Hanging Tough with Obama When Obama is Not Hanging Tough

THE BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Mark Karlin

Editor and Publisher

July 7, 2008

As I've mentioned more than once, BuzzFlash is the oldest and largest progressive Internet news and commentary site between the two Coasts.  We have the perspective of the Heartland -- and we were founded on a premise that only when we hang tough for Constitutional values will we prevail.

The most basic and fundamental message of BuzzFlash -- long before the other sites that now get branded on television all the time (we were founded in May of 2000) -- was that you don't win victories by laying down like a doormat; and you don't sell out the Constitution, one person-one vote, economic justice and the energy future of our nation by cowering in a corner every time that the Republicans pull a national security scare.

Of course, there are other factors at work, like the DLC, which have made many Democrats as complicit as Republicans when it comes to voting with big corporations because of the money channeled to their campaigns by "K" Street lobbyists.

Barack Obama offered a vision of an end to this cowardice and betrayal.

We believe that he still does.

I want to make it emphatically clear that I and BuzzFlash oppose Obama's position on the latest House FISA bill; on "redefining" an Iraq pullout; on giving a green light to the unprecedented Supreme Court gift to the NRA; and on his "carve out" of exceptions to late term abortions that would exclude the mental health of a woman.

These are not progressive perspectives (although the Iraq statement was consistent with his prior qualifications -- and those of Hillary Clinton).  We oppose his stances as stated above, and will continue to do so.  As I have often stated, we are beholden to principles, not to an individual.  As a grassroots organizer, Obama, we suspect, understands that.

There's been a lot of Internet speculation about why Obama made these counter-progressive comments.  Is he following the advice of his strategists because he needs to ease the concerns of key voting blocks in new states that they plan to possibly pick up (e.g., Colorado, New Mexico, Montana, Georgia, Virginia, etc.)?  In that case, Obama loses some of his luster as being the "genuine" candidate.  Or are these nuances that Obama actually believes?  Or are they a lot of "dog days of summer" attention focused on issues that will pass once he becomes president and appoints Supreme Court justices who will lean progressive, along with having a heavily Democratic Congress, including the Senate?

The answer: probably a little of all of the above.

Being in Chicago, as we have said, we have worked with Obama in the past on some advocacy issues, such as putting an end to Payday Loans  (although we have absolutely no connection with his campaign; we're talking about when he was a state senator).  We also know a lot of people who know him from Hyde Park -- both socially and politically -- and elected officials who worked with him in the legislature.

Most of them will tell you this: if he has a core center upon which he will not compromise, it is related to Constitutional issues.  We wager that he and his campaign know that Harry Reid doesn't have the votes to maintain a filibuster on the House FISA bill, so Obama is taking the chance to innoculate himself from the only thing the Republicans got to run against him; i.e., that he is a furtive Muslim sympathizer.  As BuzzFlash has speculated before, we think that too many Democrats were given classified briefings about the FISA illegalities and would be implicated if Bush and Cheney were held to account.  As for Telecom Immunity, show us the money.  When you have the Democratic head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Jay Rockefeller, cheerleading for Telecom Immunity, you know that the fix is in.

Do we justify such "business as usual" political moves? No, but we are going to hold our judgment on Obama, barring some radical departure from his primary positions, until he is elected.  This guy is committed to the Constitution, and BuzzFlash and the rest of the netroots are going to be all over him like a panther on the prowl if he doesn't roll back the Bush usurpations of the Constitution and our civil liberties.  The same goes for abortion.

Because while he's made these objectionable statements, he's also been "framing" the national security issue in a way that Democrats have not done before; he is boxing McCain in on the definition of what makes our nation secure.  That is the larger battle that has to be won. 

We've talked in the past with George Lakoff -- the master of "framing" -- and it is clear that he not only approves of Obama's ability to redefine and reframe issues to pull more people into the progressive tent, but that Lakoff has given the Obama camp advice and counsel. (Although as Lakoff's just-posted commentary on the Huffington Post indicates, the Obama campaign didn't listen to him on the "move to the center" statements, of which Lakoff disapproves -- as, we repeat, do we.)

Most Americans share progressive values, but they have been tugged by the demagogic slogans and think tank positions of the right wing.  In general, Obama has the rare ability to double down on the right wing by bringing in a larger context to the debate and debunking their charlatan bag of demagogic tricks.

So, I would contend Obama is hanging tough, even when it appears that he is not. The Democrats are going to try and realign the electoral map from the gridlock of the last two elections, and Obama is at a point in the election cycle when he is trying to up the comfort level of swing voters while closing off lines of attack from the Republicans -- or at least reducing their impact.

Will it work? We'll see.

But we'll end with this historical note.  In 2000, before the theft of the election by Bush Inc., many BuzzFlash readers wrote us and asked what we would do if Gore won because we were so anti-Republican?

