Chilly Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 "To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies." -- Obama spokesman Bill Burton, Oct. 24, 2007 "My view on FISA has always been that the issue of the phone companies per se is not one that overrides the security interests of the American people." - Barack Obama, Jun 25, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 On a somewhat related note, here's a list of Democratic House members of the most ethical Congress ever that changed their votes and how much Telco PAC $$$ they received http://www.maplight.org/FISA_June08 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Oh those pesky and ethical republicans NEVER change their opinions. ESPECIALLY Mr. Straight Talk Express. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Oh those pesky and ethical republicans NEVER change their opinions. ESPECIALLY Mr. Straight Talk Express. But Obama's not a Republican and wasn't he supposed to be a different kind of politician? Now you're comparing his actions to John W McBush III Change you can believe in = The king is dead. Long live the king Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 But Obama's not a Republican and wasn't he supposed to be a different kind of politician?Now you're comparing his actions to John W McBush III Change you can believe in = The king is dead. Long live the king I was actually going after the statement "Democratic House members of the most ethical Congress..." I absolutely can not stand it when people say that. Especially with anything worth passing Bush threatens a veto and when Congress was pretty much run by the republicans they ran it into the ground. Easy for people to forget that I guess. Agree or not, my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 27, 2008 Author Share Posted June 27, 2008 Oh those pesky and ethical republicans NEVER change their opinions. ESPECIALLY Mr. Straight Talk Express. Its okay that he's manipulating his positions for political reasons because the other guys do it too. More of the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Its okay that he's manipulating his positions for political reasons because the other guys do it too. More of the same. Wow, did I say that? Um, no. I said that it's not the first time that a politician has changed their position. But since it's Obama let's get him!!! I wonder why there isn't as many negative posts on this site for McCain? HMMMMM? He must be such an angel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 I wonder why there isn't as many negative posts on this site for McCain? HMMMMM? He must be such an angel. Or maybe because McCain is a known quantity. Not much can be said or learned about him that we don't know Obama on the other hand was branded as a different kind of politician. He's change, hope, etc. But the more he opens his mouth, the more he sounds like the same old same old Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Wow, did I say that? Um, no. I said that it's not the first time that a politician has changed their position. But since it's Obama let's get him!!! I wonder why there isn't as many negative posts on this site for McCain? HMMMMM? He must be such an angel. Obama ran and is running on a theme. "Change" Thats their point. Do I need to explain further? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 "To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies." -- Obama spokesman Bill Burton, Oct. 24, 2007 "My view on FISA has always been that the issue of the phone companies per se is not one that overrides the security interests of the American people." - Barack Obama, Jun 25, 2008 What is it, specifically, that you don't like about what he said. Here's Obama's full, unedited statement: Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. There is also little doubt that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, has abused that authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders. That is why last year I opposed the so-called Protect America Act, which expanded the surveillance powers of the government without sufficient independent oversight to protect the privacy and civil liberties of innocent Americans. I have also opposed the granting of retroactive immunity to those who were allegedly complicit in acts of illegal spying in the past. After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act. Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance -- making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act. It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives -- and the liberty -- of the American people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Or maybe because McCain is a known quantity. Not much can be said or learned about him that we don't know Obama on the other hand was branded as a different kind of politician. He's change, hope, etc. But the more he opens his mouth, the more he sounds like the same old same old Obama does provide change you can believe in*. *Offer expires January 19, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 27, 2008 Author Share Posted June 27, 2008 What is it, specifically, that you don't like about what he said. What I don't like, specifically, is that after saying he wouldn't support any bill with retroactive telecom immunity, he's decided to go ahead and do just that. Who gives a flying !@#$ if there is a provision to investigate what happened? There is still no liability here if a crime was committed. A real candidate of change would have had a backbone and stood up for what he had previously said he believes in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 27, 2008 Author Share Posted June 27, 2008 Wow, did I say that? Um, no. I said that it's not the first time that a politician has changed their position. But since it's Obama let's get him!!! I wonder why there isn't as many negative posts on this site for McCain? HMMMMM? He must be such an angel. There is a huge backlash from people like me because Obama has convinced a multitude of morons to vote for him simply because of his "honest, open, and post-partisan" image, which isn't supported by any evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Obama ran and is running on a theme. "Change" Thats their point. Do I need to explain further? I understand that der. I would just like to see people question McCain a bit more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 I understand that der. I would just like to see people question McCain a bit more Because it's been pretty established that McCain meanders between issues. It's logical that Obama as the new guiy running on a "change" platform is being subjected to more questioning. And, like clockwork, he's moved much more to the right after Hillary dropped, and is now an avowed free trader and a fiscal conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Because it's been pretty established that McCain meanders between issues. It's logical that Obama as the new guiy running on a "change" platform is being subjected to more questioning. And, like clockwork, he's moved much more to the right after Hillary dropped, and is now an avowed free trader and a fiscal conservative. either way it's a presidential election we should be questioning both candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 27, 2008 Author Share Posted June 27, 2008 either way it's a presidential election we should be questioning both candidates. You don't think thats happening in more important places than this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 You don't think thats happening in more important places than this? Most likely is... I would like for it to happen here as well. If we're going to talk politics, why question only one candidate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 27, 2008 Author Share Posted June 27, 2008 Most likely is... I would like for it to happen here as well. If we're going to talk politics, why question only one candidate? Then do it. Most people on here from what I've seen don't love McCain because of his image, but there are a lot of people here that :wallbash: Obama and view him in an incorrect way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Then do it. Most people on here from what I've seen don't love McCain because of his image, but there are a lot of people here that :wallbash: Obama and view him in an incorrect way. I see it as most people love to attack Obama and Democrats in general. And love everything but. Hardly a negative posts on McCain. Just funny to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts