“Political Dispatch” podcast: 7/11- Robert Borosage
 
We are happy to bring you another edition of our “Political Dispatch” podcast series from PoliticalBuzz.com. “PD” is a weekly series bringing you insight and analysis from the best political journalists and strategists as well as exclusive interviews with top politicians and campaign staffers.
This week we talked with…
- Robert Borosage - president of the Institute for America’s Future and co-director of its sister organization, the Campaign for America’s Future. He also writes occasional columns for the Huffington Post blog.
Robert has been a frequent guest on the program and returned today to chat about the Rev. Jesse Jackson’s recent controversial remarks about Barack Obama and what, if any, rift has developed between Obama and the liberal/progressive base of the Democratic Party as the Dem nominee makes a subtle shift to the center for the general.
You can listen to/download the program below, or get this and all of our podcasts through iTunes.
Sphere: Related Content
Filed under: "Political Dispatch", PoliticalBuzz.com Exclusive
Someone had posted at the NYT web site, asking “•If Obama is such a persuasive orator - and face it, that’s the only reason he’s the presumptive nominee, not his short and mostly unimpressive record in office - why can’t he vote against such a dangerous and unnecessary bill (FISA), one that he pledged to support a filibuster against if it contained telecom immunity - and be confident in his ability to explain his reasons without looking soft on terrorism? ….This FISA bill is a lot more complicated than the gas tax holiday and non-political junkies won’t follow the debate anyway. But it does risk alienating his supporters, civil libertarians and anyone who is paying attention; i.e., those most likely to vote…..”
Good point ( “be confident in his ability to explain his reasons without looking soft on terrorism” ) and I think he did try to explain his vote at a Virginia townhall meeting with a gathering of women voters; but I go back to my argument as well; its mostly about winning the White House (along with the other high profile issues confronting both candidates). It was interesting to see the Democrats’ voting “yes” on that bill (but, probably for less political reasons); Baucus (D-MT) ; Bayh (D-IN) ; Carper (D-DE); Casey (D-PA) ; Conrad (D-ND) ; Feinstein (D-CA) ; Inouye (D-HI) ; Johnson (D-SD) ; Kohl (D-WI) ; Landrieu (D-LA) ; Lieberman (ID-CT) ; Lincoln (D-AR) ; McCaskill (D-MO) ; Mikulski (D-MD) ; Nelson (D-FL) ; Nelson (D-NE) ; Obama (D-IL) ; Rockefeller (D-WV) ; Salazar (D-CO); Pryor (D-AR) ; Webb (D-VA) ; Whitehouse (D-RI)