Our response was simple; we would keep advocating Constitutional principles and progressive values -- and when Gore deviated from them, we would criticize him. (Although Gore, after the 2000 election, then went through a transformation and became such a strong change agent and fiery spokesman of truth that he became disinterested in the compromises demanded by the political process.)

So it will be with Barack Obama.  We will be there pounding away at his lapses when necessary while defending him from attacks from the right wing beer hall putsch crowd.

The power of government in America is derived from the people.

Let no president forget that, whatever his or her party affiliation is.

THE BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Update: 8:35 EST, July 7th

Technorati Tags:

I got the point in that

I got the point in that one forex forex online casinos online casinos

Hanging tough with Obama

With Obama taking a right turn and siding with republicans, Obama supporters will soon be defending Bush's policies. I never agreed with Bush and I am not going to start or make excuses for him just because the democratic candidate decides he likes how Bush ran the Country. What is funny is seeing Democrats act like Republicans. I'm sure lots of Republicans did not agree with Bush but decided to vote for him because they could not vote Democrat or third party. Look how that turned out. Now we have Democrats saying they don't agree with Obama but have to vote for him cause they can't vote McCain or third party. If you are going to vote for a candidate no matter what they do you will never get what you want. Obama can and will completely ignore your wishes. He has already said the democrats will vote for me, cause where else are they going to go. He is playing you for fools. Just like Bush played the Republicans.

Hanging tough with Obama

I love it. Obama keeps changing where he stands on issues. You crucified Hillary Clinton no matter what she did. She was demeaned, degraded, called vile, vicious names, threatened with violence, called a republican, a liar, willing to pander for votes. You guys would have more credibility if you held your messiah to the same standards. Instead you make him the victim. It's not his fault. He has to lie and pander to get elected. He has to take the conservitive stands to get elected. What happened to the new politics. Obama has flip-flopped on every major issue that democrats are supposed to hold and you make excuses for him. How pathetic!

It IS fun, isn't it?

All the teeth-gnashing and angst amongst the prog police who vilified her during the primary? I honestly didn't expect to see it until after the general. Here we are only a few weeks after the primary, and we're off to the races!

Most will continue to give him a pass (not much choice now) for a while longer, and will even continue to defend the "revisions" as merely smart, pragmatic politics (Hey - you do what ya gotta do to win, right?). Of course, when they said that about Hillary Clinton just a few weeks ago, it was a bad thing.

But c'mon ......... it's not like anyone ever claimed he was a new kind of politician.

........................................... right?

Obama the flip flopper

I was going to say the same thing, "tennismom". I still have friends who are making excuses for BO. When I ask "tell me what it is about BO that I can believe in that makes him a good candidate?" I still get the vague answer, "change, a different way of doing things.." One month into his official campaign and I see more back pedaling than even I thought possible. I keep hearing, "wait until he gets in office and then we will hold him to his promises..." We all know candidates only have less accountability after they are elected. And as far as bringing us all together, I have never seen more division, animosity and divisiveness in the Democratic Party in my life! We all know that Hillary was held to a different standard because of sexism. If she had back peddled on her top issue of health care, even I would have stopped supporting her. But it seems BO can abandon his issues of being a different kind of leader and when he is no better (or worse) than the lot of them, we give him a pass.

Time for Seriousness and Commitment

The object is not to feel good about our self-righteous selves, it is to successfully take our country back from the corporate oligarchy. This takes time. The way to do it is for progressives to provide intense support to the only viable alternative to the Republican fascist junkyard dogs--the Democratic party--and then take it over.

Right now, the Dems in the game (as opposed to purist armchair quarterbacks like too many of us in the blogosphere) know the establishment--with the help of the MSM and a still influential block of non-attentive voters--can wreck a candidate or a President regardless of truth, fairness, or even the will of the people. Any Dem that wants to stay in the game in order to make any difference needs to do a little ring-kissing (mostly in areas that involve big money for the biggest behind-the-scenes powers) for their self preservation and for the prospect of even limited success (remember what happened to Bill Clinton? He did not start out as a sellout...)

What is needed is a broader Progressive Movement that can credibly counter the establishment on its own, and thus give Dem leaders cover. Crying about Dems inevitable (and probably necessary) caving is lazy, naive and counterproductive. Let's take matters into our own hands...

