|
Banned
|
Well...we may have enough new information to attract a few more informed voters to to post an opinion in this thread's poll, now.....
I've maintained that Obama, billed by the right as "the most liberal member of the US Senate".... is actually a candidate with the stamp of approval of the "Powers that Be".... a center-right "offering" intended to placate "the center", (they lean to the right, but they consider themselves "middle of the road"....), who will say and do anything he has to, to win this election. The PTB seems pleased with his performance, so far, and that is enough for me to remain a sadly disappointed skeptic of a once promising candidate looking more and more, to me....like an "empty suit", as David Sirota put it!
It's time to post again in this thread....
Here is the link to the first page, the thread title, and the poll:
Historians looking at Bush presidency may well wonder if Congress actually existed
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=130417
From the January 18, 2008 OP of this thread:
Quote:
|
....If Clinton and Obama do not join Dodd in the senate to speask and vote against passage of this bill, and with the democratic congress accumulating a legislative record as "Bush's poodle"...and, if you believe that sometimes violence is the only appropriate response to attempt to redress grievances against a government undermining the foundations of our constititutional bill of rights, would lack of firm oppostion to this bill by Clinton and Obama, and it's passage, be one of those times when consideration of responding with violent protest, in lieu of defense of our rights by either party's leaders and likely successors, be something you would consider, or....would you elect to wait.....for what, and for how long?.....
|
Yesterday, from dc_dux in another thread:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...65#post2470665
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
host....the party of Hoyer, Pelosi, Rockefeller, Reid stopped Bush's illegal "terrorist surveillance program" that wiretapped American citizens w/o a warrant.
I dont agree with the compromise proposal on telecomm immunity in the current that would leave it to the FISA courts to determine immunity.
But the bill does reinforce, and some might say strengthen, the basic underpinning of the FISA program that prohibits warrantless wiretaps of citizens.
I accept that I wont likely agree with the Democratic party on every provision of every bill but I wont disavow the party based on those relatively few disagreements (at least for me).
|
dc_dux, you left yourself a way out because, while you gave an impression that Rockefeller, Reid, and Hoyer had:
Quote:
|
.....stopped Bush's illegal "terrorist surveillance program" that wiretapped American citizens w/o a warrant......
|
.....you posted "the party of", in front of their names, because you know they are, and have been working to retroactively legalize the Bush warrantless wiretapping, complete with provision for amnesty for telecomms cooperating with administration requests....documented in court filings to have begun with requests from the administration issued as early to some telecomms.....as nine months BEFORE the 9/11 attacks.
The choice seemed pretty clear as to who Obama should endorse in the Georgia congressional primary of rep. John Barrow on July 15. I believe you have to oppose the things John Barrow stands for, with a passion. I don't see that passion in Obama, or in his campaign handlers. I think outrage about this will buid to the point that denials of this endorsement of Barrow will be belatedly issued by Obama's campaign.
The point is that word from Obama could help mightily to pause Steny Hoyer's efforts in the house to move the democrats away from the FISA "reform" bill that they already passed, into a new version that gives Bush everything he demands.....at the expense of our rights and even knowing what the telecomms were told, when they were first told it, and what they did to cooperate, without receipt of warrants, signed by a judge, to monitor our communications and billing records......
.....not only is that "word", not coming from Obama, he is reported to be endorsing this DINO, republican sock puppet:
Watch Rep.John Barrow's (D-GA) campaign ad:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by John Barrpw
"I stood up to the leaders of my own party....fought to eliminate the "death tax", and in Iraq, we "can't cut and run"...
|
Background:
Targeting "Bad" Democrats:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...ats/index.html
In february, rep. John Barrow signed this letter, with other "blue dog" democrats, urging Nancy Pelosi to support the Rockefeler-Cheney warrantless surveillance/telecomm amnesty bill that the senate was about to pass:
Quote:
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congre...531&id=8376129
Text From the Congressional Record
Hastings, Richard [R-WA]
Debate: H.RES.976
Begin 2008-02-13 12:05:05
End 12:08:16
Length 00:03:11
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.
Mr. Speaker, the tragic events of September 11, 2001 taught us many lessons. One of the lessons we learned that day was that our Nation must remain aggressive in our fight against international terrorism. We must always stay one step ahead of those who wish to harm our fellow Americans. Now is not the time to tie the hands of our intelligence community. The modernization of foreign intelligence surveillance into the 21st century is a critical national security priority.
Mr. Speaker, that was a letter sent to Speaker Pelosi less than 2 weeks ago by the members of the Democrat Blue Dog Coalition.
CONGRESS of THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, DC, January 28, 2008.
DEAR MADAM SPEAKER: Legislation reforming the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is currently being considered by the Senate. Following the Senate's passage of a FISA bill, it will be necessary for the House to quickly consider FISA legislation to get a bill to the President before the Protect America Act expires in February.
It is our belief that such legislation should include the following provisions: Require individualized warrants for surveillance of U.S. citizens living or traveling abroad; Clarify that no court order is required to conduct surveillance of foreign-to-foreign communications that are routed through the United States; Provide enhanced oversight by Congress of surveillance laws and procedures; Compel compliance by private sector partners; Review by FISA Court of minimization procedures; Targeted
immunity for carriers that participated in anti-terrorism surveillance programs.
