Hillary's FISA Vote - Is It A Patriot Act Flip Flop - Consider Her Senate Race

[Median Democrat]

In her Senate race against John Spencer she vigorously responded to attacks that she would be soft on terrorists, similar to the arguments raised against Obama, and in voting on the 2006 Patriot Act, she voted for it, while making the same floor statements made by Obama:

http://www.factcheck.org/article416.html

NSA Wiretapping as a Vital Tool?

The Spencer ad also criticizes Clinton for questioning the NSA wiretapping program, and makes a highly dubious claim that NSA wiretaps were "vital" to stopping the alleged plot to blow up US-bound airliners taking off from Britain.

It's true that Clinton has sharply attacked Bush for the NSA program, saying the President lacked legal authority to order wiretaps without judicial warrants, and has "stonewalled" Congress by refusing to supply details of how the program works. She hasn't opposed eavesdropping on suspected terrorists, however, and in fact has said she would allow warrantless wiretaps in certain cases during "the immediate aftermath of war," and that "in cases of true emergencies" she would allow law enforcement officials to eavesdrop first and get a warrant later.

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. Or a sharp bone in the gizzard of the Hillary haters?

[Median Democrat]

3. Who knows? For The Leftist Crowd, Both Hillary and Obama Are Too Right

Obama and Hillary said virtually the same thing in reference to the 2006 authorization of the Patriot Act. Indeed, Hillary has criticized whether Obama would be as tough as she is on National Security issues despite their similarities.

[RedShoes]

2. "It's true that Clinton has sharply attacked Bush for the NSA program..." eom

eom

[Median Democrat]

4. Also true that "would allow warrantless wiretaps in certain cases"

nm

[bemildred]

5. Congresspersons do make deals about who gets to vote which way on legislation, you know.

As long as the outcome is not in doubt, they will trade favors as to who gets to be the good guy and who does not. I suspect that is what is at issue here.

[percussivemadness]

6. Clinton vrs Romney

call me crazy, but that`s what I think we`ll be voting on in November....

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

7. Quite respectfully...

In which of the universes of string theory will this be taking place?

[Median Democrat]

8. Yikes - Then We Have To Deal With Hillary Flop Flop Posts By DUers

Obama and Hillary are even more similar than Bush and McCain. Its like trying to argue that McCain is represents a sea change from Bush. Obama and Hillary's voting records are virtually identical, and the factcheck article just underscores that Hillary has said and voted in the same manner to protect her right flank from charges that she is soft on terrorists.

There are differences of course. Hillary voted to authorize the Iraq war, and did not acknowledge that it was a mistake until late in the primaries whereas John Edwards acknowledged his vote was a mistake fairly early in the process. Also, Obama opposed Bush's BK reform bill. Hillary did not. Finally, Hillary is the one who ran as the anti-liberal by calling Obama elitist.

So, it is really a difference in presentation, then a real difference in opinion.

The bottom line is that DUers will always hate the Democratic nominee. I remember the complaints about our weak candidates with Kerry, as well as the there is no difference between Gore and Bush crowd who argued that Gore was not liberal enough.

[Beacool]

11. Obama's comments in San Francisco WERE viewed as elitist by plenty of people.

I campaigned for her in PA and people were furious. It was the gift that kept on giving, people kept bringing it up when we went canvassing.

[Median Democrat]

15. Does 1 comment make him elitist? Does Hillary's assassination comment . . .

Suggest that she is hoping that he dies, and that is why she hung out in the race for so long? Don't get me wrong, I think a long primary was ultimately beneficial for Obama. (Yes. I am in the minority on this point.) But, the point I made is that Obama is being accused of being elitist based on 1 comment, and the fact of the matter is that he is probably the closest to most of us in terms of income and lifestyle. Bush, Hillary, Edwards, McCain, etc. are really, really rich. Not just top 5% rich. But +$10 million range rich. Yet, Obama gets hung with the elitist tag? That strikes me as dishonest. What the fuck is an elistist? Woundn't you agree that Hillary is elistist given her income and wealth? Or, is it possible to have a multi-millionaire who is really just 1 of us?

[Beacool]

19. No, he isn't close to earning what most Americans earn.

It was the Clintons who were the poorest presidential couple in decades. They made the money after they left the WH thanks to their books and Bill's speeches.

Elitism is not about money, it's an attitude. I've seen some elitists who are middle class and some very humble people who have always been rich.

[JDPriestly]

25. And, of course, some of the post-White House money

came from that lucrative contract with Gupta for consulting fees.

Info U.S.A.'s CEO is Vinod Gupta, a close ally of both Clintons. Gupta's empire also includes the Opinion Research Corporation, which conducts the political polling for the television network CNN.

Vin Gupta has a long history of giving and raising campaign money for the Clintons, and gave $1 million for the 2000 Millennium Celebration, a New Year's Party thrown by the Clintons.

