The Dangers of "Synchronized Flip-Flopping"

Honestly, after the gas tax holiday pander-monium went so badly for Clinton I just can't understand why McCain's team would even try this. This is so blantantly about more $$ for big oil.

If I gave a damn, I'd be embarrassed for them. Sheesh.

Once again you cut to the quick on this, Al. I was astonished when McCain made this announcement. This seems a worse pander than the gas tax. Hopefully, the public will listen to the facts on coastal drilling as they did on the gas tax, but as you stated, this issue is far more damaging to McCain than Obama. The people that have skin in this game are coastal residents, like those in Florida, who do not want to see the local ecology or tourism industry damaged.

The most amazing part of McCain's statement on coastal drilling was his laid back attitude about the risks of coastal drilling on the local environment. He basically said, "It's pretty safe" and shrugged.

Al, To put it another way, there is a significant "enthusiasm gap" between those who are opposed to the idea of offshore drilling and those who are in favor. This is almost certainly a game-changer for those opposed due to personal self-interest, and almost certainly not a game-changer for everyone else. In addition, this might be an excellent wedge issue for the Democrats to exploit in the geographies you highlight in the Fall.

About how easily targeted coastal dwellers and small business owners are, I mean. As a person who falls into both categories (and a Floridian to boot), I can see how such a strategy might be a game-changer. I wasn't very optimistic about Obama's chances here in Florida a month ago, but I'm feeling better about it now.

I keep thinking there must be some trick to this off shore drilling gambit... the McCain camp can't be this stupid, can they? I mean, I think they can be, but I don't want to get my hopes up too early.

Is the McCain campaign being run by trained monkeys? It seems that McCain has decided the way to win is to sell his soul to the Devil and do it in the most public way possible. I think he has lost whatever political sense he had. He's trashing his brand and becoming more Bush-like with every move. I keep waiting for a more formidable opponent to show up, but maybe that's not going to happen.

Remind people about who collected for the Exxon Valdez oil spill (no-one, while Exxon's making record profits these days).

This will go over well with all those coastal, potential swing states (NJ, VA, NC, SC, GA, FL, LA, OR, WA)

McMaverick is not just McSame as Bush, but also is McSame to Enron, Exxon, the Saudi Royal Beheaders, the Iranian Ayatollahs, Saddam Hussein and the failed US auto executives, all who owe their wealth, fame and infamy to the whims of Big Oil.

I understand the flip-flopping part, but what's Bush up to? Why would he want to make a big deal about going to Congress to ask for something that's guaranteed not to pass? Is it just ego -- or does he feel as if he's somehow helping McCain?

That's what I said before...even without looking at all the specifics of how the OSD issue plays environmentally or what have you, why, why, why would he so clearly line himself up with Bush and big oil in one big huge, pubilc move? Three weeks ago, he very clearly stated his opposition to this - OSD is not the answer, we need a long term solution, etc. Then he gets $2M from big oil, changes his mind and lines up behind the president's latest divisive games?? If Bush really wants to undo this, sign a new executive order. Why turn it in to a political game? In the meantime, Obama has turned the DNC from lobbyist and PAC money and comes out smelling like roses. I'm kinda with Kirsten. They can't really be this stupid, can they? What am I missing here? I don't want to underestimate our opponent but it's getting hard not to.

Seriously, are they really this stupid?

In the last 2 weeks or so, they've managed to weaken their candidate in every way imaginable. They've emphasized his weakness on the stump, then undermined his narratives of supposed independence, positivity, integrity, etc... They've signaled a determination to emphasize his identity with Bush on security issues, and simultaneously flip-flopped on economic issues in Bush's direction. Do they really think courting the Club for Growth is going to win them blue-collar votes?

I can only think they feel a need to pander to the Repub base, as if hardcore righties would ever fail to support him. Or maybe they're trying to sandbag Obama into some sort of complacency. I'm not trying to Chicken Little out here, but it can't really be this easy.

BTW I'm glad you found a new home so quickly Al. Sorry you got screwed that way, but hopefully being back with a real reporting outfit will be a better fit! Viva la Field!

