. Stopping or modifying the bill still seems unlikely, but this is politics, and… who knows? Our elected representatives might even decide to defend and protect the Constitution. It could happen.

X-posted at Donklephant.
…

——————————

I watch both stations. I learned a long time ago that while neither side speaks the truth, you can generally learn a lot more by listening to both sides and then learning for yourself what the facts actually are. Thats not me trying to lecture you or anything, obviously you know way more about politics than I do, just saying.

I guess I also want to say that as someone who shares a similar set of values as you, it disappoints me somewhat that you tend to write so frequently about things that I’d consider drivel. I mean, there was the back from France post that really didn’t seem to say much of anything other than to highlight that politicians do indeed pander. And now this. I guess I just dont feel like either post adds much of anything to the readerships ability to make better informed political decisions. Obviously thats not all of what writing is about, but I keep hoping to find myself challenged to think critically about important subjects and to find real analysis – be it policy oriented or strategy oriented. Generally speaking, for as much as bloggers and their readers love to complain about how the MSM never reports on the issues, blogs haven’t done a great job of filling that void either.

This one though certainly does have a lot of quality content, and I love that I’m able to get that from people who can see both sides of an issue and break it down sensibly.

Regretfully, every Presidential hopefully is essentially asking us to do just that, to trust them. So I don;t know if thats a valid rational. I do have hope with Obama that given the fact that he has essentially devoted his life to constitutional law, that he does have deep and abiding respect for the document. Obviously he see’s things different than a constructionist would, since he isn’t among that group. But he’s also said that he firmly believes that people have a right to own a weapon and wouldn’t try and take that away. He devotes a lot of words to the subject in his books, talking about how guns play a vital role in linking together generations of American families though hunting for example. Yes, he does favor regulation, but I dont think he’d take 2nd amendment rights that far.

But I also think that we as Americans have been crapped on by the Bush administrations wanton abuse of our privacy rights as well as our habeas rights. Given my choice between who I’d trust to lead us back to the constitution, I’d take Obama. Again, while his vote for the FISA compromise showed a lack of backbone, it was almost a political MUST. I mean, can you imagine that 527 ads the right would’ve put out had he voted against it?

“When John McCain and the Republicans tried to work with the Democrats in congress to pass a revised FISA bill, Obama refused to work across the aisle. Obama hates you if you aren’t a hippie liberal.”

“Obama voted to make it easier for the terrorists to eat your children.”

Blah, blah, blah. He had to vote for that bill. So I suppose while I’d like to have seen him vote against it, I can completely and totally understand why he didn’t. Why do one of the few things that could cause legitimate damage to your nearly unfettered run to the White House where you can easily revoke that bill, when you don’t have to?

The problem of course with calling out Obama for his pandering, only forces me to highlight the fact that McCain has been a world-class panderer himself this election cycle. And one lesson that I’ve learned is that politicians will say and do things they wouldn’t otherwise do during an election cycle. But they will always govern the same way they have in the past.

Just because McCain has pandered to evangelicals, oil interests, and numerous others, doesn’t mean he isn’t likely to thumb his nose at them once elected. And just because Obama has betrayed some of his stances in his run, doesn’t mean he’ll continue to do so once in the White House. And frankly, if FISA is a big deal, that should probably leave you still banking on Obama based on what he’s said pre-election.

“I’m curious why you care so much about Olbermann?”

Middle,
I guess it’s because I watch MSNBC and I don’t watch FOX. Nothing more. Agreed they are two sides of the same coin.

Essentially, it moves him closer to the middle, and this is always what happens during elections. I understand that its newsworthy, but its neither surprising, nor that big of a deal. I think one would reasonably expect that if Obama is elected, Democrats would quickly and effectively move to bypass this most recent compromise without so much as a hint of opposition from Obama. In that sense, its shrewd strategic move – give away some policy points now that few American’s actually have any clue about, and position yourself to be able to control the agenda utterly unopposed shortly thereafter.

I know this is something you and I are both concerned about – the fear of any one party gaining such a huge swath of power. But in this rare case, I actually feel it just might be worth taking the risk. The Bush administration, in my mind at least, has simply trampled on the constitution for the last eight years, leaving many egregious areas of concern. I also believe that they’ve squandered a key opportunity to invest in energy and to modernize our economy to one that is capable of competing on the world stage.

We have a lot of very serious issues facing us, and like FDR, perhaps the best thing for it is bold and determined leadership from the left to lead the country in a new direction. And while I respect the heck out of John McCain, he has offered me precisely nothing that is going to help change things. His economic “policies” are a joke. They are essentially, “leave things the way they are.” His energy policy is, “lets open up offshore drilling,” which is just a placebo. His view on our military doesn’t fall in line with mine (nor does Obama’s), but at least Obama seems to understand that we cant adequately address our domestic issues and federal budget while bleeding red ink into unwinnable wars.