Some of his strongest supporters during the nomination campaign are dismayed about this vote, not just that it prevents us from having a day in court to challenge the erosion of our Constitutional rights. So far many of us are not satisfied with his statements and assurances. From what I understand at this point, the legislation was not necessary for national security reasons. We have operated without it for many years before the attack on 911 and for several years after it. A lack of the kind of information that can be obtained under the FISA law was not the reason the Bush Administration was caught unaware on 911. And the new law will give the government the right to listen or look in on any communication I might have with my children who travel widely around the world or that I might have with people here in the U.S when I travel outside the country and what previously has been confidential correspondence I might have had as a journalist with sources I have developed in other countries.
Last night Sen. Russ Feingold, who led the fight against the bill, said that although he was not happy with the result, it will not be so bad when Obama is president because he can lead the fight to change it. Well, what happens if Obama loses? Then we have a senile old guy, probably with an enthusiastic, far more conservative younger guy with all the tools he needs to complete the work begun during the Reagan era to establish an unstoppable, all powerful executive. And with the corrupting power of power, there certainly are no guarantees that Obama won't be seduced himself.
This simply is not acceptable and I hope Sen. Obama can offer a more satisfactory explanation of his change in policy. It's too late to change back on this issue, but some concrete assurances that his change philosophy has not been absorbed into the Beltway Borg are necessary for him to keep the kind of enthusiastic support he has enjoyed for more than a year.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment