The quoted comments of our nation’s fine Senators here must be read to be believed. Highpoints:

Some Democratic defectors said they voted for the Senate Republicans’ legislation out of discontent with the late appearance of their own party’s measure, deciding to vote for both bills with the hope that one would reach a 60-vote threshold.

“At this point, I still don’t understand it,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said of the Democratic proposal sponsored by Intelligence Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va., and Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., which was defeated 43-45. She voted for both that bill and the Republican proposal, sponsored by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Intelligence panel vice chairman Christopher S. Bond, R-Mo., which won passage 60-28.

Others said they had concerns about the Republican legislation, but voted for it anyway.

“I’m not thrilled,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. “There are some changes we need to make to make sure that American citizens are protected. But it’s a lot better than a lot of things that have been forced down this Congress’ throat right before recesses that trampled on American’s liberties.”

A few (among too many) salient quotes from his piece, which was — to use his own word about his interview with Dodd — “dispiriting” … to face the lack of spine, Dodd himself having no real explanation for how and why so many Democrats keep capitulating on one matter or another to Bush’s whip-cracking.

Memory may ill serve me but I have to think that this tendency has increased sharply in the Bush years and – no surprise — my only explanation is that the MSM themselves have played so heavily into Bush’s hands for so long, so willing to quote unchastised the GOP’s omnipresent “how unpatriotic” slurs against Democrats, that it has cowed more Democrats more often than ever. Did they toe the line for George Bush Sr. even, that recently, the way they have for Jr? I don’t think so. Maybe my gray cells have gotten too much grayer to recall well.

Anyway, a few excerpts from Glenn Greenwald:

Examine virtually every Bush scandal and it increasingly bears the mark not merely of Democratic capitulation, but Democratic participation. In August of 2006, the Supreme Court finally asserted the first real limit on Bush’s radical executive power theories in Hamdan, only for Congress, months later, to completely eviscerate those minimal limits — and then go far beyond — by enacting the grotesque Military Commissions Act with the support of substantial numbers of Democrats. What began as a covert and illegal Bush interrogation and detention program became the officially sanctioned, bipartisan policy of the United States. ….

Much of this was undoubtedly the by-product of the Democratic Beltway consultant geniuses who insist that Democrats not resist the President’s instructions on terrorism lest they look “weak.” They need to look “strong,” and they achieve that by giving the President what he wants and thereby generating articles like this one in The Washington Post, the first paragraph of which reports (accurately):

“The Senate bowed to White House pressure last night and passed a Republican plan for overhauling the federal government’s terrorist surveillance laws, approving changes that would temporarily give U.S. spy agencies expanded power to eavesdrop on foreign suspects without a court order.”

In the mind of the moderate Democratic Beltway centrist consultant, that is how Democrats look Strong — by “bowing to pressure” exerted by one of the weakest and most disliked presidents in modern history. There is nothing like being described as “bowing” and “capitulating” to give an appearance of strength.

And can we please be spared the condescending assurances about how great it is that the law has a six-month sunset provision, since — in 6 months — it will be exactly the same Democrats voting on whether to renew these powers and they will be intimidated by exactly the same threats that if they do not renew it and give the President all of the powers he wants, the Terrorists will kill us and it will be all the fault of the Democrats for disobeying President Bush. The cycle is just going to repeat itself 180 days from now. Why would it be different? ….

This afternoon I interviewed Sen. Chris Dodd, who more than any other presidential candidate is attempting to make issues of executive power and constitutional encroachments the centerpiece of his campaign. … for now here is part of the discussion we had concerning last night’s FISA vote in the Senate (Dodd, along with Obama and Clinton [and Biden], voted against the FISA bill):

GG: Can you describe what you think it is that motivated 16 of your colleagues in the Democratic caucus to vote in favor of this bill?

CD: No, I really can’t . . . We had caucuses during the day, so everyone knew what was there. You had a vote at 10:00 at night, people say I didn’t know what was there, then normally I can understand, but we had a caucus during the day. There was a lot of conversation about it.

GG: So this wasn’t a Patriot Act case where people can claim ignorance because there was a rushed vote? There was a careful assessment of what the terms in this statute were?

CD: Absolutely. In fact, even during the vote, Carl Levin was sitting there, and Carl said: “look, I want everyone to read this” . . . . Most people know about the Gonzales references and the 180 days — there is also a section, as Carl pointed out, that basically says that if they can prove reasonably that you’re out of the country — not that you’re not a citizen, just out of the country [then they can eavesdrop on you] . . . .

I also asked Dodd why Democrats repeatedly engage in the same self-destructive behavior — refusing to take a hard-core principled stance against the administration, and instead capitulating just enough to look like losers, but — despite the capitulation — still allowing the vote to be used against them. As always (see e.g., Iraq War Authorization, warrantless eavesdropping, Military Commissions Act), they capitulate in order to prevent the vote from being used against them, even though it ends up being used against them anyway because so many of them vote (with futility) against it, but do so without ever fighting for, explaining or defending their position.

