3 ms·

Before people criticize this political story on hacker news, note that it's as relevant as a story about a time bomb planted in Silicon Valley. This law brings

by brlewis 18y ago

Before people criticize this political story on hacker news, note that it's as relevant as a story about a time bomb planted in Silicon Valley. This law brings an end to constitutional separation of powers in the U.S. government, in that the executive branch is no longer answerable to the judiciary. Obama, as the presumptive Democratic nominee, is in a position where the media cannot ignore him. He could have pointed out that the 1978 FISA law already allowed for retroactive warrants, so no "modernization" was necessary. It would not have hurt him politically to vote against this bill. Obama does not uphold U.S. law or the U.S. Constitution, but I'm going to vote for him because McCain is worse.

ajkirwin 18y ago
It's like this. He tried to get it amended, but it failed. And as it stands, he can't go about filibustering this close to an election. If he voted no, it'd give the republicans a chance to jump on it and use it as a weapon. So he had no choice but to say Yes.
- anamax 18y ago
  Can't? No - won't. The interesting question is what won't Obama do to win the election. And, is the election actually that close or is Obama more willing to abandon his principles than his chances?
  - dangoldin 18y ago
    Well I think we already know the answer to that.
- brlewis 18y ago
  If this were 6 months ago I would say you had a point. But now he's in a position where his message on any issue is going to get out. Voting in a way that protects the Constitution would have handed him a much bigger weapon than any handed to the Republicans.
- hugh 18y ago
  In addition to the two options you mentioned (voting "Yes" or filibustering) he could have voted "No" or abstained. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt here and assume that he was actually convinced by the merits of the bill, at least as a general compromise on some very difficult issues. If he genuinely thought it was as terrible a bill as some people here do, he would have voted "No" and used it as a weapon against McCain.

by brlewis 18y ago

ajkirwin 18y ago

It's like this. He tried to get it amended, but it failed. And as it stands, he can't go about filibustering this close to an election. If he voted no, it'd give the republicans a chance to jump on it and use it as a weapon. So he had no choice but to say Yes.

anamax 18y ago
Can't? No - won't. The interesting question is what won't Obama do to win the election. And, is the election actually that close or is Obama more willing to abandon his principles than his chances?
- dangoldin 18y ago
  Well I think we already know the answer to that.
brlewis 18y ago
If this were 6 months ago I would say you had a point. But now he's in a position where his message on any issue is going to get out. Voting in a way that protects the Constitution would have handed him a much bigger weapon than any handed to the Republicans.
hugh 18y ago
In addition to the two options you mentioned (voting "Yes" or filibustering) he could have voted "No" or abstained. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt here and assume that he was actually convinced by the merits of the bill, at least as a general compromise on some very difficult issues. If he genuinely thought it was as terrible a bill as some people here do, he would have voted "No" and used it as a weapon against McCain.