Obama lies and supports fascist spy bill
The last two presidential elections have really jaded me on our electoral system, but lately I’ve found myself increasingly excited to hop on the Obama band wagon.
Change we can believe in? Not anymore.
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama supports the spy bill compromise passed by the House Friday, despite having opposed retroactive amnesty to telecoms that helped with the President’s secret, warrantless wiretapping.
The measure expands the government’s ability to install blanket wiretaps inside domestic communication infrastructure and frees the nation’s phone and internet companies from lawsuits accusing them of massive violations of their customers’ privacy. The Senate is expected to take up and pass the Bush-approved bill next week.
The bill is widely perceived as a victory for the White House, and was agreed to by Democrats out of a fear of being labeled soft on terrorism in the upcoming elections.
The most important political news seems to come out on Friday, which is why the media seems to have missed this. This is nothing new of course. The above news article also cites the statement released late last Friday by the Obama campaign where he attempts to explain himself. He was obviously hoping nobody would notice. I have noticed and I am angry.
I’m not simply angry about his support for this unconstitutional and, frankly, fascist bill. I’m angry that he lied and reversed his position on this bill. American’s have been consistently and overwhelmingly against this bill since the White House first introduced it in January. I’m angry that someone promoting “change” is playing the same manipulative political games that have turned our election process into a farce. Disillusioned and jaded once again.
A lot of people don’t see this telecom thing as very important, but it is. It’s Orwellian. He lied and is tossing aside our civil liberties so that he can appeal to a fraction of conservatives who won’t vote for him anyway. Bad move, Obama. Now you’re just another hypocritical politician.
I have a friend who heard about this and now plans on supporting Nader. I fell for that in 2000 and don’t plan on doing that. I still dig Cynthia McKinny, but if I’m going to “throw my vote away,” I might as well vote for my Dad. As for now, I’ll do my part to bring back Wavy Gravy’s campaign slogan. This isn’t a slogan promoting mass apathy. Rather, we shouldn’t be forced to vote between two unsuitable people. There is still a lot of time, but I’m not happy with Obama. Plus, he’s for nuclear power too. As Ani DiFranco said when she was here last week, “I can sum up my argument against nuclear power in two words: nuclear waste.”
…and if you think my criticism is harsh, you should scroll down and read the comments from this Wired article.
Explore posts in the same categories: politics
June 27th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
You see, when I say I’m NOT wasting my vote by choosing Nader… I’m not only going to be flexing my right as a citizen of this Democratic country to vote for the candidate they see fit, but I’m also going to be voting for the same person I voted for the past 2 terms… someone with the guts to stick to their guns and stand up for the people of this country!
June 28th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Yeah, I like Nader, don’t get me wrong. This is a point in the campaign where everyone seems to be moving closer to the center, at least symbolically. Nader’s been pretty solid on his stances without changing his mind. That’s integrity. That’s what is missing in politics today.
It bothers me, however, that Nader is largely invisible until election time. Of course, the media plays a huge role in publicizing some candidates and ignoring others.
That’s the argument of Ron Paul supporters as well. The media is pretty afraid of him. That guy can sure fire up a crowd though….particularly those white male college students who don’t care about women’s rights or human rights at the border….but I digress.
Sadly, my money is on McCain. All his has to do to win, I think, is find some crazy fundamentalist, pro-life, pro-war guy (tell me that’s not a contradiction) as his running mate. That’s how he’ll mobilize the enormous base of crazies that currently see him as “too liberal.”
June 29th, 2008 at 8:57 am
There are more problems than just nuclear waste that is the problem with nuclear power. It need water to cool the reactor. For example Palasides and Cook Nuclear Plant in Michigan. They are both on Lake Michigan in South Haven and Brigman respectively. They take water in into the reactor and the excess water that is not given off as water vapor is let back into the lake at a signifacantly warmer temperature. It changes the ecosystem over time. They talk about alternative power a lot here in Michigan, but they are all bad. Hydroelectric dams water and stops the natural fish runs, wind power kills migratory birds (which will increase the insect pest that damage plants and crops), etc.
Moreover, you are not wasting your vote by voting. The way that they have the electoral college set up, yes it seems that you are wasting your vote, but by not voting, you are doing more damage by voting.