Dang I forgot Oboma

THE HONORABLE AND CORRECT WONDER OF THE AGE SEN. B. OBOMA,

I know that you have only limited regard for the liberal part of our party but I have heard that you have some regard for the Constitution. If this rumor is true you must know that the position that you are NOW supporting is not supportive of the 4th amendment thereof:

Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

FISA is already wrong by being secret from the public. FISA was passed to prohibit BUSH and his CREEPS from finding out what his Enemy’s were trying to do to get elected… or bypass the Executive branch for passing LAW. Your addition is oats through a Bull. And worth just about as much.
(OH SORRY IT WAS NIXON)
(OH SORRY ROVE NOT CREEPS)
(OH SORRY NOT ENEMIES but OBOMA)
(OH WAIT MAYBE SOME OF THE REST ARE INCLUDED IN THE ENEMIES LIST TOO…)
(Oh yeah there is the problem of illegal funding to the Contras as well)
(OH DANG RAYGUN WAS A PART OF THESE CRIMES TOO)
Sorry I just got too much history of corrupt use of the executive power in my comments.
Maybe you are too young to remember the JAPS being incarcerated. Maybe you don't remember the attacks on Mexico to help the Doles. Maybe you think Gen. S Butler was wrong about the use of the Military. Or maybe you don't remember Ike E. warning us about Blackwater/KBR/Bush/and the rest of PNAC as treasonous groupings. EVEN G.Washington was worried about intrest groups.

This is your chance to clean the commons. Your choice… but know that people ARE paying attention.

Please consider that the courts can and must answer the question of legality. Without legal knowledge we are allowing murder, theft, fraud, child rape, porn and treason without knowing. (hey you don’t know do you? If you do ... we need to see what is up with you too.)
(BTW Whatever happened to those White House emails???)
We can pardon crimes by any number of pathways IF WE SO DECIDE. Despite any pardon people injured must be made whole and the crimes detailed. Move to set the bill aside for future consideration.

The FISA court (as scummy and unconstitutional as it may be) can take care of the criminal observation of our people as needed. We can charge the FISA judges with crimes of judgement as needed. I look forward to your promise and plan to review ALL :
Signing statements,
Executive orders,
No bid contracts,
FISA warrants,
DOJ election fraud actions,
EPA actions,
AND SO ON AND SO ON.
IF THE EXECUTIVE ACTIONS ARE SO IMPORTANT LAW SHOULD BE PUT IN PLACE. WITHIN A YEAR.
NO MORE LAW FROM THE WHITEHOUSE.

If you dare to act as Bush and his boys have acted many of us will want to replace you.
People are already looking at replacing many of the others supporting the FISA bill.
I wish you support and success in your run to the WH. BUT please know I am watching for where my next dollar needs to go.


Have a great day
:D

Holding my nose to vote for Obama

This spring I gave an impassioned speech at my local WA Dem caucus, and brought over 2 Hillary supporters to support Obama. I was divided against myself at the time, but my voice cracked when I told folks THE TIME IS NOW, I can't watch another generation X and Y support the old Reagan BS, with all the Reagan Iran Contra Central American murderers sanitized and recycled into Bushwa 43. I was ready to hit the streets and canvas for Obama this fall, and I hate folks who come to my door, don't know why I'd want to do it to someone else. But I was ready to put in whatever effort it takes to get the vote out for Obama. But 2 weeks ago, I was devastated to hear that Obama was going to support this FISA telecom immunity BS, I guess it doesn't even matter to him that they're spying on his campaign right now, but what the heck, who gives a damn about the constitution anyway? Then last week, Obama came out supporting the Hypochristians with Bush's FAITH-BASED BS? For me, that was the last straw, forget the rest of the issues that Mark mentioned above. Any enthusiasm I had for Obama is dead. Yeah, I'll vote for him, what choice do I have left now? But that's it, I'm not donating, I'm not lifting a finger for him, I'll need my index finger and thumb to hold my nose when I check his name on that ballot.

just a comment

I have been going to this site for longer. 1998 or so I think.

http://www.bushwatch.com/

They have issues too but both of your sites keep good track on the issues people need to know about.
Thanks for the service and I will be so happy to know that the BUSH name is GONE FOREVER from our country...

Have a great day
:D

Show me now that you are for the people, not the elitists.

The time is now. He should do the right things now. His stance on FISA/retroactive immunity is inexcusable. I caucused for him in the primary. I was on board up until he flip flopped on retroactive telecom immunity. He is supposed to be an expert on the Constitution. I think he has been bought. If he votes for retroactive immunity, I will not vote for him. This bullshit about trying to strip immunity from the bill later doesn't wash with me. If he has a secret plan that would justify his position, he needs to make it known. Otherwise, he is in the same boat as McSame. It is a Goddamn shame. He gave me hope for a little while. What good is electing Obama, if he votes like a RAPUBLICAN ELITIST? ROBinDALLAS

Money

How will Obama balance the budget, end the trade deficit, stop spending social security money to cover the third of the federal budget that has no tax money behind it?

Holding Judgement till he's elected? No way Challenge him NOW!