So how soon will he flop back? It seems that despite what some people see as "McCain has a YouTube problem" his backers seem determined to find more fodder for left/right highlight reels. "I'm an environmentalist" "It's pretty safe now." "Global warming is real" "Let's burn more oil."

Do you think there might be a coup at the Republican convention? This can't be good branding.

Also, someone posted the other day that the vast majority of spills occur not from the drilling but from the transport. Exxon Valdez was just moving oil from point A to point B. Could have just as easily been from Saudi Arabia. That's not the same thing as an accident related to oil drilling. There may be lots of good reasons to oppose OSD, but the TRANSPORT of oil is not one of them.

I think the only reason that Charlie Crist is going along with McCain is that in Florida, at least, he knows that there's a law on the books preventing any new drilling. Both the federal and the state laws would have to be dismantled before any kind of drilling would occur, and Crist knows darned well that that's not happening anytime soon.

It's a pretty transparent pander, but it is shocking in its tone-deafness. Not only does McCain risk reminding everyone about the gas-tax holiday plan disaster, but he must have known that Bush was going to announce a similar intention this week, no? I'm guessing that these weird shadow puppet moves are the only way that McCain's camp feels they can campaign both with and against Bush....take, for another example, both Bush and McCain separately going to Iowa today. I'm puzzled - do they have that little faith in their citizenry's intelligence? is there something else going on? it's quite bizarre to watch, and, I'm guessing, will continue to be entertaining.

What can you expect from a party whose celebrity support line-up consists of 'with-it' hipsters like Ted Nugent, Bo Derek, Chad Everett, Ben Stein, Methuselah, and the inventor of fire?

The only thing they have that's formidable that they possess can be countered with Bean-O.

I just can't get over how plain *stupid* this move is on so many levels.

Not only is he synchronizing with Bush, he is doing so on the very same issue (energy/climate) that he has been using to *distance* himself from Bush.

Also: Al, I'm interested in your take on this John Barrow / Obama advertisement thing: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/19/obama/index.html

I can't find much to like about it, and Glenn Greenwald makes a point near the end that we Obama supporters shouldn't really try to defend it :

"None of that is enjoyable to write or accept, but those are just facts. There is a disturbing tendency on all sides to view Obama through a reductive Manichean lens -- either he's the embodiment of pure transformative Good who is going magically to cleanse our polity the minute he takes office, or he's nothing other than a mindless, passive tool of the establishment whose pretty rhetoric masks a barren ambition for power and who is no better than McCain. Neither of those caricatures is remotely accurate, and a John McCain presidency would be an unmitigated disaster on every level.

But it's critical to keep in mind that Obama is a politician and, like all people, is plagued by significant imperfections. He has largely entrenched himself in, and is dependent upon, the power structure he says he wants to undermine. Uncritical devotion to political leaders, including him, is destructive. Obama needs pressure, criticism, checks, and real scrutiny just like anyone else in power in order to keep him accountable, responsive, and faithful to the principles he claims are the ones driving him."

I understand that Obama maybe wants to show he is willing to work with party regulars and show his benefits as a candidate down-ticket, but this seems unnecessary. Maybe I, and Greenwald, are missing something. I don't expect my candidates to be perfect, but it'd be nice to see him support the down-ticket people that are more aligned with his newer vision of the party.

There may be lots of good reasons to oppose OSD, but the TRANSPORT of oil is not one of them.

Would you buy a used oil rig from Exxon?

I understand your logic, but if logic prevailed in elections, we'd be talking about the real bottleneck driving up oil prices, the lack of refining capacity, which Big Oil and the politicians it owns refuse to address simply because they love their big paydays.

I have been reading about the FISA 'compromise' that the dems are about to cave on, and along with that the progressive blogs are talking about Obama not stopping the bill now that he is leader of the party, and that he's even just made a 60 sec ad for pro-FISA Barrow of GA who is being challenged by a progressive. This seems like corrupt politics as usual, or even worse than usual.

