FISA: Dems refuse to accept Obama's cover

It's late, and I just want to get this thought down:

Obama demonstrated a strong political skill while in the Illinois Senate, and that was the art of giving cover to other Dems. He held a safe seat, so his votes never stood to cost him his job. But he had colleagues who were not in safe seats, so he did whatever he could to help them avoid votes that could be used against him. Most of his "present" votes were of that nature: he would vote present, and deprive the Rs of accusing him of voting for a bad bill or against a good bill — and because he (and other safe Dems) voted "present" the endangered Dems could do likewise.

He was not only smart; he was a team player.

Earlier this year, Obama gave his fellow Dems (and a few decent Rs) in the Senate a chance for political cover. He stated he would filibuster telecom immunity, as did a number of other like-minded Senator. All that was required was for the less bold Senators (or those from red/purple states) to simply not vote for cloture. Obama, Dodd and others would take the heat; the others would simply be accused of not voting for cloture, and that makes a terrible negative ad.

But too few Dems showed up for the job. The support for Obama, Dodd, Wyden et al was insufficient. Wyden and Dodd could maintain their stand; they have nothing at stake this year. Obama was left out to hang. He could have bulled ahead with the filibuster, a battle he would have lost (and losing the cloture vote would have looked like his first presidential failure as he failed to muster even his fellow Dems to support him) and it would have driven a wedge between him and those Dems.

What's great about Obama is that he's not blaming the other Dems who refused to take the right stand at any point on this. He's taking the heat to himself. He's made his own declaration on the matter and not pointed fingers at those who deserve a bit of shame. He's taking this flak, dangerously, not because he loves the FISA bill but because he knows that, for the long term, he needs to keep the goodwill of those Senators who are not progressive and may be conservative in nature. As president, he can not only rally them more effectively but he'll be able to give them all the cover they need (especially when he delivers a strong Congress with his coattails). He can take a hit today for the good it will bring the nation in 2009 and beyond.

(He can also repair most of the damage done by working with Congress to replace this ugly law, which I believe he will. Maybe it's a pity AT&T and the other telecoms will get away with this, but since President Obama will maintain net neutrality, they're going to lose the bigger battle anyway.)