"Do we justify such "business as usual" political moves? No, but we are going to hold our judgment on Obama, barring some radical departure from his primary positions, until he is elected." Obama has always been for more troops for Afghanistan that doesn't mean we shouldn't call him out on it. Obama is for merit pay for teachers...you know just like the corporate CEOs get Obama is voting for FISA even if it EXPANDS the use and retention of illegal wiretaps. No, we can't wait to challenge him on the issues. The bandwagon isn't playin' the tune I want to hop on to and continuning to follow a Pied Piper well you all remember the story

Holding Judgement till he's elected? No way Challenge him NOW!

"Do we justify such "business as usual" political moves? No, but we are going to hold our judgment on Obama, barring some radical departure from his primary positions, until he is elected." Obama has always been for more troops for Afghanistan that doesn't mean we shouldn't call him out on it. Obama is for merit pay for teachers...you know just like the corporate CEOs get Obama is voting for FISA even if it EXPANDS the use and retention of illegal wiretaps. No, we can't wait to challenge him on the issues. The bandwagon isn't playin' the tune I want to hop on to and continuning to follow a Pied Piper well you all remember the story

More bleating from ideologues

I agree with Mark Karlin 100%.
Our next president will either be Barack Obama or John McCain.
No one will care about those who voted for Bob Barr, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader etc etc etc.

Those who think Obama will be as bad as McCain can do as they wish. For the rest of the
realists, who aren't right-wing Republicans, Obama is our only choice.

We're not voting for saint. We're not judging who hews most closely to a limited set
of positions. This is not about religion. This is politics - has been since the beginning
of organized political life several thousand years ago.

That being said, of course, many of us care passionately about certain positions, policies
etc. We should express ourselves. We should write to Obama, as I myself did on the FISA
bill. But if Obama has made a pragmatic decision that if he can't defeat them he might
as well join them and cover his ass or his right flank, well, we'll just have to live
with it. The last thing the Democrats/liberals/progressives etc need is to give any
ammunition at all to the McCain campaign.

Voters should act like the adults the law says we are. This isn't the playground anymore
where you can cry and complain that "It's not fair."
No, you choose one candidate or the other, or don't vote. If it makes some people
feel better they should focus their energy on House or Senate races to defeat obnoxious
right wingers and/or support serious progressives. There's need for energy everywhere.

Colleen Clark
Cambridge, MA

Your next president

"I agree with Mark Karlin 100%. Our next president will either be Barack Obama or John McCain." Perhaps, YOUR next president. "No one will care about those who voted for Bob Barr, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader etc etc etc." They don't care about any of us now. Do they? The only way you matter to Obama is when you vote for him. After that, he will flush you the way the two Corporate Party candidates always do. "Voters should act like the adults the law says we are." Huh? The law says we are adults? Speaking of "the law", the Constitution says impeachment must take place for high crimes and misdemeanors. So Obama, where do you stand? Pelosi? Heid? Progressives in the House and Senate? Where are you? In the friggin' playground taking a vacation when there are two simultaneous wars going on. Obama is sounding like a right winger, so how about you take your own advice and "defeat obnoxious right wingers and/or support serious progressives." Nader is a progressive, as is McKinney. Obama is not.

Caving is not leadership

Americans vote for a Leader in the White House. Every time O'Same endorses yet another wingnut policy he is telling the majority of gullible voters that those wingnut policies are right for America.

* This makes McSame look right, and look like a leader.
* This makes O'Same look like a late-to-the-party me-too follower.
* This strengths McSame and his wingnut friends.
* This hurts wingnut O'Same.
* This undermines real Progressive politicians.
* This undermines real Progressive policies.

By adopting wingnut policies O'Same is hurting Progressives and helping McSame.

The wingnuts won '08 when the race was narrowed down to Billary, McSame, and O'Same. There's no point fighting on in the lost battle of '08. All we can do is focus now on '10 and '12. And that means voting for Cynthia or Ralph.

Eventually the Dims will get the message and oust the DLC traitors, but we're going to have to hit them hard with an electoral clue-bat before they get the message. And that is the only way that we will undo fascism in the US. Eight more years of O'Same would just make fascism worse.

Obama was never a Progressive

Obama is a re-run of Dubya. He has attracted a bunch of gullible newbie voters by loudly proclaiming "CHANGE!" yet his past votes and his campaign platform have always been on the nutty side of wingnut.

Obama favors increased military spending, warrantless wiretaps, leaving our soldiers to die in the Middle East, and telcom immunity. He favors ethanol subsidies and mass starvation. He is so strongly opposed to single-payer health-care that he has promised to make our existing awful health-care system COMPULSORY. He wants to execute rapists, and he strongly supports Israel's ultra-right-wing terrorism. Some of his polices are slightly to the right of McSame, and some are slightly to the left, but none are Progressive.

There's no reason to vote for a wingnut, whether DLC or Repug.

Ralph? Maybe.
Cynthia? Probably.
McSame or O'Same? Never.

Thanks Mark, the future is now....