There may be lots of good reasons to oppose OSD, but the TRANSPORT of oil is not one of them.

The other day someone made the point that while transporting oil from a rig, not the rig itself, may be the core threat -- the transport issue is moot if there's no rig to begin with.

"CharlesF" - I don't pretend to have an idea of the why. I also don't get too riled up about it. Many of the same "progressives" that are complaining about this are promoting and cheering Senator Jim Webb for Vice President (and hero-worshipped him during his Senate campaign in 06), who also voted for FISA. I think there's a lot of "situational ethics" going on over at the progressive side of things, too. A great many "netroots" and "progressive" Democratic lawmakers also voted for FISA (immunity for telecommunications companies that participate in unwarranted telephone surveillance on behalf of the government). Civil liberties has always been a tough struggle. There's too much selective indignance, in my view, because it is not applied universally. I confess that I don't follow the Congressional elections so closely. It's not as much of an interest to me as the contest over who holds the executive branch with its greatly expanded powers in the post-Bush era. But I think that your choice of the word "corrupt" for what, at worst, seems to me to be calculation in a state that the presidential nominee is trying to put into play against steep odds, overstates the matter. I'm also not aware of whether the progressive challenger has a ghost of a chance anyway. If the challenger had a real shot at winning, I doubt the nominee would be doing this. If the challenger doesn't have a real chance, then all this indignance is a distraction, at least in terms of what I think is important.

I hope I'm not going to get flamed by Al for spamming, but I added these links at the very end of other oil thread just now, before I realized this thread was up. Another reason why McCain is stupid to be cozying up to Big oil and Bush right now is the upcoming deal that will come into effect on June 30 that will let the four big oil companies back into Iraq after 36 years (and at a time of record oil prices):
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/06/mission-acc...
Mission Accomplished indeed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/world/middleeast/19iraq.html?_r=2&hp&o...
Also, I was wondering what was Al's take on McCain's call for 45 nuclear reactors, considering that I just read on his wiki bio, that he started his career lobbying against nuclear power. Do Americans in general have strong feelings on nuclear power?

(I also had included links to some pretty powerful posts by Sullivan on torture and the Bush administration - worth reading)

I've often found that political cartoonists are among the best when it comes to taking the pulse of the electorate. So the fact that today's cartoon in Raleigh's News and Observer has me wondering how extensive an impact the OSD pander will have here in NC.

OSD has always been an unpopular topic here, at least in the years since I moved in. But I suspect it will take time to gauge how much of an impact this will have on the election. It will be interesting to watch, though.

(Paraphrasing): "Most accidents are from oil transport, therefore offshore drilling is safe" - sounds like a logical fallacy to me.

1. There's a reason for the ban in the first place, and it was an offshore drilling accident:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/06/the-oil-spill-t.html

2. How do you expect to get the oil out of there?

Anyway, I love the way McCain says "it's pretty safe..." like even he doesn't buy it.

I keep hoping that the erosion of the Constitution will stop at some point, that someone in power will say 'enough'.

Good point about the challenger in GA having a chance. That even crossed my mind semi-consciously when I read about the ad, your reply makes it a solid question, I will go read up on the race.

For those who don't read Froomkin at WaPo, he talks today about the synchronized pander in much the same terms as Al. As a bonus (and OT), he discusses the torture issue later in the column.

Be sure to link at the bottom to yesterday's column, which was almost entirely about torture. The headliner there was MG Taguba calling a spade a spade, and saying the administration has committed war crimes. Now we know that's the case, but it is still a big deal coming from a General (or former one). Taguba was the man sent to "investigate" Abu Ghraib, and was forced to retire when he actually did.

Back to today's column, it appears that some of our allies are already preparing war crimes indictments for after 20 Jan 09.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/06/19/BL200806190...

As many of you know, Al HAD credentials for the Denver Convention until last week...and just like many of you have not yet received refunds for the "Send Al to Denver" Fund, the credentials FOR Al have not been GIVEN to Al!

So, up-and-coming Community Organizers that we Field Hands are, we've developed an online petition that will be sent to Howard Dean et. al...to make sure Al has credentials.

