Obama responds to FISA opposition

I want to take this opportunity to speak directly to those of you who oppose my decision to support the FISA compromise.

This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn’t have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush’s abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration’s program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That’s why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.

But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I’ve said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility

The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.

The ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States is a vital counter-terrorism tool, and I’m persuaded that it is necessary to keep the American people safe — particularly since certain electronic surveillance orders will begin to expire later this summer. Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I’ve chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention — once I’m sworn in as President — to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I’m happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions. No tool has been more important in focusing peoples’ attention on the abuses of executive power in this Administration than the active and sustained engagement of American citizens. That holds true — not just on wiretapping, but on a range of issues where Washington has let the American people down.

I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago, that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I’m not exempt from that. I’m certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable too. I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country. That is why we have built the largest grassroots campaign in the history of presidential politics, and that is the kind of White House that I intend to run as President of the United States — a White House that takes the Constitution seriously, conducts the peoples’ business out in the open, welcomes and listens to dissenting views, and asks you to play your part in shaping our country’s destiny.

Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That’s ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.

So I appreciate the feedback through my.barackobama.com, and I look forward to continuing the conversation in the months and years to come. Together, we have a lot of work to do.

Obama reconfirms 16 month timetable

Refinement refers to the pace of withdrawls, not the 16 month withdrawl table

Does Reuters know how to do any fact checking?

In a recent article they say that Obama is adding new language on Iraq

“But he has said over and over again we have to be as careful getting out as George Bush was careless getting in. So he will redeploy our forces responsibly, at a rate that our commanders say is safe and sustainable.”

Letting commanders have a say in the pace of withdrawal is new language from the Obama campaign.

Umm No it isn’t:, he said it in March as well:

Obama says he will listen to generals about the war

BY ABDON M. PALLASCH Political Reporter/apallasch@suntimes.com

Trying to help Barack Obama appear ready to be commander-in-chief, nine former generals stood at attention today as the Democratic White House hopeful walked in to a news conference against a backdrop of flags at the Chicago History Museum.

The generals said they think Obama has the judgment and temperament to be commander-in-chief.

Gen. Merrill “Tony” McPeak, who served as Air Force Chief of Staff during Operation Desert Storm and who introduced Obama to audiences during the Iowa Caucuses, said Obama was so steady he should be called “No Shock Barack” or “No Drama Obama.”

Sen. Hillary Clinton’s rival campaign hastily threw together its own conference call to start 25 minutes after Obama’s news conference. In Clinton’s event, generals supporting her explained why they think she would be the better commander-in-chief.

Obama lamented the early retirement of Admiral William Fallon, who has clashed with the Bush administration over its policies toward Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan.

“I think it’s a loss,” Obama said. “I think he provided a balanced view of the region. I’m sorry to see him go, but I guess I’m not surprised.”

Obama said that while President Bush has said that he follows the advice of his generals regarding Iraq, when they give the president advice he doesn’t like — cautioning against the War in Iraq, for example — Bush doesn’t listen to them.

“There were generals at the beginning of the conflict that said this is going to require many more troops, will cost us much more … those generals were pushed aside,” Obama said.

Responding to comments made by a former advisor who said Obama might shelve withdrawal plans after getting elected, Obama said he would listen to his generals but, “I will not equivocate in my strategic belief that we need to withdraw … one to two brigades per month — that will be the operating pace that I come into those conversations with.”

Obama tried to deflect the importance of race in the campaign, the day after he won 90 percent of the African-American vote and a quarter of the white vote in Mississippi, according to exit polls.

“There will be some voters for whom the fact I am African-American means I’ve got to work a little harder to make the case,” he said. “In fairness to Sen. Clinton, there may be some voters who require her to work a little harder to make the case because she’s a woman. But there are probably some who give me the benefit of the doubt because I’m black and there are probably some who give Sen. Clinton the benefit of the doubt because she’s a woman.”

Obama called former U.S. Rep. Geraldine Ferraro’s comments that Obama’s race is helping him in this campaign “ridiculous.”

And Obama mocked the notion that his high level of support among African-American voters might turn off white voters.

What percentage of the African-American vote would pundits like him to get that won’t bring criticism for having too much or too little support in the African-American community, he asked.

Four generals in the Clinton conference call praised her help for veterans, work on Arlington Cemetery and other issues, calling her “steady in the saddle.”

Rove disciple takes control of McCain campaign, alters structure

Steve Schmidt is altering the structure of McCain’s camp

Moving to put his imprint on the campaign, newly-installed McCain chief Steve Schmidt sent a memo this morning to the campaign’s 11 regional campaign managers alerting them that he was going to hire a political director and field director to bring more structure to campaign’s political operation.

The regional plan, hatched by Rick Davis, delegated significant authority to the field operatives, empowering them to make decisions and allocate resources in their assigned states.

In the memo, Schmidt suggests that they won’t have the autonomy they once did — but also that their positions aren’t being completely eliminated.

“These individuals will work with all of you and with [deputy campaign manager] Christian Ferry to increase our capacity to reach out to voters, build coalitions, identify supporters, and ultimately turn them out to the polls on Nov. 4,” Schmidt writes of the new political and field directors. “We will be enhancing our headquarters political capacity to provide additional resources to you and your regions.”

Veteran Republicans were baffled by McCain’s attempt to outsource authority over tasks typically overseen by a political director and field director in the traditional campaign model. McCain strategists explained it as the logical outgrowth of what worked best for them in the GOP primary, letting local aides and advisers on the ground determine the plan of attack.

Now, Schmidt, a veteran of the highly-disciplined Bush-Cheney school of campaign organization, is making clear that he wants more central control.

“The organizations you are leading are providing important coordination in the field between all the various aspects of our campaign — whether that is political organization, finance, surrogates, communications, coalitions etc,” he writes. “In the days ahead, we will be working to enhance and strengthen the coordination between all these aspects of the campaign.”

Republicans in and out of McCain’s campaign expect former Rudy Giuliani campaign manager Mike DuHaime to take over one of the two new slots. A veteran field specialist, DuHaime has been working closely with the campaign headquarters and the regional managers for the past few months in an advisory capacity with the RNC.

McCain’s lies, Youtube style