New York Times returns to the Obama bipartisan trap
You know the one . It's where the Beltway press blames Democrats, and Democrats alone, for the failure to achieve bipartisan cooperation. This, despite the fact that the definition of bipartisan is the act of two parties working together:
From today's Times article , which examines the political consequences of the weekend health care vote:
But there is no doubt that in the course of this debate, Mr. Obama has lost something — and lost it for good. Gone is the promise on which he rode to victory less than a year and a half ago — the promise of a "postpartisan" Washington in which rationality and calm discourse replaced partisan bickering.
See, Obama lost the promise of a "postpartisan" Washington. The fact that Republicans have adopted an unprecedented, obstructionist political strategy doesn't matter. It's Obama who lost.
Also, please note how the Times claims that while running for president Obama promised a "postpartisan" Washington. Of course, that's no accurate. What Obama pledged while running for president, as has virtually every major party candidate for the last half-century, is he pledged he'd try to change the Beltway environment to the point where both parties would work together and see past their partisan differences.
But in the media's preferred telling, Obama promised he'd end partisan warfare. Period. And because he hasn't changed the behavior of Republicans, that means Obama has "lost."
Did I mention this is a trap ?