OK. So 18 Democrats crapped their pants and gave up a golden opportunity to break out of the ” Democrats are unprincipled, weak-ass pussies” stereotype that has grown up over the past 5 years.

In a prefect world, here’s what the Democrats would have done.

1. They would have runded up the 41 votes necessary to force a filibuster, and shift the pressure onto the moderate Republicans who may not have the balls to oppose Alito, but who also may not have the stomach’s necessary to blow up the Senate with the nuclear option either.

2. The Democrats would get an uninterrupted media opportunity to make the case against Alito. Which would move the numbers against him. The more the public knows about Alito, the less they want him on the Court. In one recent poll, the public said by almost a 20 point marin that he should not be on the Court if he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

At worst, the GOP blows yp the Senate (preferably with Dick Cheney casting the deciding vote) and the Democrats have their pride back, an energized base, and newfound respect earned from the voters.

Plus, the media would have been amazed at how the Dmocrats managed to do this on short notice.

Oh well. That’s what we get for having piss-poor visonless leadership in the Senate.

Now, for the real purpose of my post.

Let’s see if the Democrats can manage to get their acts together for the upcoming Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Bush’s domestic spying program.

Here’s a suggestion, Democrats on the committee. Stop worrying about face time and grandstanding, and give one member of the Committee (say Chuck Schumer) ALL OF YOUR TIME FOR QUESTIONS!

I don’t need to see Joe Biden’s shit-eatin’ grin anymore. I want ONE SENATOR up there grilling the hell out of Alberto Gonzalez and other administration officials. Had they done this during the Alito, or Roberts hearings, I think we’d have seen a different result. The questioning would have been more consistent, and narratives would not have been lost. There must have been at least a dozen times when a Senator started getting some traction on an issue with Alito, and his damn time ran out.

So, the idea should be to either do what Al D’Amato did with the Whitewater hearings, and hire some high-powered, ass-kicking attorney to grill Bert Gonzo, or pick ONE Senator to do it, and funnel all questions through him or her.

My preference would be for Schumer to do it. If someone can make a case for Feingold or Leahy, I’d listen. But, quite frankly, I’d prefer Schumer. He’s smart, well-prepared and knows how to cross-examine.

Please God just do not let Ted Kennedy and Di-Fi bluster or look stupid. Just one voice for the Democrats on this.

Put your Goddamned egos aside, for once, and do something right.

If Dean’s spent a chunk of change making state parties more effective, I’d consider it cash very well spent.

Of course, considering Drudge’s record on getting the facts right, I’ve no way to know if the story’s even true.

I do know this: with Dean at the helm the Dems have started demonstrating more backbone than I’ve seen in years. And knowing Dean’s fundraising prowess, I don’t consider this shortfall - if there is one - as anything more than a temporary thing.

As I said at the outset, though, Dean promised to make the state parties more effective and better funded. If he’s acheved that, I’m certain we’ll see the results in November that’ll silence his critics completely.

Consider what a lousy job the NSA is doing.

Consider that George Bush the Elder was hired purportedly to reform the CIA in the last half of the 1970s. As a result, they didn’t see the Iran revolution coming and a few years later missed the evidence that the USSR was about to fall.

Consider that George Bush the Younger carried on the family tradition when he ignored the intel about Al Qaida prior to 9/11, then cooked the intel ever since to make the case against Iraq.

And consider what Condi Rice’s response was to the Hamas victory, as reported in the NY Times:

LONDON, Jan. 29 — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acknowledged Sunday that the United States had failed to understand the depth of hostility among Palestinians toward their longtime leaders. The hostility led to an election victory by the militant group Hamas that has reduced to tatters crucial assumptions underlying American policies and hopes in the Middle East.

“I’ve asked why nobody saw it coming,” Ms. Rice said, speaking of her own staff. “It does say something about us not having a good enough pulse.”

Consider that the FISA court has approved nearly 18,000 wiretap requests and rejected only four. Question: I don’t even recall 18 terrorists prosecuted, so how valid are all those approved wiretap requests?

Not to mention the tens of thousands of Americans Bush has spied on illegally. Where’s the results of all that intel work?

Answer: nowhere.

For 30 years, the Bush family’s handled all the intelligence. Yet they always claim to need more, bigger and better, legal or illegal. Yet even if we were to grant them that, their interpretation of all the data gained has been surprisingly consistent. Consistently wrong.

Isn’t it time America recognizes that a Bush and intelligence have never produced a single positive result? In fact, the Bush family and intelligence seem to be mutually exclusive. And if they always interpret the data wrong, why should we believe his interpretation of Scripture?

Of course, the reality is that Bush never relies on intelligence. He just sets a course and delivers propaganda mislabelled as intelligence. And as Jeanne notes at Body and Soul, his methods drive a stake through the heart of democracy.

Which is why the only intelligence we have to rely on is our own. We, the citizens of a dying democracy, must assemble our wits to save this democracy. We must exercise our collective intelligence to defeat the corruption that gnaw at the core of democracy with all the brains of a colony of rabid termites.