Folding

This is so very very true and the Democratic Establishment STILL doesn't get it:

Republicans openly defied the polls when they impeached a president who had a 60 percent approval rating. (They had the help of the press, of course, but it never made any difference in public opinion.) They used the language of principle and "the rule of law" and paid no price for what they did beyond the loss of a few seats in 98. People do not hold it against politicians for standing up for principle even if they know there is political intent. They do hold it against politicans if they are seen as having no principles at all.

Folding on an illegal spying program, which the President has admitted to doing, which the public by a slight majority knows is illegal and wrong, which represents unchecked Presidential power run rampant, just sums up the entire national security problem that has been staring Democrats in the face for five years. They are willing to dissolve Congress all by themselves, without so much as a fight, just because Vice President Beer-Drinking McShootyerfriend glares in their direction and warns them not to investigate.

Digby also explains that this is a major problem for Republican moderates (or Eunuchs):

The Republicans are split on it, with the libertarian wing and the doctrinaire conservatives finding themselves having to swallow their disgust or break with the party. Democrats are in a much better position than they think to turn this into a positive and drive a wedge through the Republican coalition while they do it.

If the Democrats in congress simply stood together on principle instead of listening to overfed, out of touch strategists who have misdiagnosed the problem for years, they would begin to crawl out of this hole on national security. In order for the nation to trust them to defend the country the first thing they must do is stop believing that going along with the Republican Eunuch Caucus will ever improve their lot. People trust leaders who lead not followers who fall in line.

I should mention that every Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee voted to investigate this program (they even got one Republican to agree). Clearly it's the Senate, where the rights of the minority are at least nominally maintained, where the Dems could make headway. Instead they had one hearing, failed to even swear in the Attorney General, and now will sign on to the "IF the President Does It, It's Not Illegal" Act of 2006 and call it a day.

There are lots of things for Democrats to do here. You can raise the profile of this in speeches (as Sen. Byrd did today), you can block the legislation, and failing that you can make this a major campaign issue: restore checks and balances by voting Democratic. I believe the public would overwhelmingly support such a view; I may be wrong, but I don't think so. Standing up for principle, most of all, is about as important as it gets for political parties. Without core principles you won't get anywhere. By falling in line behind Republican abuses of power, you don't neutralize the issue, you highlight it. You're saying "they're right, they're better on this."

Arrgghh... when will they get it?