You can read and sign the petition by clicking the link below! It's fast and easy, and your name can be anonymous if you like!

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/credential-al-giordano.html

You can also post it to your fav social media sites and email it to your distribution list.

I specifically did NOT mention "DK" in the petition...

Since about noon ET, LOTS of people have signed...what about YOU?!?!?

We love Al, and he loves us back! We will NOT tolerate censorship: not this time, not this year!

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/credential-al-giordano.html

"I'm also not aware of whether the progressive challenger has a ghost of a chance anyway. If the challenger had a real shot at winning, I doubt the nominee would be doing this. If the challenger doesn't have a real chance, then all this indignance is a distraction, at least in terms of what I think is important."

That's a really good point, actually. Pick your battles and all.

Also, Greenwald and netroots have been really focusing on the FISA issue, and I usually don't like it when a group denounces a candidate wholly for his or her stance on one pet piece of legislation (how many of us know of ANYthing Barrow has done locally for his constituents?). There's a lot to consider here.

Add this to the list of issues which CA Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is smart enough to dissociate himself from McCain/Bush.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/06/18/schwarzenegger-s...

"The other day someone made the point that while transporting oil from a rig, not the rig itself, may be the core threat -- the transport issue is moot if there's no rig to begin with." This is not true. Oil will continue to be transported from somewhere as long we are dependent on it. And we will be for many, many (many) years to come. I'm not advocating for or even against OSD. I'm just saying that you can't site tanker accidents as a reason to oppose it. The tankers will be there whether or not we have rigs off our shores.

If you are the Republican nominee it is expected you will carry water for your corporate handlers. It would be decades before any of these fields come on line and even then they would satisfy only a small percentage of US demand. Yet it was entirely predictable that a rise in oil prices would be used to try to once again open these fields. This isn't about lowering prices or energy independence. Rather, it is about locking down the rights and booking the assets to many billions of dollars of future profits...

What's up with these tankers spilling oil anyway? How many cars, trucks, airplanes or cruise ships go around spilling gasoline or their passengers? I mean really.

Given the synchronized flip-flopping going on between the president, the governor of florida and the GOP nominee, the Republicans clearly think they have hit on a winning political issue. Few of us seem to have a clue why they think that.

Perhaps given the rising price of gas, McCain feels that simply taking ANY position that can remotely sold as an effort to lower gas prices will force Obama to take the opposite position--thus leaving many low-information voters who aren't seeking out the details by watching Countdown to conclude that McCain wants to lower gas prices and Obama does not. That's my best and only guess. -Absentee Bob

Rush Limbaugh had been all over McCain for his opposition to drilling in ANWR and off shore, so yesterday he was happy - though still pushing for drilling in the ANWR only 2.000 acres of course and it's not pretty...:

 

RUSH: Last night and today, we finally have an issue, an issue that represents a goal for the United States of America: energy independence, drilling for our own oil and our own natural gas. Finally, the president of the United States is willing to lead the charge on this. I know you can say, "Yeah, where has he been the last seven years?" He actually has proposed drilling in ANWR. He hasn't gone all the way, but he finally has now. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth and say, "Yeah, where's this been?" We finally have, ladies and gentlemen, an issue that can rally people -- a simple issue that's easy to understand. This is easy to understand as the House Bank scandal was easy to understand. We don't have to explain the falling dollar, or why it's happening and how to get the dollar back up We don't have to explain.

 

Limbaugh also ties Bush to the hip of McCain on this - since Bush went fourther this is all his idea and glory - and McCain is just trundling along. Not exactly what McCain had in mind I'm sure.

Some grudging appreciation from Marc Halperin via The Page:

8. A frozen brick of butter would have melted in Obama’s mouth as he recorded the video explaining his “reason” for opting out of the system.

 

His other 7 explanations - only opting out made sense.

