Barack Obama's disappointing statement on the new FISA bill

Here's an excerpt from Senator Obama's statement on the new FISA bill which passed the House yesterday and will likely pass the Senate. I received it via e-mail this morning:

After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act.

Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.

It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives - and the liberty - of the American people.

My comments, which don't approve of Senator Obama's message, follow:

Despite what Senator Obama says, it will not be "over", it only become retroactively legal so that it such spying can continue. I would never think I would win in a battle parsing words in Senator Obama, but the only thing that will stop is the illegality of the actions of the Bush Administration and the telcos. The spying will continue as it has before, but Congress just put its seal of approval on it.

This unchecked spying, in the wrong hands, is still very dangerous. And I can see President Bush adding a little "signing statement" to it granting the Executive Branch even more powers (and then giggling about it like a schoolkid).

I don't trust Bush, I don't trust the Republicans, and I don't trust the Democratic Leadership Council with my Fourth Amendment rights. Past history shows that when these groups get together, there's always an ulterior motive behind any compromise that they work on. Between the DLC (whose members I don't even count as Democrats), the GOP, BushCo, and the lobbyists that wrote this bill, these people are proven to be the among biggest liars and backstabbers in Washington, DC.

One of the things that makes me a Democrat is my belief that our party is one that protects the rights of all individuals against the government and Senator Obama appears to be the candidate that best personifies that belief. Therefore, I am disappointed that he's willing to cave on this issue and now I feel my wholehearted support is just a bit tarnished.

I also believe that we can protect America while simultaneously upholding our core values and beliefs, and when reading this bill, it is quite evident that it compromises those beliefs and fails the Constitutional litmus test. Senator Obama, who has lectured Constitutional law at the University of Chicago, must know this, too.

And last, I don't think we should make the assumption that Senator Obama is going to win the White House. We should always prepare for the worst. In the wrong hands, this legislation remains a real threat to the Fourth Amendment protections against unwarranted search and seizure.

However, while Senator Obama's statement doesn't make me feel any better and this capitulation is a real letdown, I still support him for 100 percent for president over John McSame, who would use such legislation to unfair and inequitable ends, just like his Republican predecessor has done.