I felt angered by Obama’s vote. He wants to be more electable by moving toward the center and that is wrong. By Obama voting for the Facist warrentless wiretap bill, my vote is now up in the air.
June 29th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
I made a mistake in my typing now that I have read it over again….
When I stated, “Moreover, you are not wasting your vote by voting. The way that they have the electoral college set up, yes it seems that you are wasting your vote, but by not voting, you are doing more damage by voting.” I forgot a word. It was suppose to be “but by not voting, you are doing more damage than by voting.” Everyone should vote and they should make an eduacted vote, not one that is based on opinions on superficial things (like our conversation over e-mail). If people want there opinion to be expressed than vote, don’t stand there and bitch, because if you didn’t vote, then why should people listen to you. And if the elected people go against what they were elected to do, they should be automatically re-called. We voted in an democratic congress and nothing has changed…I say re-call them all!
There was another typo, but I think that you still understand it rather go through and explain myself. And I even read over my post before submitting it….hmmmm.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Under the American “democracy”, a vote for Nader is not a wasted vote, it’s a vote for John McCain. That’s the way it is. A vote for anyone besides Obama is a vote for John McCain. It’s a bummer, but I don’t see any way around that. Nader and his supporters should be working toward election reform. Not running for President.
I’ve been prepared to be disappointed by Obama. From here till November, he’ll be moving closer to the center, supporting things that I don’t think he should be supporting. He’s trying to get elected President of the United States. The only surprising thing that has happened is that he’s still in the race. Nader is not trying to be President. He’s trying to make a point. In 2000, I was listening. In 2004, I was listening.
2008, I have someone to vote for. Obama supporting this bill is not his first mistake and it won’t be his last. I don’t expect radical change if Obama is elected President. I don’t plan on becoming suddenly patriotic. But I am excited to not be completely embarrassed of this national identity I have no control over. To have a President that can say a sentence correctly and inspire people. That can speak to the people that work in this country and say words that string together to make sense to the audience. A politician that is able to discuss the racial and class divide and have it reflect reality is enough for me. It’s not his job to ‘fix’ these problems. It’s ours.
If you think Obama supporting this bill makes him no different than John McCain, than vote your conscience. Maybe this mistake will cost him the election. If you think it’s McDonalds v. Burger King, than vote for vegetarian Mom and Pop. But if you don’t want to see Mr. wincing-grin in Office, you should suck it up and vote the only alternative we have and be glad it’s not Clinton.
Is it sad that I’m willing to vote for somebody just because he’s able to spell? Yes, it is. Good afternoon, welcome to the United States, where were you this morning?
June 30th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Thank you for being the rational yin to my irrational, knee-jerk yang. You’re right. None of us should expect politicians to change politics. Just once, though, it would be nice to vote for an electable candidate that I can really get behind. I’m tired of walking into a voting booth and thinking, “well, this guy is not as crappy as the other.” That kinda takes the empowerment out of it all.
It is up to us to fix the problems in our electoral system. It does seem, however, that there are less and less ways in which protest is effective. It’s the growing, “this is all there is and there isn’t much we can do about it” mentality that I loathe and at the same time, empathize.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:40 am
BC does make a lot of sence. Other politician should push for a change in politics, but from what I seen with normal population, it will not change because of apathy. Not enough people care to change it. And I agree with you Kyle, I’m tired of voting the lesser of the two crappy canidates.
July 7th, 2008 at 6:56 am
I couldn’t agree more with Kyle and Jason. I also agree with BC’s assertion that it is our job to change politics and that is why I so adamanty want a system with more than two parties. When I walked into a pub in Amsterdam and an elderly gentlemen vocalized his displeasure in being in the company of Americans, his number one complaint is that we only had two parties. He of course was surprised when I engaged in a conversation with him and agreed with him. BC has a point about being embarassed by this national identity, but maybe the embarassment is necessary to incite change. It is not the politicians who are going to make the change it is the people who will make the politicians change; much like drug policy reform, change has to begin locally and expand from there; change starts at the state level before the federal government finally catches on. I do not believe that if I do not vote for Obama that I am voting for McCain. I believe I will not compromise my beliefs out of fear.