It is bad enough fighting the conservatives, republicans and right-necks of this nation who are ignorant on facts, wrong on ideology and pathetic as sheep but now Obama gets attacked by the chicken-littles calling themselves progressives. You cannot fight to change the nation if you don't win the presidency. Moreover, this "can't see the forest for the trees" mentality undermines everything we can win. The "loser" mentality among Democrats is the reason republicans have elected ideological morons for years. Progressives want to be so precociously right on one or two issues we are going to lose the biggest issue as we cannot unite after this 8 year nightmare. So let us remain progressive, stand firm on FISA or campaign funding and keep giving the republicans and their minions the MSM more ammunition we are fractured. Our key issues are more important than getting our best people elected who can fix, help target our key issues as a whole. We love this terminal underdog status, always fighting against the less intelligent, less qualified, brain-dead knuckle-draggers. The problem is these knuckle-draggers are led by masters of manipulation and dirty tricks and their followers are good lemmings who will actually jump off the cliff. Meanwhile we will stand firm on our ideals and show our candidate and party who is boss. We will enthusiastically blog against our own (even though we agree with 90% of his platform), we will cease contributing money based on principle and we will continue waiting for the perfect messiah-candidate to come down from the heavens. Meanwhile, the courts, the presidency and eventually the legislature will be conservative/republican. The laws, the rules and our way of life will change to conservative, right-neck theocracy. Moreover, our media, our bedroom and the Internet will be now regulated and invaded by knuckle-dragging, hypocritical laws. But we stood our ground on FISA...

Exactly - HelenBack

Remember the guy who ran for President as a "compassionate conservative?" The guy who could work across the aisle, because he had worked with both Republicans and Democrats, when he was Governor of Texas. (What he neglected to tell America -- is that in Texas --- there's no difference.) He was the "Uniter Not the Divider?" He was going to restore honesty, transparency, and dignity back into the White House. I don't recall that he even ran as a "Born Again". The good people of this United States elected this man, who was none of those things, into the presidency, not once but twice. He campaigned to the centrists. And he governed from the extreme right. Meanwhile, Democrats have nominated a more progressive --- and ------ oh my God ---- black man --- who is going after every damned vote he can get. Progressive, Independent, Democrat or Republican --- who knows that we, as a country, and the world, cannot survive a continuation of the Bush/Cheney years. But we will whine, complain, threaten to vote third, fourth, and maybe even fifth party. Well Nader isn't going to save us. McKinney, God Love Her, isn't going to save us. Barr isn't going to save us. And neither is Ron Paul. We, realistically, have two choices. McSame or Obama. I made a contribution to the Obama campaign yesterday. I made a contribution to the campaign of a progressive Dem in Georgia this morning. (I live in Texas.) Molly Ivins was right: "Next time I tell you not to vote for a president from Texas -- please pay attention." Change comes not from the top down, it comes from the bottom up. You want to make change happen? Stop complaining. Find some progressive congressional candidates to support. Send them -- even a modest donation. It matters. If you live in the district of a progressive who is running for office --- any office --- put on your sneakers and help them get out the vote. The Government of the United States has been listening to our phone calls, reading our e-mail, opening our mail - if they want to -- monitoring what web sites we visit -- and invading our privacy for over six years. The sky has yet to fall. You want it changed, elect members of Congress who believe that "Impeachment should NEVER be off the table." Contribute and work in those campaigns. Meanwhile --- Quit your bitc***g.

Well said, HelenBack

The Republican machine is onto the left's cadre of the more-disaffected-than-thou faction and is more than happy to provide the provacateurs to tear down any challenge to the extreme right wing Christian machine. All liberal progressive have to do is look back to the 2000 election. Remember when accusing Al Gore of being no different from George W. Bush made you sound smart? Eight years later we see what an idiocy that was...I'm voting for Obama because I have two sons that I dont want to see drafted for McSane's 100+ year war..I can't afford clever, elitist opinions. That said, when Obama is president, it is up to US to hold him accountable for the positions he takes...

Obama's tactical error

By moving to the right, Obama may attract a few swing voters, but he also validates Republican themes about national security, the death penalty etc. In essence, he is allowing himself to be defined by the opposition. This is a foolish strategy that will turn off more voters that it will turn on. Already, we can see that it has de-energized the progressives who are his base. If the base loses enthusiasm, can one reasonably expect the non-base to find it? Obama's appeal has always rested upon his ability to inspire ordinary people to believe that positive change is possible and that he is not an ordinary politician. His move to the right will not inspire anyone, but will discourage many. The best thing he could do now is jettison the insider consultant hacks who have been advising him of late.

Hang Tough?

Buzzflash wrote: "The power of government in America is derived from the people. Let no president forget that, whatever his or her party affiliation is." How pathetically ignorant, and shamefully juvenile. To make such a statement would lead us to believe that you and I (we) have a fucking choice on how we choose to live OUR lives...... Buzzflash, once again has missed the forrest for the tree's... You have owners.........remember that...........

