‘Is the Law Good, Is the Law Bad?’ Why the NSA Debate Over Legality Is So Misguided
That vote caused quite an uproar on the left, particularly among those who were concerned with civil liberties, because the vast majority had gone all in for Senator Barack Obama in the presidential primary largely on the basis of his approach to national security and he had explicitly promised to support a filibuster of this bill if it came to the floor. He voted for the bill instead thus marking the first scales to fall from the eyes of some civil libertarian supporters. Not all of them were upset of course. In fact, this comment from a Daily Kos diary made it all the way to the New York Times and it reflected a theme among many Democrats that continues to this day:
“The FISA bill is obviously imperfect, but I do not believe that a serious Presidential candidate can afford to vote ‘no’ on legislation that is intended to help prevent 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.”
That candid rationale works pretty much for every elected member of the government and at least partially explains why no matter what is revealed about intelligence agencies abusing civil liberties, the end result is always two steps forward for the intelligence agencies for every one step they’re yanked back.
More: ‘Is the Law Good, Is the Law Bad?’ Why the NSA Debate Over Legality Is So Misguided