Fight means he'll make a little speech on the floor and may even vote against it, knowing it will pass with safe margins.
The end of his statement actually looked like he would make his little speech, immunity would stay in the bill, so he'd have to vote for it because other than that it's a nawsome bill, like Pelosi said.

If he chooses not to take a forceful stand, then he is just another politico (without any real experience).

Why Obama Kinda Likes the FISA Bill

I've long thought that Obama, while a brilliant and hardnosed politician, was somewhat naive about his ability to transform the System.  Now, with this doublespeak and betrayal along with his bizzare, Orwellian "Divine Seal", I believe the man is an Authoritarian every bit as dangerous and deluded as our current one is, and that is an unacceptable choice for me, I don't care what the stakes are.

My God, what has this Party wrought?

As you may know, I have opposed all attempts by this President to limit our civil liberties or to circumvent our judicial system.  Because of these strong beliefs, I was one of only 66 Members who voted against the original so-called PATRIOT Act.

Over many months, I have written to you regarding the ongoing effort in Congress to update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Today, the House voted on a new bill that represents a "compromise" between congressional negotiators and the White House. I believe that today was a sad day in American history. Supporters argue that this bill succeeds in balancing protection for civil liberties with measures needed for our security, but I could not disagree more strongly. I believe that adherence to the Constitution and its Fourth amendment is the only way to ensure our freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, and the other freedoms safeguarded by the Bill of Rights.  This legislation utterly fails to meet that test. On the issue of retroactive immunity for telecom providers, the bill compels the dismissal of cases as long as companies were told by the government that the surveillance was legal, making the court review virtually meaningless.  

I have always regarded the preservation of our cherished liberties as one of my most solemn obligations. I am deeply saddened at today's vote.

I voted NO and the entire vote is recorded below:

DEMOCRATS
YEA 105
NAY 128

REPUBLICAN
YEA  188
NAY    1

TOTAL
YEA  293
NAY  129

 Additionally, it is questionable whether Obama could even strong arm a filibuster, at this point.  He did not receive the support of Bayh, Feinstein, Inouye, Lincoln, Mikulski, Nelson, Pryor, or Stabenow, as of April.  Each of those 8 senators were opposed to stripping the immunity provision.  Assuming they are not inclined to support a filibuster, whether Obama wants it or not, that leaves little room for error.  

In our anger at the big corporations, we can't let ourselves be placated with a promise to sue AT&T. Hell, you can give them immunity. No corporate exec is ever going to jail on this. All that will happen is we will have a six year trial and spend a trillion dollars, after which nothing will happen.

I agree and you can contact Sen. Obama through his website by going here:

Once we have the lock on three branches the Congressional lefties will start revolting like you wouldn't believe.