Largely accord on this Daily Kos diary (see also here) on a NYT article about the "far left" upset with Obama. You mean, like the paper's own editorial staff?!!! BTW, he did not "flip flop" on the death penalty. Look at his damn book. If some think he did ("don't all lefties like him?"), fine, but a credible article would note they are mistaken. Obama's response to Heller is more of a spin job, a rather lame one, though understandable given the restraints of a Supreme Court ruling. But, the article cannot dwell on such things, since it is a typical "they say" piece.
[And Also, see the comments here for some parsing of his comments in the book that suggests Obama did flip somewhat at least on the death penalty point. But, as my reply suggests, I think that is a stretch. Surely, in context.]
There is also some debate in the Daily Kos comments as to the constitutional weight of the FISA amendment. One suggests he didn't vote to change the Constitution, which can only occur via the amendment process, but just for a bill. As the diary author noted, this is naive. The Constitution develops over time and executive/legislative action influences the process, the Supreme Court often loathe to interfere. This is particularly the case when it comes to executive/legislative power as well as what is "reasonable" for Fourth Amendment purposes. The term clearly is influenced by legislative action and societal understandings. See also, "cruel and unusual."
I a bit more wary on the negative effects, since when you hurt your base, the blowback might very well pop up in troubling ways -- for instance, less work and monetary support. Likewise, in swing states, concerns he is just another weak willed politician can be problematic. The effect on media coverage also is evident. Still, the "damn him" part is my sentiment too -- it really pisses me off that many will respond to critics like me -- concerned with the Constitution and all that other tedious stuff -- with a snide "yeah, like where do you have to go?" Show a bit more respect for the core of your parties, assholes.*
Not that it helps that the Green Party (who actually votes some local officials from time to time) went out and nominated Cynthia McKinney (the libertarians? Bob Barr). Anyways, the "far left" headline rankles. Particularly so since those outside it like Jonathan Turley, Glenn Greenwald and John Dean are wary too, while those who lean conservative are as well, even if it is just to sarcastically note his apparent cynical hypocrisy. Fraudulent framing is sure to negatively affect Obama's path, particularly because how the media and other usual suspects (is the new term, "The Village?") treat him is deemed an important factor to take into consideration.
So, it's like some sort of perpetual motion machine.
---
* The article has a photo of a couple young progressive activists. Such individuals provide a yeoman effort in loads of cases, including in support of candidates not likely to win, all the time. The tend to passionate believers in party principles, or what they think they are, and snide comments like that basically spit on their efforts. One of the two in photo voices disappointment, but understanding, the usual loyal spouse sentiment:
We’re frustrated by it, but we understand,” said Mollie Ruskin, 22, who grew up in Baltimore and is spending the summer here as a fellow with Politicorps, a program run by the Bus Project, a local nonprofit that trains young people to campaign for progressive candidates. “He’s doing it so he can get into office and do the things he believes in.”
"Loyal spouse" sounds a bit snarky, but it can also be wise, if the loyalty is deserved. Or, sometimes, when it is necessary.