Since then, Senator Obama has released his statement, one that while not exactly praising the bill, isn't a fierce "pure" indictment that many progressives wish he would give.
I must say I am mildly disappointed in Senator Obama, and disagree with his supporting this weak-ass compromise. However, it's not going to stop me from supporting his campaign, and shouldn't stop any person truly committed to changing the system in Washington.
Sometimes compromise means swallowing a bad pill. While the new FISA bill isn't perfect, it does have some provisions that might restore the rule of law over the executive branch. In fact, if the damn thing didn't include retroactive immunity for giant telecoms, I doubt few people would be getting in a tizzy over this.
Although there is certainly an issue regarding privacy and civil rights, the biggest issue is the excusing of corporate complicity with illegal acts. What makes them so certain that excusing AT&T and Verizon this time won't result in the companies over-stretching the boundaries of law next time?
I know there are some political issues here, and that sometimes you have to make a bad choice. The Democrats clearly felt threatened by the potential issue the Republicans might make Obama has certainly done enough during the primaries to gain some trust, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt here. After all, the Senate hasn't even voted yet, and maybe he has something up his sleeve.
If one expects purity in a decision made by the government of a pluralistic republic, one will most often be disappointed. Compromise is the nature of a republic, and the pursuit of the good cannot be scrapped in favor of chasing the perfect.
I just wish I could feel more confident that Obama was on the right side here.
UPDATE: Here is a comment from Wonkette that is as good of an analogy as I can see for this situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment