I just sent the following letter to Bill Burton:

Mr. Burton,

My wife and I have to date been very strong supporters of Sen. Obama's campaign for president. We have given money to the campaign and had intended to give more. We intended to volunteer in Cincinnati this summer in support of the campaign's effort to take Ohio in the general election. And, naturally, we intended to vote for Sen. Obama.

It is impossible, then, for me to overstate the profound loss and disorientation I felt at reading Sen. Obama's support for H.R. 6304, which essentially legalizes the current administration's criminal infringement on the fourth amendment, one of the basic rights granted to all Americans.

I am not one prone to political rigidity or self-righteous grand-standing. In fact, I appreciate the pragmatic elements inherent in politics -- what makes it the art of the possible. I also appreciate political strategy, and admire those who are able to skillfully neutralize an issue before their opponents can wield it against them as a political weapon.

But there are things that, while vulnerable to the political process, nevertheless exist outside of politics. The fundamental rights which America has promised us as Americans are among those things. Outside of the struggle for specific policies which reflect our deeply felt convictions in favor of fairness and opportunity there exists the right as an American not to be enslaved, or spied on, seized, held, silenced, or prevented from participating in our own governance without warrant.

Therefore, I request that you convey to Sen. Obama my insistence that he vote against the above mentioned bill when it reaches the Senate. If Sen. Obama truly aspires to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America, his unqualified opposition to this odious and unconstitutional scrap of legislation would be a marvelous -- and requisite -- next step toward that goal.

Otherwise, I will have to assume that Sen. Obama is the sort of man who would pretend toward an office for which he has no regard. Obviously, I cannot vote for such a man. For the past seven years, we've endured a president who has no respect for the presidency, and I didn't vote for him either.

Yours Sincerely,

Mark Fasano

Louisville, KY

Your letter to Burton is much better than mine was. I didn't go quite as far as promising not to vote for Obama, but the thought has crossed my mind. It's amazing how this horrendous position he's taken has completely changed my view of his candidacy and his integrity.

I could sort of understand the possible necessity of his post-nomination swing to the right: his groveling for AIPAC, his vow to continue the Cuban embargo & his promise to keep sending "drug war" money to the despotic Colombian government were all a bit hard to take, though not impossible.

But for him to embrace this despicable frontal assault on what's left of our 4th Amendment rights? That's a dealbreaker for me; I am leaving the Democratic party.

I don't have any hope left that the Senate will stop this abomination from passing. It's over.

On the bright side, the "BitchSlap Hoyer" fund just topped $300,000!

(to see where it is, visit http://www.actblue.com/page/fisa or click on my sig)

That's why the guy with robe makes him swear on the big book that he'll actually do it.

Like I said, I'm all about political gamesmanship, and I'm willing to bend some on the issues in order to grant a preferred candidate flexibility.

Perhaps I might have "punished" Obama for his recent rightward drift by not giving his campaign any more money (which I'm not delusional or self-important enough to think matters, given that his war chest will probably equal Bolivia's GDP by Election Day, but it's the principle), or by holding off on volunteering.

But not voting for Obama post-Constitutional ass-wiping is a no-brainer.

Just as I wouldn't vote for a candidate for dog-catcher who announced during the campaign that he will refuse to catch dogs once elected, I'm not going to vote for someone to be the chief constitutional officer of the country I live in who announces, tacitly or otherwise, that he has no regard for that country's constitution.

Call me old-fashioned.

If you didn't sound so very proud of yourself for being the oh so rare and wise one for downing the red pill--I might not have such a strong ick response.

Yeah ok. I do understand that is rather common for people to feel a bit ill when confronted with a truth they are not quite ready to accept. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch ain't it?

"All you have to do is acccept the truth and try to create change yourself?" Come on, that's the most simplistic and trite advice I've heard in awhile.

That would be trite, yes. But then I don't think that is precisely what I said and I am sure it is not what I meant to relay. Let me try one more time. The more and better democrats crowd are like drug addicts that cannot or will not admit they are addicted. What they need is to experience a fundamental paradigm shift so as to be able to see the situation for what it is. Until they do, they cannot possibly hope to change anything. Their belief in their current "plan" is akin to a smack addict believing he can get clean by changing the needles he uses to shoot up with. "Let's just change out the politicians, then it'll all be good." Right?

Either/or is simply not acceptable for those active in politics. It's a constant and difficult interplay between both. -- nicole p

No. You don't get it. Understanding and accepting this particular "either/or" is a necessary prerequisite to being able to act in ways that will bring about fundamental change in the long term. That does not mean you have to completely forgo those avenues within the system you think make a point but it does mean that you cannot use them as your primary method of fighting. Either people accept that the system is gamed and realize that working within that system is not a legitimate plan for bringing about fundamental change -- or they don't and they continue to wonder why they get screwed at every turn.

Getting that "ick" feeling again?