Just because Obama won the primaries doesn't mean he doesn't need

[alfredo]

money. He needs our contributions because much of his money is only for after the convention. His money for now until then is limited. Remember, Kerry got slaughtered in August because he was short of money and couldn't effectively respond to the vicious attacks of the Swifties.

[robinlynne]

1. not getting a penny from me ever, unless he satnds up for the rule of law tomorrow at 11AM.

I did not see him in the senate today, the most important Senate debate of the past 3 years.

[silverojo]

2. Way to help McCain become the next POTUS

There are other desperately important issues, as well as FISA. Obama may not be doing what we want with that issue, but consider the horrors of a McCain presidency....

[wtmusic]

3. That may be true

He won't lose any votes, but he's going to find the money drying up pretty fast if he doesn't stop dissing his base.

[ToeBot]

4. I guess it's a good thing he's making all those new friends!!! nt

[JDPriestly]

5. Obama needs to keep in mind that money from progressives

helped him win the primaries. Most of us are not rich. We have to sacrifice to give money to a candidate. I will give my money to progressive Democrats. I will vote for Obama, but any money I give (if I have it to give) will go to progressive Democrats. Thank you.

[alfredo]

7. I regularly give to my local Dems, I have given to Obama. Still What is

better, having a Dem in the White House, or having McCain naming future Scalia's and Roberts.

Standing on principle is fine, but losing is not.

[JDPriestly]

8. At this point, I wonder whether there is any difference.

FISA was an obvious no. There can be no compromise on the fundamental rights granted to the American people by the Constitution. Obama needs to explain what he personally will do to inform the American people about what happened in the eavesdropping. What were the programs at least in so far as they have had an impact on American communications, Americans? What about the communications of people working in foreign embassies, at the U.N., for international companies? How do we know that Bush was not also spying on them? And if Bush did not obey FISA in the first place, why would he (or any future president) obey the new amendment considering there is utterly no penalty for ignoring or violating it?

I am so shocked by Obama's disregard for our rights and so discouraged. He needs to make amends with us. Is he willing to prosecute those in the Bush administration who have committed crimes? Or were his promises in that regard just empty? I really feel discouraged by this. Congress has nothing about the torture, about the illegal invasion of Iraq, about Guantanamo, nothing about any of it? Instead, they continue to fund the Pakistani government which compromises over and over with Al Qaeda. Obama talks right on Pakistan, but he does not vote to cut off funding or to censor our support for that corrupt government. Obama needs to talk to us about these issues. I have no choice but to vote for him, but I wish he would treat those of us who have written so many e-mails, made calls, worked so hard to defend our rights with some respect and really tell us what he will do about the crimes of the Bush administration.

[alfredo]

9. There's still no immunity from criminal charges. You got to remember

that. It is only civil cases that are covered, and even then the immunity provisions may be unconstitutional. Obama has mentioned that and has left the door open to criminal proceedings.

Also bush will have to go to the courts. He cannot disregard them.

[JDPriestly]

11. But if Obama did not have the courage to vote against telecom

immunity, what promise is there that he will have the courage to bring criminal proceedings. And there is a chance that the court will not stand tall on this although this FISA bill invades the jurisdiction of the courts.

[alfredo]

12. This bill will be challenged in the courts. I don't think it passes constitutional

muster.

Civil cases do nothing. Look at Exxon Valdez and the tobacco settlement. Criminal cases will come, and they don't have to come from the DoJ.

[JDPriestly]

14. I agree. I don't think it is constitutional, but it is a huge risk.

[alfredo]

15. Thinking politically, Obama's vote might have been the best thing.

It will take away an issue for McNasty.

[deacon]

6. If he's for "change" in how things are being done- he will vote AGAINST FISA. n/t

[dkofos]

10. He will get plenty from the telcos.

But he won't get anything from me.

[alfredo]

13. He didn't give immunity from criminal charges, and that is a hell of a lot

better than civil suits.