When he was president, Bill Clinton named Gupta to the Kennedy Center board of directors. Gupta also got to sleep in the Lincoln bedroom. He gave another million to the Clinton Presidential Library.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18958566

[Median Democrat]

28. However, Hillary The Candidate Is Very Rich . . .

and as for your comment about attitude based on the San Francisco comments, then you have to throw in Hillary's baking cookies comment, which was also considered very elitist. Does that make her an elitist? Frankly, I think it is a useless tag, but a lot of folks like to bring it up the San Francisco comment as though that one comment says it all. If it does, then Hillary is also done for.

The difference between Hillary and Obama is not one of issues, but one of approach, which I think is the real reason the primary was so contentious. There really was no real red meat because they both wanted to repeal the tax cuts, both were pro-choice, both offered some form of health care reform that dramatically increased the scope of government, both were against privitizing social security, both touted mandatory targets for energy efficiency such as higher fuel economy standards.

I did not contribute to either candidate during the primaries because I was not going to pay Democrats who I liked to beat each other up. However, I leaned Obama because Hillary's fight, fight, fight mantra actually turned me off. I am really tired of these overtly partisan battles on the hill. Mark Penn really turned me off. I wanted to hear a a message and mission of someone who will lead. Not someone who is going to the White House to pick some fights.

Now, I know that is NOT what some DUers want. They want payback. I understand that. Look at the impeachment debates. However, I want someone who is going to rally all Americans even the ones who are registered Republican around the issues that face us all. Sure, the GOP will promote divisiness, but I did not want to see that responded to in kind. That's just me.

[percussivemadness]

10. as I said, call me crazy :), however, in view of your respectful response

technically speaking Obama hasn`t been confirmed as the nominee, he is the "presumptive" nominee.


As for "support our nominee", I will, when it has been confirmed 100%.

P.S up until today`s FISA vote, I would have chosen Obama over Clinton 100% of the time, however, assuming that over 85% disapprove of Dumbya, and 91% disapprove of congress, I cannot for the life of me understand his vote.He has basically sided against 91% of the country by supporting the FISA bill. There is no excuse for betraying your oath of office, namely to protect the constitution. If he capitulates on this, a critical vote, what else is he going to capitulate on?

The ends justify the means I hear you say, in fact it has been repeated over and over on DU all day. You leave a very important element out of the equation. You are assuming he is going to win come November. What if he doesn`t? How will this vote for FISA change if he isn`t in a position to change it? No the ends do not justify the means, the end for Obama is to defend the constitution, i just don`t see how his vote today achieves that.

Maybe he is relying on the ACLU and the EFF to do his dirty work for him, but I though Obama was a man of honor? Yet for self-serving political expediency he sold the 4th amendment down the river. Like he thinks the constitution is just a "goddamn piece of paper" or something.

This is change how exactly?

[Median Democrat]

17. So, you disagree with him. That is fair.

There is always the possibility that he believes that this legislation is necessary. He may be wrong. Remember both Hillary and Obama voted for the Patriot Act, which people also have raised similar objections to.

[Median Democrat]

18. So, you disagree with him. That is fair.

There is always the possibility that he believes that this legislation is necessary. He may be wrong. Remember both Hillary and Obama voted for the Patriot Act, which people also have raised similar objections to.

[Beacool]

13. From your lips to God's ears..........

but why Romney?

[percussivemadness]

20. I think Romney made a deal to drop out when he did

I don`t think McCain can win it in a million years. I expect a "poor health" announcement in October when it becomes apparent that the Dems are slaughtering the Republicans in the polls. Plus, Romney for all his faults, represents bizarrely exactly what the Reslugs need to put forward, pro-life, fam,ily values and good on the economy.

As I said, its just a hunch, as for the Dem nomination, I know everyone says its a forgone conclusion, but Hilary hasn`t handed over her delegates and this vote, coupled with Edwards coming out and saying he would have voted against it, plus the massive backlash from most rational people, does it really stretch the imagination to think maybe the Clinton`s have something up their sleeve?

As I said, I`m probably just crazy :)

[Beacool]

24. Hmmm........

They won't give it to Hillary for the same reasons the super weasels stated before: the loss of the AA and youth votes. As much as I would hope for you to be correct, I doubt that he won't be the nominee.

Romney may yet be McCain's VP. Anne Coulter was talking about it last night and she thought he would be his best choice.

On the other hand, it's been such a crazy election season. Who knows? Anything can happen............

[AmyCamus]

9. The primary is over, isn't it?

Support Obama's vote. He's our nominee, you should support him, and not dwell on the past.

[Beacool]

12. Wrong!!!

Support should be earned, not demanded. Every candidate's feet should be held to the fire, the nominee is no exception.

[percussivemadness]

22. amen to that!!!!

nt

[Toucano]

14. Whoa!

I can respectfully disagree with the nominee about a variety of issues and still support him.

I will not "support his vote" when I think it's wrong.

Sorry, I'm not a Republican. I don't partake in group think.

[Bluebear]

16. 'Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes ...."

"and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens." - Brittney Spears :)

[ccharles000]

21. ...

I am so proud of Hillary.

[Beacool]

23. So am I!!!!!!!!!

:bounce:

[emilyg]

26. Me, too!!!

:toast: to Hillary.

[StevieM]

27. Me three!!! I have never been more proud of her! She is everything a Senator should be (eom)