Obama is taking a lot of incoming flak for flip-flopping on public financing for his campaign. I don't get it. Doesn't a candidate who funds his own campaign through millions of small donations actually saving US taxpayers $84 million by not taking money from the US Treasury? How is that not a good thing not only for Obama but the country?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics... Rasmussen polling on the OSD issue. I guess this is what they are thinking...that folks are on board with the issue and it's a winner. Of course, as the issue gets out there and people learn more, opinions can change dramatically.

 

I would think this is similar to the campaign finance issue.  If you can get your story out there, opinions change.  It's just a matter of breaking through the MSM logjam.

The flak on the public financing issue will pass as Obama as time goes on. To my mind it is strictly a cable news/inside the beltway story.

There was also a poll done in Florida a couple of years ago that indicated about 60% support for off-shore drilling. People love the idea...as long as it's somewhere else.
And as soon as people realize it could take 10 years to get that gas into their tanks, this becomes another winner for Obama, just like the gas tax.

The public funding flap can be dismissed with this true statement: "My campaign takes no money from lobbyists and relies on small donations from many donors. There is no purer form of "public funding."

End of flap.

Tara van Niman:

The point Al so eloquently makes is that those who support offshore drilling support it passively. It's not a game-changer as far as who they vote for. They just see it as "every bit helps" when it comes to oil prices. But those who oppose OSD, are vehemently opposed, usually because they are the ones who must live and work in the places that are impacted by the coastal drilling. A resident of Boca Raton who is opposed to OSD is more likely to vote on this issue than a resident of Denver who is in favor of OSD.

If 55% of people passively support an idea, and 45% vehemently oppose it, you are better off not pissing off the vehement minority.

couldn't have caused him to flip (o, is this a flop? I've lost track!), could it?

As far as the opting out of campaign finance, I think Obama and his surrogates need to spell out the loopholes Johnny Mac and the RNC had stitched in for him in real plain English for the voters. Most people (including those who write them) are only getting the headlines on this one.

That's what he did so well on the gas tax pander. It worked a treat, and it can work again; but this issue is less compelling to a lot of outside-the-beltway people so it needs extra clarity and flair in the telling to keep their attention until they've got it.

Bush's Me-Too! was my greatest laugh of the week so far. That and picturing the McCain group's faces when they learnt the president was 100% on board and lending his weight to the proposal!

I don't think this will work--combine threat of spills to tourism, threat of turned up sediment to fishing (commercial and sport), and the news that experts expect this to affect oil prices starting in 2030--but I do think it's the sort of bold stroke we'll see more of. A respectable close finish doesn't do McCain diddly; at 72 I doubt losing by 5 pts vs 20 pts is how he'll strategize. He's got to do stuff that could land him 20 pts down or, just maybe, 1 point up.

It's time for all the Democratic delegates to invest in a pair of flip-flops. Remember how the Republicans so proudly displayed theirs at the 2004 convention?
If I remember correctly, those large plastic flip-flops were more prominent than the American flag. Flip-flop! Flip-flop!

I've got two burning questions:

First, what's going on with the Republicans? There's got to be some dirt on behind-the-scenes maneuvering in the Republican party. They know they're likely to lose the presidency, but I can't imagine them letting Obama and all those down-ticket Dems win in the kind of avalanche they're heading for. Even if a Democratic congress and administration completely screwed up, it'd be years before they recovered enough congressional seats to get anywhere with their loathsome policies.

Second--and believe me, I've been holding off on asking this, waiting for a shoe or at least a sandal to drop--where's Hillary? One could understand her taking a week or so off, but in this climate I'd expect her to be doing more than taking one private meeting with her fundraisers and Obama. I don't believe there's anything nefarious going on. Perhaps everyone's decided to let her fans get their feet under them for a while before she comes out to change their minds. After all, a lot of her supporters completely ignored her entreaty for them to support Obama. If she kept begging them to switch and they kept ignoring her, she'd not only lose credibility with them, but would lose her rep as a tough leader.

On the other hand, perhaps the Clinton family is quietly having a collective nervous breakdown. Or the press, which is just circulating the same stories over and over, is on vacation itself and is waiting to wonder about these things until July. But really, am I the only curious one?