And so why not just vote with the administration anyway, since the Democrats’ “safeguards” are like letting the pit bull into the hen house as long as it’s wagging its tail and grinning all friendly-like?

C’mon! Let’s have a little appreciation party here!

Well, I thought it was right on point and pretty witty, too, if I do say so myself. And apparently I have to ’cause no one else will.

And thanks for the mention of Greenwald and Dodd.

For convenience sake, recapping now the vote here in, imo, an easier fashion to process than the AP’s layout.

And this does change a few things; First of all, the SF Chronicle was wrong yesterday. I praised them for citing how California’s Senators voted, even while growling at Feinstein for voting Yes. However, they got Boxer wrong: They said she voted No, but this says she was one of 6 Dems (and 6 Republicans) who didn’t vote. I see they have subsequently revised their web version accordingly.

Secondly, it confirms my post above here, about today’s NYT coverage: All of the Senate Intell Democrats were present and voted, no absentees, hence they were split 4 to 4 (and the Yeas were in the minority 4 to 6 if you count the ex-officios). So there was ZERO basis for the NYT to go further than Blunt did and claim that “most” of them supported the bill.

Anyway, for anyone’s interest and easier reference, here were the votes grouped by position:

YEAS (43 R, 16 D, 1 Inde)

Alabama : Sessions (R) Yes; Shelby (R) Yes.
Alaska: Murkowski (R) Yes; Stevens (R) Yes.
Arizona: Kyl (R) Yes
Arkansas: Lincoln (D) Yes; Pryor (D) Yes.
California: Feinstein (D) Yes.
Colorado: Allard (R) Yes; Salazar (D) Yes.
Connecticut: Lieberman (I) Yes.
Delaware: Carper (D) Yes.
Florida: Martinez (R) Yes; Nelson (D) Yes.
Georgia: Chambliss (R) Yes; Isakson (R) Yes.
Hawaii: Inouye (D) Yes.
Idaho: Craig (R) Yes; Crapo (R) Yes.
Indiana: Bayh (D) Yes
Iowa: Grassley (R) Yes
Kansas: Brownback (R) Yes; Roberts (R) Yes.
Kentucky: McConnell (R) Yes.
Louisiana: Landrieu (D) Yes; Vitter (R) Yes.
Maine: Collins (R) Yes; Snowe (R) Yes.
Maryland: Mikulski (D) Yes.
Minnesota: Coleman (R) Yes; Klobuchar (D) Yes.
Mississippi: Cochran (R) Yes
Missouri: Bond (R) Yes; McCaskill (D) Yes.
Nebraska: Hagel (R) Yes; Nelson (D) Yes.
Nevada: Ensign (R) Yes
New Hampshire: Sununu (R) Yes.
New Mexico: Domenici (R) Yes.
North Carolina: Burr (R) Yes; Dole (R) Yes.
North Dakota: Conrad (D) Yes
Ohio: Voinovich (R) Yes.
Oklahoma: Coburn (R) Yes; Inhofe (R) Yes.
Oregon: Smith (R) Yes
Pennsylvania: Casey (D) Yes; Specter (R) Yes.
South Carolina: DeMint (R) Yes; Graham (R) Yes.
South Dakota: Thune (R) Yes.
Tennessee: Corker (R) Yes.
Texas: Cornyn (R) Yes; Hutchison (R) Yes.
Utah: Bennett (R) Yes; Hatch (R) Yes.
Virginia: Warner (R) Yes; Webb (D) Yes.
Wyoming: Barrasso (R) Yes; Enzi (R) Yes.

NAYS: 28 (27 D; 1 Ind.)

Connecticut: Dodd (D) No
Delaware: Biden (D) No;
Hawaii: Akaka (D) No;
Illinois: Durbin (D) No; Obama (D) No.
Maryland: Cardin (D) No
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D) No
Michigan: Levin (D) No; Stabenow (D) No.
Montana: Baucus (D) No; Tester (D) No.
Nevada: Reid (D) No.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D) No; Menendez (D) No.
New Mexico: Bingaman (D) No
New York: Clinton (D) No; Schumer (D) No.
Ohio: Brown (D) No
Oregon: Wyden (D) No.
Rhode Island: Reed (D) No; Whitehouse (D) No.
Vermont: Leahy (D) No; Sanders (I) No.
Washington: Cantwell (D) No
West Virginia: Byrd (D) No; Rockefeller (D) No.
Wisconsin: Feingold (D) No; Kohl (D) No.

NOT VOTING: 12 (6 R; 6 D)

Arizona: McCain (R) Not Voting.
California: Boxer (D) Not Voting;
Indiana: Lugar (R) Not Voting.
Iowa: Harkin (D) Not Voting.
Kentucky: Bunning (R) Not Voting;
Massachusetts: Kerry (D) Not Voting.
Mississippi: Lott (R) Not Voting.
New Hampshire: Gregg (R) Not Voting
North Dakota: Dorgan (D) Not Voting.
South Dakota: Johnson (D) Not Voting
Tennessee: Alexander (R) Not Voting
Washington: Murray (D) Not Voting.