Bush today welcomed the Senate vote, calling the bill “critical to America’s safety” and “long overdue.” He said in a statement, “This vital intelligence bill will allow our national security professionals to quickly and effectively monitor the plans of terrorists outside the United States, while respecting the liberties of the American people. . . . It will ensure that those companies whose assistance is necessary to protect the country will, themselves, be protected from lawsuits for past or future cooperation with the government.”

Senator Barak Obama voted for the bill – which, as Keith Olbermann said earlier, will probably be seen as some sort of political weakness, even though most Republicans voted for the bill as well.

John McCain didn’t bother to vote at all, and instead spent the day campaigning. He also predictably criticized Obama for voting for the the same bill that he too supported – and would have voted for – if he hadn’t been too damn busy.

Interestingly, while there is quite a bit of commentary about how the bill blocks lawsuits of Telecom providers who aided and abetted the Bush administration’s illegal domestic wiretapping scheme (for our own good, you know), there is relatively little commentary about whether Administration officials or Telecom execs could face future criminal charges. Now that would be something to see.

Bush spokesman Tony Fratto said Leahy is “more interested in headlines” than in reaching accommodation with the White House and passing spending bills and other legislation. “Every day this Congress gets a little more out of control,” Fratto said.

Getting out of control?

It shouldn’t be surprising that some members of the President’s inner circle have a dimmer view of Congress, now that it isn’t simply rubber-stamping White House policy. It is, though. Surprising, that is, that members of the administration would let their attitude toward Congress slip like this. Rather than an equal to the Executive branch, the Legislature is apparently seen as something that falls under Executive control. Indeed, how else can one explain Fratto’s comment outside of an expectation that Congress, up until recently, has been very much under the control of the White House? How else can one explain the near total submissive obeisance of the Congress before the White House in the years between 2001 and 2006, without some measure of inequality between these two branches of government? How else does one explain the imperial attitude of Bush administration officials in the absence of an increase of Executive powers and a coincident decrease of Legislative powers?

I’ll tell you: You can’t.

And that’s why more and more people, from all across the political spectrum, are starting to seriously consider impeachment proceedings against this President and Vice President. They have usurped power that does not belong in the Executive branch, and in so doing, and diminished our republic and have done harm to the Constitution of the United States of America.

I, for one, hope the Congress remains more than a little out of control.

[Thanks to Lisa for the Bill Moyers link!]