OK, I've still got work to do and again have to feed the cats. No scrabble for the wicked; the house gets filthy when I work too much, especially when I then go home and check back here.

Forgive me for changing the topic, but I don't understand what is going on with the whole campaign financing thing. I thought it was a sign of fund-raising weakness to accept public financing. What are these loopholes Obama is talking about? I get the whole 527 thing, but we all knew that was coming. Why is he so steamed about McCain accepeting public financing?

Also, just because McFossil and the RNC have more money, doesn't mean they can get more value for that money. Wasn't spending big and going bankrupt a hallmark of the McCain primary race? What will prevent him from burning through all this money at his disposal at the same rate he did before?

Didn't the Clinton campaign prove that having money and 527 ads don't match up against superior organizing?

Petition signatures have topped 100 -- thank you for putting together on our behalf, Pam!

For those of you who may not be aware, there is a petition circulating to encourage DNC to grant Al rightful credentials for Denver Convention.

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/credential-al-giordano/signatures.ht...

p.s. Tien Le, "McFossil" cracks me up. I'm using that one.

This must be driving McCain nuts, is nowhere safe?

The Results:

McCain: 44%
Obama: 43%
Barr: 6%
Undecided: 7%

The summary:

"My view is that Georgia, the 9th largest state in the nation with 15 electoral votes, will remain a major new battleground state through November. This changes the landscape of electoral politics as Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, and perhaps another surprise southern state, join Florida as potential “swing states,” that cannot be presumed to vote Republican in 2008.”

http://www.insideradvantagegeorgia.com/restricted/2008/June%202008/6-19-...

Sorry to be off-topic but this is a wonderful and well-written petition and statement (stop the false race-gender divide). I hope everyone at least reads it and passes it on after signing it. After all our discussions on race and gender, I wanted to share what the feminist community has been up to.

This is from Ann Russo & Melissa Spatz. They are Chicago-based white anti-racist feminist activists and writers. Ann Russo is Director of the Program in Women's &
Gender Studies at DePaul University. Melissa Spatz is Director of the Women
& Girls Collective Action Network. Together, we are co-authors of
Communities Engaged in Resisting Violence (available at
www.womenandgirlscan.org).

We both hope that you will share it with your networks and friends, and sign
onto the letter at:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-the-false-race-gender-divide.

If you do forward the email, please share the email address associated with this
Call to Action: calltoaction2008@gmail.com

Thanks!

siddhartha

Below are the questions in the Rasmussen poll on off-shore drilling. I am impressed that they clarified what off-shore meant as the same people who can't answer the question, "Who is our Vice President?" on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" would also not understand what offshore means. In any event, the way the questions are asked is, at best, questionable as it allows (in my interpretation) the respondent to incorrectly assume that gas prices would go down in short order.

1* How concerned are you about rising gas and energy prices? 79% Very concerned

16% Somewhat concerned

4% Not very concerned

1% Not at all concerned

 0% Not sure

2* In order to reduce the price of gas, should drilling be allowed in offshore oil wells off the coasts of California, Florida, and other states?

 67% Yes

18% No

 15% Not sure

3* Should drilling for oil be allowed 50 miles off the U.S. coasts?

64% Yes

18% No

20% Not sure

Tara,

It's one thing to ask if people support offshore drilling. It's another to ask if they support it in their own state or beach front . Ask the question two different ways, and you'll get two different answers. This is the king of all NIMBY issues at work here, the negative impact on (my) property values for the sake of (your) energy consumption.

Alexa, Just curious --since I joined RV some months ago, I noticed you and about 10 other regulars. Since moving to the new Field, I haven't seen Cheryl in NJ or john from Illinois. Have you seen them posting at all? I hope they found their way over here!

John seems to be still posting over at the Ex-Field, as is Rhoda and rikyrah who I also recall as regulars. LetThereBeLiberals is commenting there too - but he does know about the new Field - he/she seemed to have a bit of a dummy-spit here a few days ago.

