FISA Problems for Obama?

jfuh · 07-03-08, 04:50 PM

Is this a case of reaching across over into the enemies base to secure a political victory? Or is this a case of selling out on principle to which he is not who we thought he was?

Source

Alex · 07-03-08, 05:32 PM

I think he is trying to seem more centralist. This is something that he did not have to do in the primary because he was courting specific people (liberals) for the nominations. Now he has to court many more types of voters so he is selling out on his original positions.

He is a politician like any other so his theme of "change" was nothing but a ruse to get the nomination. The changes that he has made the last few weeks are clear evidence of that. He only said what he did during the primary to get the nomination.

I think as he tries to get more to the center, he will lose more votes than gain.

partier9 · 07-03-08, 06:11 PM

I voted for both, because as it said he orignaly was against it but was then for it a week later. Though the bill has other things he probably supports, the fact that he changed his decision on it means he's selling out to try and get some of the independents or repuplicans who are undecided. Honestly I really don't care about it one way or the other. Though this may hurt him, McCain can paint this into him flip flopping which could hurt him more than he gains.

Summerwind · 07-03-08, 06:22 PM

He's (Obama) recently posted this on his site. At least he recognizes that he has a problem and addresses it directly and thoughtfully with respect toward those that are "against" him on this issue.

my.barackobama.com | Joe Rospars's Blog: Response from Barack on FISA and Discussion with Policy Staff

independent_thinker2002 · 07-04-08, 12:23 AM

But I thought he was the most partisan, liberal Senator?

hrdman2luv · 07-04-08, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

I think he is trying to seem more centralist. This is something that he did not have to do in the primary because he was courting specific people (liberals) for the nominations. Now he has to court many more types of voters so he is selling out on his original positions.

He is a politician like any other so his theme of "change" was nothing but a ruse to get the nomination. The changes that he has made the last few weeks are clear evidence of that. He only said what he did during the primary to get the nomination.

I think as he tries to get more to the center, he will lose more votes than gain.

I think, and others I have discussed with agree,(including Obama supporters) that if he had said these things 6 months ago, then we would all be looking at John Edwards as the Dems nomination. Or even a Clinton Nomination. (which I would not favor).

Obama's lack of honesty and and his total disreguard of political simplicity will be a good reason for a libertarian to actually have a chance at the White House as Nov gets closer.

I'm no libertarian. But, I can see where the libertarians are are more inline with more Americans. Now, getting people to stop this "lesser of two evils" mindset (that has been placed in their thoughts by Dems and Repubs), and vote for who they truely are aligned with, is going to be the challenge.

I believe that people are redundant to vote for the same party and expect any real change. 2006 should be a prime example.

Thats like putting your dirty shirt in the dryer, and expect it to be cleaned.