we must stop supporting a party that stands for authoritarianism, and start opposing it. Since in the election Obama will be the main representative of the authoritarian party, we must defeat him.

rrriiiiiiiiiiiiight.

I'm sure the gop, the racist fascists, are begging for an obama presidency.

riiiiiiight.

hahahahahah.

And the Dems don't want to be blamed for hampering "intelligence" operations.

It's about to go down...

Pearl Harbor/911 style...

I just called, and the first time, I got a recording that noone was available to speak to me now, leave a voice mail...and then when I went to voice mail it said there was no more room for messages!

Fortunately, I tried again and got someone this time, and very politely said if Obama doesn't step up on this I'm going to strangle the next Obama supporter I see. Ha.

Actually, I told them I am an Obama supporter from way back, which is true, and while I knew he was opposed to telecom amnesty ("he is!" said the person on the other end) that being the standardbearer for the party now, I thought he needed to make a statement today.

She said she would bundle my comment with all the others (of which they had many) and let Mr. Obama know.