by Josh Orton, Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 11:56:52 AM EDT
At DailyKos (UPDATE: and here at MyDD), recommended-list diarist HatchInBrooklyn tries to defend Obama's FISA stance:
We all know that in this day and age a serious Presidential candidate absolutely cannot vote "no" on a bill even loosely related to preventing terrorist attacks. If Obama were to oppose the bill as a whole, he would be handing McCain--who didn't even bother to show up and vote today--a huge opening to scare voters and paint Obama as weak on terrorism.
No. No no no no no. No.
Democrats must always stand against Republicans on national security - because Republicans have proven miserable failures on national security, and yet still try to politically intimidate Democrats by painting them as weaklings yearning to surrender. It's precisely why Barack Obama deserves credit for opposing the war in Iraq. It's why Feingold deserves credit for casting the sole vote against the PATRIOT Act in the Senate. And, because the American people don't like to be fooled twice, it's why most of our fellow citizens no longer fear a terrorist attack and favor ending the war in Iraq.
There is more than one possible justification for voting the way Obama did on FISA, but this is quite possibly the worst.