Since When Is Appeasement to Treason "Hanging Tough", ERW?

Bush was right, but for all the wrong reasons - because Bush is the two-bit Hitler Obama needs to stand tall against...and isn't on FISA. I lived in NYC during 9/11, and I say F&#K Colorado and Minnesota and all those other Midwest Flyover NaziSymp states that are not now and will never be attacked by terrorists, but BOY are they taking advantage of the "War on Terror" to get their way! They'll take Obama's bending over for FISA as their due, and still call him the "Manchurian Muslim"...and a weakling to boot, just like every other spineless triangulating "libburul". This will get him fewer votes than a principled stand against eviscerating the Bill of Rights, win or lose, would have.

How many times do I have to SAY it to you lot who keep insisting "Obama has to track to the (mythical) Center to win"? The Great Ammurikan Heartland Only Respects Strength and A Firm Hand, just like the "Good Germans" they are. THAT is why The Traitor Bush has gotten away w/it time and again - b/c he acts strong and decisive. Which may make the Good Germans (many of whom are my relatives) smarter than most of us so-called "Progressives", who stand time and again by dithering ineffectual twits who are constitutionally (small "c" - they betrayed the Big-C "Constitution" a long time ago!) incapable making up their minds about lunch w/out two polls and three focus groups to tell them what to eat.

Thanks to his waffling two-faced capitulation on FISA, and his inability to explain why to his Progressive base in terms that make sense to us (and yes, I've read his statements - those are excuses, not explanations), Obama Will Lose the Election. Why should the mythical Center vote for him anymore, now that he's proven to be Just Another Unprincipled Weak-Kneed Appeasing Dem?

Will I still vote for him? Of course - b/c he still IS an improvement over McCain. But I'm now going to find it VERY hard to explain to my Right-Wing relatives living in those flyover states I cursed above why they should vote for a Young Black Democrat promising "Change" over "War Hero and Straight Talker" John McCain.... :(

AGAIN?!?!?!?! That's gotta hurt, "Doc"

First you get duped into voting for Hillary. Now Obama has gone from a new kind of politician for "real" progressives to just another waffling, weak-kneed, appeasing, two-faced capitulator? Ouch ....

Did you ever start to think the problem might not be with the candidates/pols? As the old adage goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice ..."

Hanging Tough

Obama is just showing what he really wants to do; he wants to be part of the DC insiders faster than most other people get there. By his willingness to cave on FISA, how do you think he will do on net neutrality? Do you really think that he will have the troops out of Iraq in 16 months as he says? If the official troops come out that quickly, what will he do about the rising influence of the mercenaries at home and abroad? w and cheney are trying to get as much placement of laws that will allow the US to have an absolute ruler before w leaves office. Once that happens, how will we return to a society in which the government is not constantly eavesdropping on us with extrajudicial imprisonment and torture possible results. How is the nation we have become any different than the old USSR, Iraq, Iran, or China. There is simply too much to say in one posting. Obama had a strong following because he seemed to many people to be progressive. He should win this election easily, but he seems to be working hard to close the gap between him and st. john. It is not inconceivable that Obama can so alienate his supporters that mccain wins. Obama did not need to try to change his approach to try move to the "middle." He had enough to win without the few of the 23% that he may attract. Now he simply looks like another pandering pol. I think that he will need the money freed up by Hillary's withdrawal, because it probably won't come from the internet any more. I don't see what change he is going to bring to DC (Kucinich was my choice). As has been said by someone else, the rethugs now have their majority in place, even if the dems are elected to carry on the repug policies.

skinning cats

There's more than one way to get elected: there's the centrist, triangulating, get me 50 plus 1 way... ...and there's the solid, convicted, courageous, stick to your guns way. The first gets you no effective way to govern, once elected The second gets you the strength we need to start fixing a whole world of hurt.

Nancyspeak

Yes Nancy Polosi, we have already started by fixing Obama.

not 50 plus 1

We don't win presidential elections the "50 plus 1" way. We have instead super delegates and an electoral college, and, oh yes, a Supreme Court, that picks the president.

Say what?

"There's been a lot of Internet speculation about why Obama made these counter-progressive comments. Is he following the advice of his strategists because he needs to ease the concerns of key voting blocks in new states that they plan to possibly pick up (e.g., Colorado, New Mexico, Montana, Georgia, Virginia, etc.)?"

And in what way are those states so much more likely to have a large constituency that wants government to spy on us without oversight and wants telecoms to be allowed to commit crimes and get away with it?

Since Obama announced his support for the FISA bill he has lost ground not only in Colorado but in Oregon - Oregon! - and he's still running mighty weakly in PA and OH, and McCain is still ahead in FL. That's not a very good trade-off for one or two western states that only have three electoral votes. (Both Democrats were already ahead in New Mexico. And why doesn't he have Nevada, yet? Even Hillary had Nevada.)

