Great job by Sens. Feingold, Leahy, Reid, Durbin, Craig, Sununu, et al. I'm wondering what the practical affect of Frist entering the motion to reconsider will be. Is there going to be some middle of the night vote on cloture, whereby suffiicient arms and other body parts will have been twisted so the Administration gets its way?

Congratulations Senator Feingold. Keep up the good work!

Congratulations to you and to all of the Senators who voted to preserve our freedoms and who resisted the pressure to stampede the Senate into compromising them away.

Ah but congratulations are very much due to you specifically! Without your very important leading role none of the rest would have happened.

Is it just me or does it seem that it's rare that congresspersons speak directly to the entire public (not just their base or constituents) asking them for support on specific bills? It seems its always ideological sound bites we end up getting (most notably on culture wars issues, of course...many of us know that they are raised when a distraction is needed.) There's almost like a presumption that that is what the public wants and that they don't want to hear about regular actual business? While that may be true on mundane and arcane matters, or a huge complex budget bill, with something as major as the Patriot Act, I think some would be surprised at the interest they could get from the public at large when major issues come up in bills.

This is a win for the whole country, and I contratulate all the senators who voted the right way, and you, Sen. Feingold, for leading the fight.  But we must still be vigilant, because I fear that the Republicans will make a stealth attempt to ram this through.

No reauthorization? Hoorah!

Frist is positioning himself for a Kerry moment: "I voted against it (cloture) after I planned to vote for it." Or maybe: "A vote against was really a vote for." How does he wiggle out of this mess?

What is the likely resolution to this vote?

ramdilo - 
Frist changed his vote for Senate parliamentary reasons.  As LA Times explained:
Frist changed his vote at the last moment after seeing the critics would win. He decided to vote with the prevailing side so he could call for a new vote at any time.

Frist did the same thing during initial John Bolton voting so he could bring up the vote again.

Thanks for your efforts, Senator Feingold. On a broader front, The a twenty year lack of civility has tended to skew current debates in directions which have had perverse consequences. No doubt, the reach of the Patriot's Act is one of the consequences. As I have stressed in other online boards, it has and will continue to promote prejudice and mistrust for years to come, two inherently divisive attitudinal devices which detract minds from pursuing healthy activities. Often they come into play for reasons other than just fear of terrorists. I'm sure that you understand what I'm saying. The fact that security is commodified is an incentive to perpetuate prejudice and mistrust. So I hope that we can do more in the way of providing incentives to get people to recognize the interconnectedness of our worlds. Instill a sense of optimism along with that.  
 

It would be great to cultivate more warmth and genuineness in so many different spheres. I know- I know-- they sound so old-fashioned now. But they can and do bring out the best in ourselves and in others. No public relations strategy has been able to function as their equivalent, even when that is the intent. It comes off as glossy posturing. 

Great work, Senator Feingold.  And thank you for taking the time to update us here...

It seems its always ideological sound bites we end up getting (most notably on culture wars issues, of course...many of us know that they are raised when a distraction is needed.) There's almost like a presumption that that is what the public wants and that they don't want to hear about regular actual business?

Yeah, and that's even if you have cable.  For people who *don't* have cable... gah.  The (non-cable) network news nowadays is a mix of Entertainment Tonight, plugs for other network shows, and "horse race" style political coverage, with maybe 5% of the broadcast devoted to actual news, and even that frequently manages to leave out most of the salient facts.  Maybe the threat of not having their licenses renewed for failing to serve the public interest would encourage networks to take their mandate more seriously. 

And hopefully in the near future, everyone will have easy access to more media channels (that they'll know how to navigate, having grown up internet/media literate...)   But for right now, folks who get their information from the 6:00 "news" and the two local papers, both owned by the same (crummy) company, often have no idea what's going on. 

Sure doesn't seem like a great way to run a democracy.

I see two positives.
The failure to invoke closure leaves the issued to be negotiated and improved.
Second the coalition broke party ranks in at least  1 notable way. In my view the Senate can be a more effective body if Senators vote their views and don't simply follow the party line.  Having lived in Idaho I know Larry Craig is fiercely conservative. It was heartening to see that he was voting his views.

Kudos to Senators Feingold, Craig and their compatriots (pun intended). 

To be honest, I have not been affected one iota by the Patriot Act.  I'm sure you can say the same thing.  My point is, if so few people have been subjected to ANY of the provisions of the act, why is there this need change it?  I don't want to use the term grandstanding, but Senator Feingold seems to be chasing ghosts to a certain extent.

Bush is intellectually incapable of responding to these posts coherently. He would have to have an aide do it.

"Having lived in Idaho I know Larry Craig is fiercely conservative. It was heartening to see that he was voting his views."

