When members of Bush’s criminal enterprise, otherwise known as Bush Administration political appointees, were testifying before Congress, they had to be reminded that they had not sworn an oath of allegiance to George Bush or the Presidency, but to the Constitution.

I support the Constitution and the rule of law – not a specific candidate. This week, in a stunning reversal, Barack Obama has said that the Constitution and the rule of law do not matter when compared to our security interests.

Gee, where have I heard that before? Thank goodness I’m from Wisconsin and can still look up to Senator Russ Feingold, who would tear his heart out before voting for laws like FISA that rob us of our Fourth Amendment rights.

For the Democrats who believe that Barack Obama is going to change things, like I did, perhaps his speech in 2002 was just a fluke. When push came to shove this week, he capitulated, compromised, ignored his base, and is now spouting Republican talking points. This is what we have come to expect from Democrats. It is apparently in their DNA to be invertebrates.

There is only one thing that the President of the United States has to defend: The Constitution. Everything else is secondary. Everything.

When it mattered most, Barack Obama failed to act. This will be remembered the same way that Hillary Clinton’s vote to proceed with the Iraq War has been, a craven, gutless attempt to gain power by abandoning the very principles people elected you to uphold.

Oh yes, I will vote for Obama, and yes he will be elected.  By the way, nice flag lapel pin, Barack.  So much for showing your patriotism in your heart rather than on your clothing.

Here’s more from the Daily Kos (emphasis mine):

In a reversal of previous policy statements, from October, 2007 and January, 2008, and again in February, 2008, Barack Obama now says telco amnesty just isn’t that important. Greg Sargent:

Asked specifically why he’s supporting the current FISA bill when he’d promised months ago to support a filibuster of an earlier version of the bill, Obama suggested flat out that “national security” overrides the question of telecom immunity… It’s true that Obama says mitigating things like we need to be “watching the watchers.” But here’s the key quote from him:

“The bill has changed. So I don’t think the security threats have changed, I think the security threats are similar. My view on FISA has always been that the issue of the phone companies per se is not one that overrides the security interests of the American people.”

Obama’s line on national security here seems to be affirmation of something that many understood already: That he will support the bill even if telecom immunity isn’t stripped from it, despite his promise to try to get immunity out of the legislation. If the issue of telecom immunity doesn’t override national security, he’ll of course vote for the bill with or without it.

Not that telco amnesty and national security really have anything to do with each other, or that this FISA bill actually does make us safer. It’s disturbing, to say the least, to see that Senator Obama has adopted the talking points of Steny Hoyer and the Right on the issue.

Daily Kos: Obama on FISA

It was only last October that TPM announced that Barack Obama had agreed to filibuster any legislation that contained immunity for the Telecoms.

What a difference eight months make:

It’s official: Obama will back a filibuster of any Senate FISA legislation containing telecom immunity, his campaign has just told Election Central. The Obama campaign has just sent over the following statement from spokesman Bill Burton:

“To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.”

As we reported here yesterday, MoveOn and a dozen top liberal bloggers were preparing to wage an aggressive campaign today to pressure Obama and Hillary to say that they’ll support Chris Dodd’s vow to filibuster any Senate FISA bill containing telecom immunity. And late yesterday both Obama and Hillary put out statements saying that they’d back Dodd’s threatened filibuster of the current legislation that’s just come out of the Senate intel committee.

Those statements, however, lacked the clarity that immunity opponents have been looking for, so today the MoveOn and lib blogger campaign has been in full swing. MoveOn emailed members this morning urging them to call Obama and Hillary and…

Tell him/her the public is counting on him/her to filibuster any bill that gives immunity to phone companies that broke the law.

Now we have Obama’s answer: He’ll support a filibuster of any such bill.

When informed of Obama’s decision, MoveOn expressed relief. “Excellent — this is the kind of leadership we need to see from the Democratic candidates,” MoveOn spokesman Adam Green told Election Central. “Dodd, Biden, and Obama all agree. Will Clinton get on board?”