Obama doesn't really appear to be picking up new voters with this right-wing talk of his; on the contrary, he seems to be alienating some of his own supporters instead. I was at the Economists for Obama blog this morning and they're talking about withholding contributions for him over this - and they're a blog that exists to support Obama!

Democrats need to push Obama to stand up for the Constitution and stop sounding like just another Democrat who doesn't stand for anything, or we will lose in November. End of story.

AC
More liberal media at The Sideshow

Super delegates

Now I know why Kennedy,Kerry and the super delegates endorsed Obama and not Hillary.He is one of them not one of us trailer trash Arkansas Democrats with no class.

Sorry Kids - Obama has never been all that PROGRESSIVE.

or Liberal. Let's remember that the 'Center' has been pushed so far to the Reich that Nixon and Goldwater might qualify as Centrists. With the DLC and Blue Dogs we have - and have had - Rove's Permanent Republican Majority. What's left of the Democratic Party after almost 20 years of the Clinton's? Not much. There are damned few Democrats in Washington any longer. Maybe Obama will correct this problem by driving a stake through the heart of the DLC and BD's - maybe not. We will see. The problem is, that the alternative to Obama is significantly worse. We are STUCK supporting him. Once again I have to vote Against the Republicans rather than FOR the Democrats. There is no alternative and I hate it. PS: I voted for Edwards.

More stupidity

Buzzflash suffers from the same delusion and stupidity that have afflicted Democratic voters since Bill Clinton.

What are you people sniffing?

Based on your commentary, it must be pretty intoxicating stuff. And some of the side effects are rather dangerous:

wishful-thinking
delusions
gullibility
naivete

In the last 7 years DemocRATS have been an opposition party:

by voting “YES” for the USA PATRIOT ACT,
by voting “YES” for two illegal wars and subsequent funding,
by voting “YES” for Alito,
by voting “YES” for Roberts,
by voting “YES” for Gonzales,
by voting “YES” for Rumsfeld,
by voting “YES” to authorize Bush's spying
by voting “YES” in the Senate (97-0) for the resolution to threaten Iran.

And how can you people EVER vote for a Democrat again after the blatant backstabbing of 2006, when after promising to end the war, they went ahead and gave Bush even more money than he had asked for? Obama is Bush with a tan.

Blind fools.

Like this provacateur...

Giving you the "they're all the same" rap and then unmasking himself as a Rethug operative...Who do you think you're fooling, tinker_toy?

Democrats like you can't be fooled

you were BORN fools and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

Calling me a Rethug operative is the only way out for you, attack the messenger since you can't attack the message.

Obama might sound great, but he's Dick Cheney in sheep's clothing. He’s a Democrat, isn’t he? Mind what he does, not what he says.

Obama voted to fund this illegal war the same way Republicans did. And didn’t Obama join Republicans in 2005 in passing the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) that would shut down state courts as a venue to hear many class action lawsuits?

Obama also voted against a bankruptcy bill which would have capped credit card interest rates at 30 percent.

While in the Illinois Senate, Obama voted to limit the recovery that victims of medical malpractice could obtain through the courts. Obama votes with the Republican Party more often than not.

In November 2007, Obama came out against a bill that would have reformed the notorious Mining Law of 1872.

His record in regulating the nuclear industry and energy policies is dubious at best.

Obama opposed single-payer bill HR676, sponsored by Congressmen Dennis Kucinich and John Conyers in 2006, although at least 75 members of Congress supported it.

He’s supposedly against NAFTA but in his 2004 Senate campaign, Obama said the US should pursue more deals such as NAFTA, and argued more broadly that his opponent’s call for tariffs would spark a trade war.

Democratic voters: incredibly stupid BLIND FOOLS.

so how did the Republicans vote?

Donnat

So how did my mother vote?

Equally important

how?

the same way their clones, the Democrats, did.

Obama and death penalty

Many progressives were especially disappointed by Obama's gratuitous and quite shameless attack on the conservative Supreme Court's appropriate striking down (5-4) of Louisiana's death penalty statute -- the only law in the nation that allowed execution of individuals for crimes other than murder. Obama went way overboard in his Campaign of Yes We Can Pander on that one. Many of us legitimately wonder: "when does the pandering stop?" Experience suggests: never. Once they get elected by pandering, they always seem intent on keeping their jobs by yet more pandering. Mark is correct that we must keep the heat on our candidates both now and, as importantly, after they are in office. Indeed, should we be fortunate enough to have an Obama presidency, the job of Buzzflash will be as important as ever in keeping the Democrats on track.

Pandering

What is the difference between one panderer and the other?