We really don't know what Larry Craigs views are, but what we do know is he sits on the board of the NRA, and counts them as the biggest weapon in his electoral arsenal.  The NRA Board has specifically and conspicuously refused to endorse the Patriot Act reauthorization, and their EVP and chief spokesman Wayne LaPierre, speaking for the organization has been critical of the Act.  In a nutshell, the NRA thinks the Patriot Act permits the government to spy on gun owners, which they find unacceptable.

Craig has a relatively small number of votes that affect the NRA.  He needs to deliver a 100% scorecard on them.  Otherwise there are plenty of others waiting for an invitation to the Board.  I'm not saying he doesn't have his own personal issues with the Patriot Act II, but they're of secondary concern to the broader political ramifications vis a vis the NRA. 

May I add my congratulations, Senator, and thank you very much for honoring us by blogging here. We also owe Josh a big thank you for setting up such a great website that it can attract people like you to debate issues with us.

I keep getting the feeling that just possibly our country has turned the corner, and the GOP magic is losing its potency. It has amazed me that so many of us have been willing to ignore our Constitution out of fear of "terrorists", a fear that is simply not justified by the facts. A much more rational fear is that acts like the "Patriot Act" will be a first step on the road to a total loss of our rights under the Constitution, with the Congress afraid to step in with an impeachment. In fact this Congress now faces a decision time: are you all willing, at last, to begin impeachment procedures, knowing that the President authorized illegal and unconstitutional spying on American citizens by the federal government? Really, that is why the impeachment process is in the Constitution.

To be honest, I have not been affected one iota by the Patriot Act.

Following 9/11, something like three to five thousand people were picked up with either minor, previously ignored immigration violations or as “material witnesses.” Many of those were Americans and many were held in secret for long periods and were treated harshly. At the very least, they had their reputations impugned.

In a story today, tens of thousands of Americans have had their phones and emails tapped by the NSC, a clear invasion of privacy. In another story today, the DOD has been spying on domestic opposition groups, mostly peace activists. People of many nationalities have been mistakenly identified as terrorists, shanghaied and tortured (sometimes to death) by US military or intelligence forces.

If you still think that you have not been affected, think about this: As an American you are hated in most of the world, precisely because of our policies since 9/11. M. L. King said justice denied anywhere diminishes justice everywhere. That is not just a PR rhetorical statement. History reveals that the more control given to the power elite, the more abuse of that power results.

Gettysburg:

Under the terms of the current Patriot Act, Federal Agents have the power to arrest and hold you in secret without charging you with a crime. All they have to do is define you as an enemy of the state.

Don't see that as a problem? In that case imagine, say Ted Kennedy as President with a solidly Democratic Congress (admittedly, leaving out Sen. Kennedy I welcome that particular prospect) with the same powers.

The temptation to use those powers will be there for whoever holds the reins. Sooner or later someone is going to abuse it, which is why the Founding Fathers put a system of checks and balances in place. There's reason they thought it might be better to let 10 guilty men go free than to arrest one who is innnocent.  

It might not affect you now, but it may someday; and if not you, then one of your children or grandchildren.

Amazingly, I don't have cable. I remember when television, just the airwaves and a set to receive them, was something of a miracle.   And nor will I pay for a radio station.  Hello, FCC, how did this happen?  However, with PBS and regular news and some  basic undertanding of the internet, I seem to actually be abreast of the news, most of the time.  Thank you, Senator, for your work;  it is so meaningful and appreciated.  As a person with disabilities, I cherish my civil rights and our government's active understanding of our Constitution as well as anyone.  I am grateful, indeed, for your work.

Thank you very much for your efforts Senator.  All Americans who are concerned about civil liberties have a debt of gratitude for your leadership and principles on this issue.

  A terrible blunder. The Dems should have let it pass and used overturning it as a campaign issue in the elections. Rove plays the Dems again.
  Rove's ploy here as always is to make the Dems look as though they are still in power enough as a minority party. This diffuses most of the Dem's capaign strategy because Bush can say the Dems have plenty of bipartisan input and hence are already in power enough as a minority party.
  Any Dem victory at the moment is winning a battle and losing the war. They need to let Bush get his agenda through and then campaign against it. Instead for the opportunity of venting some anger and getting a Phyrric victory they are throwing away the election.
  

the current mob does have an alarmingly broad definition of 'enemy', however it unthreatening may be to some.

p.s. Do some people here really believe someone like Senator Feingold or his staff would not like to see something like gettysburg's comment? That he does not want to hear opposing views? That he can't learn something from them? A zero rating for that? What did he just fight for, anyway?

Well ArtAppraiser, after further reflection, I have raised my rating to a 2 -- you make a good point about the rating system.  "Not helpful" is a more honest assessment, as far as I'm concerned.  Thanks for the reality check -- am now dismounting from that really high horse.  :)

I've given really low ratings twice- to the same person.

Point taken; artapparaiser.
OTOH, its too bad there isn't an "asinine" category...

These tactics are all wrong. Do you think that the Dems have been the only ones in world history in this situation. What you are describing is the historical losing strategy.