By the way, regardless of what Obama does, might we perhaps find a senator who will throw up procedural hurdles? Didn't that happen last time? I remember there being a way for a single senator to hold things up for quite some time, right? Or press for a filibuster? Perhaps someone can be found who is going to make this a major headache for Democrats? Dodd, Feingold ...? Or should we press Obama on taking concrete steps to remove immunity, and make clear that nothing but exhausting all available procedural options will suffice?

A Pre-Emptive Attack on an October Surprise?

Just thinking out loud here, but I am reminded of how the Dem leadership caved on the Protect America Act, with rumors that from behind the scenes the Administration was warning of an imminent 9/11 scale attack. And that if happened, the Dems would be blamed

What if Obama did make a statement against the FISA bill and it lost then sometime before the election we experience a Terrorist attack ( I would'nt put it past the Right Wing-nuts) the media /McCain/Republicans would blast Obama and the Democrats which would cause dire consequences to the Election.

In that perspective the Dems were between a rock and hard place.

I will continue to support Act Blue going forward but will vote Obama come November.

OUTRAGE!!!111™

Lashing out at everyone, everywhere.

How many people really care? Honestly now?

For example, Dodd raised a couple of hundred thousand dollars on his promise to filibuster, a promise that, well, he wasn't actually able to fulfill. Recall, Reid pulled the bill. There were no hundreds of thousands of people turning out to support his defense of the Constitution and the rule of law any more than there are hundreds of thousands of people now doing so. That's not to denigrate the people who are against FISA "reform," it's only to raise the question of just how big a constituency the Constitution actually has.

I submit it's very small. Glenn is doing his best to grow it, but...

Obama really seems to have concluded that he will become President -- as I said last night, he "knows" he will ascend the Peacock Throne.

In order for him to rule -- as well as reign -- he will need all the powers the Busheviks, a compliant Congress, and the Courts have accumulated in the Autocratic executive and then some. He's gonna face the toughest situation any President ever has from day one. The road ahead is full of potholes and many, many dangers.

He's been signaling for some time that he intends to rule as a Benign Monarch as opposed to a Crazed Flyboy Autocrat such as we have now and would have if McCain were "elected." But there's no doubt he's been assimilated into the Monarchist/Imperialist camp, and that's the way it is.

The Republic? No more. Gone.

Constitution? Optional.

Rule of Law? Depends.

Rage against it? Well...

First recognize "we are an Empire now," for real, then rage, then submit -- or fight it. But know what you're fighting if you fight.

"No kings."

Send all the messages you want, but surely you don’t want another war president who came to power because people wanted to send a message in Florida in 2000? Talk about people who refuse to learn from history. Losing Florida because the crooks stole it, would not have happened if more people would have voted for Gore instead of Nader.

It’s clear to me that millions of people would not be suffering today if voting to send a message would not have been employed to the extent it was in Florida and maybe even in Ohio and conservative SCOTUS justices had not made an unjust political ruling. In a two party system, a third party needs to mount a serious challenge, before they should be supported if there is any chance that the state vote will be very close.

It was pretty obvious in Florida that the vote would be very close and that Nader had no chance. As has been said by other commenters, voting in McCain and appointing just one more conservative justice, spells doom for justice in America. It also means more untold suffering both in the US and around the world.

Here his position rankles precisely because we know that he knows better. No doubt enormous pressures were applied, but he positioned himself as ready to resist them, and the spy regime is as odious as endless war. He is, by degrees, turning a vote for Nader into a vote of conscience -- to my chagrin but not to my surprise. He must think us idiots, but we can vote smarter than he imagines.

Glenn, your psychoanalysis is spot on -- for me and for lots of others here, it seems. In the CA primary, I voted for Obama, but with some wistfulness, as I thought Edwards' important populist message would not survive his exit. Watching Obama since then, I let myself be swept away, and to pour decades of unfulfilled hope into this vessel -- a vessel I now see is just another colander.

What hurts me the most is the obvious nature of his calculus. It wasn't the polling that led to his decision: it was the culpability of his Congressional colleagues. Insisting on denying immunity was probably within his power, but would have cost him dearly among the blood-soaked Democratic leadership. He knew he could buy their allegiance without losing too many from the left flank.

He is yet another pragmatist, but worst of all, perhaps is that he is a cunning one. Occasional Observer may vote for Nader in protest; I probably will not. S/he may accept a McCain win to preserve purity; I cannot. Because, dammit, I am a pragmatist, too, and Obama's cold calculus assumes -- correctly, alas -- my own.

Kitt,

I thought I explained this in my post, but I'll do so again, in a little more depth.

-- Martin Gale

I thought that maybe you meant that if this would have come out during the primary more voters might have gone to Clinton. To which I didn't agree. For one thing, as you said, Obama would not have taken the stance he took just now, which, as you also said, would have made it way more difficult for him to have walked it back to the position he took yesterdy. So in that regard and for that reason, indeed, it would have been better if this had come out during the primary. But I think of the primary as the Clinton/Obama primary. Because that was the bulk of it, so I doubt this would or could have come out back when Dodd and Edwards were candidates.