BondiBeachViews

This is OT, but one of the links above talked about telecom immunity, so maybe it's okay to bring it up. I really don't understand how or why the democrats seem to be doing an about face on telecom immunity. This is coming up for a vote again. Don't the democrats control what gets voted on? Every other time I had email after email in my inbox asking me to call my senators or sign some petition to try to stop it. This time, nothing.

It feels like there must be something going on behind the scenes. Something I watched or read made it sound like the democrats may be trying to protect themselves because they knew about it from the start. Why wouldn't Barack be trying to stop this?

Al, do you know what's going on with this? Anyone?

Nancy M. It appears that many of the Democrats who were in Congress when BushCO started this illegal wiretapping (post 9/11) had information about it and chose to "go along" with it. You know, as someone over on DKos said, the same Democrats who are in support of stem cell research so they can grow a spine. Back when anything that had the word "patriot" before or after it meant it was all good. So if the telecoms and BUSHCO are implicated (by not allowing the immunity) these same Democrats would potentially be on the wrong side of the law too. That's my understanding anyway with the caveat that I don't claim to be an expert on the matter.

Nancy M. It appears that many of the Democrats who were in Congress when BushCO started this illegal wiretapping (post 9/11) had information about it and chose to "go along" with it. You know, as someone over on DKos said, the same Democrats who are in support of stem cell research so they can grow a spine. Back when anything that had the word "patriot" before or after it meant it was all good. So if the telecoms and BUSHCO are implicated (by not allowing the immunity) these same Democrats would potentially be on the wrong side of the law too. That's my understanding anyway with the caveat that I don't claim to be an expert on the matter.

Catherine, thanks for the the information. I guess I am not surprised by the other folks in congress, but I will be incredibly disappointed in Barack if he doesn't stand up for what's right here. I know it's not possible to agree with him on everything, but this is a really big deal.

How hillariuos is that he was arrested immediately following his non-event of a press conference at the national Press Club ?!

More here: http://reason.com/blog/show/127093.html

DairyStateMom says it best on the faux outrage over Obama's decision to decline public financing: "Okay, let me get this straight. John McCain has 527s who he "can't control," and takes all kinds of money and help from lobbyists, is a good guy because he supports public financing -- except when he doesn't want to follow the spending limits in the primary season, even though he opted in to public financing so he could get a loan to spend more money than public financing would allow him to spend. Barack Obama has a whole bunch of little donors, which is supposed to be the whole point of the public financing system, making little money more important than big money, and has expressly said he doesn't want 527 ads or lobbyists' money or help -- and Obama is the sharp-elbowed Chicago political operator who's throwing principle under the bus to get elected? I'm sorry, what planet are people living on?!?!?!?"

I'm new here so am not sure where to post, as I don't want to derail.

But with the way the FISA "compromise" (read "capitulation") is coming down (and yes, I've done my phone calling and emailing to my reps), and the fact that Obama himself taped a radio endorsement this week for John Barrow of Georgia -- who accused fellow Democrats of wanting to "cut and run" in Iraq, and who supports warrantless eavesdropping and amnesty to telecoms as well as virtually every other abhorrent Bush policy -- I'm having a moment.

Not a Chicken Little moment. I am serene regarding the election. I guess it's just a moment of not particularly enjoying political reality.

Barrow has an established history as a Bush enabler. He is running against an African American woman (Georgia Senator Regina Thomas) who opposes the FISA 'compromise', has strong grassroots support, and whose policy stances match what Obama says he believes in. But Obama endorsed Barrow. I'm no starry-eyed idealist, but dear god, I never enjoy the moments where I set aside my disappointment over compromises in order to continue supporting a candidate who (I hope) represents a much greater good.

I guess I just needed to vent a bit. The work goes on.

Al, I realize you are a journalist of solid credentials, but I have to point you to a <a href="http://kalimao.blogspot.com/2008/06/environment-china-drilling-off-coast.html">post of mine</a> about this offshore oil drilling bullshit. I took a few minutes to look at the implications, and came up with some interesting results. You have a wider audience than I do, so please feel free to use my research in any way you think fit.