The Rockefeller-Bond FISA legislation contains satisfactory language addressing all these issues and we would fully support that measure should it reach the House floor without substantial change. We believe these components will ensure a strong national security apparatus that can thwart terrorism across the globe and save American lives here in our country.
It is also critical that we update the FISA laws in a timely manner. To pass a long-term extension of the Protect America Act, as some may suggest, would leave in place a limited, stopgap measure that does not fully address critical surveillance issues. We have it within our ability to replace the expiring Protect America Act by passing strong, bipartisan FISA modernization legislation that can be signed into law and we should do so--the consequences of not passing such a measure could place
our national security at undue risk.
Sincerely,
Leonard L. Boswell, ------, Mike Ross, Bud Cramer, Heath Shuler, Allen Boyd, Dan Boren, Jim Matheson, Lincoln Davis, Tim Holden, Dennis Moore, Earl Pomeroy, Melissa L. Bean, John Barrow, Joe Baca, John Tanner, Jim Cooper, Zachary T. Space, Brad Ellsworth, Charlie Melancon, Christopher P. Carney.
|
A democratic party member emerged to challenge Rep. John Barrow:
Quote:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/...a-primary.html
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
OBAMA TAKES A STAND IN A GEORGIA PRIMARY-- FOR THE WORST BLUE DOG IN THE COUNTRY AND AGAINST A HARD WORKING PROGRESSIVE
In sync on the issues
When I allowed myself to be talked into supporting Barack Obama for president-- I had been an early enthusiast when he was a longshot state Senator in Chicago running in the Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate-- I warned the young man urging me to abandon my post-Edwards neutrality and forget that Hillary Clinton had a more progressive voting record, that he (and his generation) should steel themselves for some tremendous letdowns that Obama would surely be serving up. He laughed at me. But when I was his age I would have laughed at me too.
So today when I heard that Obama had endorsed John Barrow, the most reactionary Democrat in Congress, in a primary pitting him against Regina Thomas, a progressive state Senator, I wasn't in the slightest bit surprised. No one who recalls Obama's enthusiastic endorsement of Joe Lieberman against Ned Lamont could possibly be surprised. Obama, like McCain and Clinton, is a professional politician. One of their basic tenets is the Incumbency Protection Racket. That Barrow is running the ads everywhere in the district is a tribute to the powerful grassroots campaign Regina Thomas is waging... and to the polling his campaign just completed that shows he's going to get his head handed to him by constituents who know he represents the corporations and the elite power structure, not everyday Georgians. Look at his first TV commercial and what how he choses GOP talking points to lean on-- eliminating "the death tax," a McCain-Bush perspective on unending war in Iraq, and scapegoating immigrants.
A friend of mine says that Obama taped the ad not realizing there is a primary. I don't believe it. He's a smart guy and knows exactly what he's doing. And he has nothing to lose-- at least nothing he cares about. Still, when Obama is president he may well regret that he taped an ad that says “We’re going to need John Barrow back in Congress to help change Washington and get our country back on track,” since the moderate Obama and the ultra-conservative Barrow differ on most important issues that Obama will have to face starting in January. Let's start with this one:
As far as the current contretemps over retroactive immunity and warrantless wiretaps which Senator Obama opposes, Barrow is a major supporter-- one of the original 22 Blue Dogs who signed the letter to Nancy Pelosi demanding that Bush's policies be adhered to. Of course that forces one to notice that while Obama is refusing the corrupting influence of PAC money-- and insisting the DNC follow his lead-- and then you make realize that his endorsee, Mr. Barrow, is a typically corrupt Blue Dog scarfing up whatever he can get from the companies who need his help. So... Obama refuses to take money from the telecoms and he is opposing-- like most Democrats-- granting them retroactive immunity for breaking laws. Barrow, on the other hand counts the telecoms, particularly AT&T, Comcast and Verizon-- the very ones who broke laws and demand immunity-- among his most generous supporters. He's taken tens of thousands of dollars from these shady characters and rather than recusing himself from voting on their special interests, he becomes one of their biggest supports... against Senator Obama's principled stand.
Regina, of course, whose candidacy may be harmed by Senator Obama's endorsement, has been working hard in the Georgia state Senate for the same exact principles and values Obama claims to represent. So while Barrow has publicly bragged about being a rubber stamp for Bush (watch that top video again), Regina has been opposing the war and working hard for the well-being of her constituents. As for the FISA bill Bush and Barrow want so desperately for their campaign donors... Regina and Obama are on the same page. "After reading the bill," she told me this evening, "the first thing I thought was that this was not good for any American citizens-- and it seems like a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. It doesn't look like what the Bush Administration wants is just the power to eavesdrop on terrorists-- I think we all agree that's his job-- but to also monitor any communication he wants to between any American citizens he wants to and without any lawful judicial supervision."
