This is an editorial from the WSJ ---


Obama's Wiretap Votes


February 13, 2008

Now and then sanity prevails, even in Washington. So it did yesterday as the Senate passed a warrantless wiretap bill for overseas terrorists while killing most of the Lilliputian attempts to tie down our war fighters.

"We lost every single battle we had on this bill," conceded Chris Dodd, which ought to tell the Connecticut Senator something about the logic of what he was proposing. His own amendment -- to deny immunity from lawsuits to telecom companies that cooperated with the government after 9/11 -- didn't even get a third of the Senate.

It lost 67-31, though notably among the 31 was possible Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama. (Hillary Clinton was absent, while John McCain voted in favor.)


It says something about his national security world view, or his callowness, that Mr. Obama would vote to punish private companies that even the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee said had "acted in good faith." Had Senator Obama prevailed, a President Obama might well have been told "no way" when he asked private Americans to help his Administration fight terrorists. Mr. Obama also voted against the overall bill, putting him in MoveOn.org territory.

The defeat of these antiwar amendments means the legislation now moves to the House in a strong position. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is in the Dodd-Obama camp, but 21 Blue Dog Democrats have sent her a letter saying they are happy with the Senate bill. She may try to pass the restrictions that failed in the Senate, and Republicans should tell her to make their day.

This is a fight Senator McCain should want to have right up through Election Day, with Democrats having to explain why they want to hamstring the best weapon -- real-time surveillance -- we have against al Qaeda.

See all of today's editorials and op-eds, plus video commentary, on Opinion Journal.

Even with their majority in congress, these buffoons cannot prevail in their wayward policies. Sweet. Kudos to the conservative and moderate democrats, there is still some lingering sensibility in the Democrat party.

It is not that the Democrats want to prevent the protection of Americans from terrorists.

I'm all for wiretapping. WITH a warrant. AND with recourse for those wrongly accused.

Good for Obama! I still don't know who I am going to vote for, but I've not ruled out anyone yet. (Except, Hillary, of course.)

I'm struck by is the unevenness of how the senator's campaign has come at us, it's not always clear whether it is substantive, or whether it is stylistic. I listened to most of his speech last night, it was more stylistic than substantive - although lots of new programs were mentioned with all of them based on (unmentioned, of course - except for eliminating the Bush tax cuts [on the rich]) the redistribution of money through programs and tax to fund programs and/or cuts in programs - looks like defense would be first to be cut with the immediate pull out from Iraq part of that effort.

I'd say that Obama is not ready for prime time as POTUS. Yes, change is needed, but slow and steady change - not drastic measures - America could be facing a depression as well, probably not but.......

On the other hand, Hillary going down is the best part of all this, it's very entertaining.