Isolation of Killers

What our country badly needs, is a really isolated Island far from the United States, where these Killers can be contained without Guards or any sustenance, to shift for them selves, with no food, no shelter no drinkable water,or medical services. These convicts have violated a basic principal of our civilation,and deserve no quarter of its rewards.

G.W.?

Will G.W. and Dick Cheney be the first occupants? They killed over a million.

Obama is "Hanging Tough"

Regardless of what the progressive movement wants, regardless of what the "Obamacons" want. Obama is "hanging tough" because he is doing what is necessary to get elected. Like it or not. Obama is doing what it is necessary for him to do, to win in November. Because he knows, as we all do, -- that the alternative is just too horrible to contemplate. Before anything can change, we have to win. Winning is Job 1. Give the man his due. He is not so ignorant of the ways of politics in America, to not know --- what he has to do to be elected President of these United. States. The objective is to win. The alternative is not acceptable.

Doing what is necessary to be elected

Is that not the cry we used AGAINST Hillary ?The Bitch!

general election

I think Glenn Greenwald on Salon has the best reaction to the Obama "blunder", in that he calls attention to the local races for Congress which must be won if we ever return the presidency to its proper level of power, that is, equal to that of the other branches. No matter who is President in the future, we must have a Congress to balance the power, not in the chambers, but against the other branches. I have sent money to Darcy Burner in Washington in hopes she can take a seat in Congress away from a Blue Dog democrat who has pandered to the Bush concept of President as Commander in Chief of America, not just the military. There is much wealth to be gained in Washington by going along with the powerful. We need new people in there who will at least hold principles consistent with democracy. Go to ACT BLUE for more information.

I agree

Vote for the rest of the democratic ticket and leave the top to whoever he is pandering to with his flip flop and refining. That way our conscience is clear.Let the women's group who endorsed him because he is black have at him.Hillary would not have let them down but of course she was white.They have all descended to Richardson level politics.Maybe Obama will grow a beard to appeal to the AARP.

Headline goes here

First, Obama has to win to do ANYTHING. Let him make himself a bit easier to vote for in what will be one of the most hateful, vicious operations Repubs have ever attempted. Forget the gun issue. If all those folks in Georgetown and DuPont circle want to own guns, so what?

What is it today, Mikey?

Are you still supporting Obama, or are you off to fight in Iraq? You were a big supporter during the primary. Even after the primary, you repeatedly told Hillary supporters that failing to support Obama was equivalent to voting for McCain and (if they did that) they would have to join the military and volunteer to serve in Iraq (and even get pregnant and carry it to term). Yet only a few weeks after securing the nomination, when Obama criticized MoveOn, you said "Obama's thrown ME under the bus. I will not vote for the lesser of 2 evils. It's been 36 years since I've been excited about a candidate. And I'm done."

So which is it Mikey, were you lying when you said you were done with Obama, or are you off to fight in Iraq? Can we assume you'll also be getting your "world-class feminist" girlfriend pregnant?

BTW - "Professional writer"? I didn't know you meant advertising! Bit of a stretch, no? Come to think of it, even whores call themselves "professionals". Although (in fairness) they generally garner more respect ... and in their case, there is some skill involved.

A Soul Brother.

let them have guns but you don't have to give them the money(vote) to buy them

A wasted opportunity

This focus group and DC consultant-inspired tack to the mushy middle by Obama has been unneeded and unnecessary. But worse than that, we have the best opportunity for a progressive revolution since 1932 and Obama is literally throwing it away by using conservative framing. If you run on progressive values and use progressive framing in the campaign, when you win the election you have a PROGRESSIVE MANDATE. What will be Obama's mandate when he wins if he keeps talking like compassionate conservative George Bush circa 1999? If George Lakoff has inspired Obama's rhetoric over the last 3 weeks you sure could have fooled me. Instead of using his gift of soaring rhetoric to reframe issues favorable to the progressive movement and use leadership to bring people over to our way of thinking, Obama has decided to play it "safe" and sell out the people who put him where he is. I had hoped we'd found a champion for the progressive movement. What it looks like instead is that we've nominated a triangulator extraordinaire with the gift of gab. The man still has my vote, but I'm pissed and disappointed right now. Obama is surely no RFK. Perhaps is was unfair for me to put so much hope in him but I feel duped. I'm sick of politicians who believe they can say anything in the nominating process and then do gymnastic flips to the middle once they've got it won. We need a real progressive as our champion, one who is unapologetic about progressive values and unafraid to stand up for them under withering attacks from the loony Right. We need a progressive to lead a progressive movement that sweeps across this great land and then changes the world. It could have happened. Perhaps it still could. But right now it looks like nothing more than a wasted opportunity by the man I thought was our champion.

fairy tale

Bill warned you. You would not listen. This guy is a fairy tale. You are throwing the dice with this guy. Have you forgotten what Bill said?