Like I told my young friend, be ready for lots of this kind of thing from President Obama-- or President Anyone Else; just don't be fooled... again. He really is just like all the rest. Meanwhile, we are not powerless, we're making a real effort to help Regina overcome this latest obstacle. Please donate to her campaign directly or to our PAC, which will be targeting Barrow in the July 15th primary.
|
Quote:
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/sha...help_john.html
Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2008 > June > 18 > Entry
Obama cuts an ad to help John Barrow in his primary fight
Wednesday, June 18, 2008, 07:02 PM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama has taped a radio commercial on behalf of U.S. Rep. John Barrow of Savannah, who faces a July 15 primary challenge.
It’s the first case of Obama involving himself in a local race in Georgia.
Details of when the ad will start airing and where it will be broadcast — the 12th District covers much of east Georgia, including portions of Augusta and Savannah — were not immediately available Wednesday.
But the Obama campaign made clear to my colleague Aaron Sheinin that it sees Barrow, a two-term Democrat, as an important ally. We’ve got calls into the Barrow campaign, but haven’t heard from them yet.
“Senator Obama believes that Congressman Barrow has worked hard to bring change that families in his district deserve, and we’ll work hard to help John Barrow win in November,” Obama spokeswoman Amy Brundage said.
In the ad, Obama asks voters to join him in supporting Barrow. “We’re going to need John Barrow back in Congress to help change Washington and get our country back on track,” Obama says in the 60-second ad.
Barrow beat a Republican incumbent in 2004 and had tough GOP opposition in 2006. But this April, Barrow picked up unexpected opposition from Regina Thomas, a well-known African-American state senator based in Savannah. Barrow is white, and In past primaries in the 12th District, black voters have cast nearly 70 percent of the ballots.
Barrow had endorsed Obama in late February, a few weeks after the Illinois senator won the Georgia primary. And within weeks of Thomas joining the race, Barrow, a conservative Democrat, was placed at the top of a list of 14 national co-chairs for Obama’s massive, 50-state voter registration drive — along with the likes of singer Melissa Etheridge and the Rev. Joe Lowery.
Barrow has plenty of cash to make use of the Obama ad. He reported $1.3 million in cash on hand this spring.
|
Update....and now, it's done....the "compromise" that the motherfuckers who lead the majority party in congress ...the party you so consistently defend, dc_dux, is exposed as the other right wing party. How much more are we going to quietly take from these bastards? Does anyone here have personal limits? All the house leadership had to do was to stand pat on the version of the bill that they had already passed. It wan't perfect, but it wasn't a sellout to Bush/corporatism that this is.
Quote:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...com/index.html
Thursday June 19, 2008 12:26 EDT
George Bush's latest powers, courtesy of the Democratic Congress
(updated below)
CQ reports (sub. req.)
http://homeland.cq.com/hs/displayale...tchId=60706424
that "a final deal has been reached" on FISA and telecom amnesty and "the House is likely to take up the legislation Friday." I've now just read a copy of the final "compromise" bill. It's even worse than expected. When you read it, it's actually hard to believe that the Congress is about to make this into our law. Then again, this is the same Congress that abolished habeas corpus with the Military Commissions Act, and legalized George Bush's warrantless eavesdropping program with the "Protect America Act," so it shouldn't be hard to believe at all. Seeing the words in print, though, adds a new dimension to appreciating just how corrupt and repugnant this is:
The provision granting amnesty to lawbreaking telecoms, Title VIII, has the exact Orwellian title it should have: "Protection of Persons Assisting the Government." Section 802(a) provides:
[A] civil action may not lie or be maintained in a Federal or State court against any person for providing assistance to an element of the intelligence community, and shall be properly dismissed, if the Attorney General certifies to the district court of the United States in which such action is pending that . . . (4) the assistance alleged to have been provided . . . was --
(A) in connection with intelligence activity involving communications that was (i) authorized by the President during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on January 17, 2007 and (ii) designed to prevent or detect a terrorist attack, or activities in preparation of a terrorist attack, against the United States" and
(B) the subject of a written request or directive . . . indicating that the activity was (i) authorized by the President; and (ii) determined to be lawful.
So all the Attorney General has to do is recite those magic words -- the President requested this eavesdropping and did it in order to save us from the Terrorists -- and the minute he utters those words, the courts are required to dismiss the lawsuits against the telecoms, no matter how illegal their behavior was.
That's the "compromise" Steny Hoyer negotiated and which he is now -- according to very credible reports -- pressuring every member of the Democratic caucus to support. It's full-scale, unconditional amnesty with no inquiry into whether anyone broke the law. In the U.S. now, thanks to the Democratic Congress, we'll have a new law based on the premise that the President has the power to order private actors to break the law, and when he issues such an order, the private actors will be protected from liability of any kind on the ground that the Leader told them to do it -- the very theory that the Nuremberg Trial rejected.
I'll post more in just a bit on the new warrantless eavesdropping powers George Bush is going to have under this law. They've vast and precisely the kind of powers that were abused by our Government for decades prior to FISA. Returning to that era is going to be part of the legacy not just of George Bush, but of this Democratic-controlled Congress. ....
|
Last edited by host; 06-19-2008 at 09:35 AM..
|