Answer: submission. Bipartisanship would mean that half the time the Democrats got their way on important issues. Instead we get jack shit.

And why should I value bipartisanship anyway? Of the two parties, there is one that is filled with anti-American lawless extremist monsters. I don't want anything to do with those scum and certainly don't want to donate to the extremists what they couldn't win at the ballot box. If they want their policies passed let them do it the old-fashioned way: win the election and pass your program.

Bipartisanship destroys democracy. The people are given a choice and they voted for the party they prefer. They didn't choose a "biparty". The two party system already waters down that choice by forcing candidates to move to the center in search of the median voter. What's more, we know that voters' true position on the issues is way to the LEFT of where things stand now and way to the LEFT of what the cowards in Congress are willing to fight for -- and of course WAY WAY WAY to the left of what the Republican extremists want. Going half way toward the Reublicans is moving in the wrong direction -- if you care about the will of the people anyway.

Bipartisanship is anti-democratic and has no justification. And of course that is doubly true when, as we all know, bipartisanship really means the Republican extremists get their way, rather than the Democrats getting their way half the time or getting half a loaf.

Bipartisanship is for submissive Republican and Village bootlickers looking for a way to mask their cowardice.

The problem isn't ideology per se. The problem is bad ideology.

People like Joe Klein and Chris Matthews who celebrated the emperor's new clothes when he was up cannot be allowed to forget it now that the emperor is down.

If Chris Matthews runs for senate in PA, he must especially be held accountable for his pathetic Bush cheerleading. He has changed his tune as of late, but I remember whose boot Matthews was licking at the time -- when it counted.

"he's perpetually pissed off. He thrives on grievance. He is like McCain in one way: whenever he disagrees with someone, he villifies them, he turns them into an enemy. It's a turnoff and extremely immature."

Glenn has done an excellent job defendig himself here in comments, but I'm going to throw in my $0.02 just because I want to.

I can't stand the passive aggressive bullshit that wingnuts and centrists constantly hand out to attack people on the left who are correctly righteously indignant. Its the same bullshit they used to attack Paul Krugman as shrill.

Its a classic example of what is known in social psychology as "Fundamental Attribution Error" which wikipedia defines as "the tendency for people to over-emphasize dispositional, or personality-based, explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing situational explanations."

For wankers like NCYvonne it can't possibly be the case that Glenn or Krugman or whoever is responding with appropriate emotion to repeated provocation and wrongdoing on the part of the people they assail -- even though people like Glenn and Krugman document their charges meticulously and fairly. Instead, wankers and concern troll slike NCYvonne resort to the ad hominem. There must be something wrong with you, you are too emotional etc.

It's like you just got raped and then your rapist wants to know why you're so bitter about it.

Fuck you.

Two things the media whores and the Villagers would love for us all to forget:

1) The fact that Bush and his political supporters stole the 2000 election

2) The fact that the Iraq War was sold to the demos by means of an egregious WMD Hoax

The MSM and the Village played a huge role as enablers in both instances. Most people have already filed away the stolen 2000 election as ancient history and the WMD hoax is fast heading down the same road.

That kind of bullshit is absolutely and completely unacceptable and unforgiveable. It is NOT business as usual no matter much the passive agressive perpetrators try to intimidate us by telling us we're overreacting. The only acceptable resolution to either one -- among a self-respecting, self-ruling people -- is prosecution. And no bullshit whitewash commission will do.

I will NEVER forget and I will NEVER forgive the Republican operatives or the MSM and Village enablers. Those people are soulless, unprincipled, careerist, social-climbing cowards.

Well, I think Obama's appointments do tell us a little bit Obama but I think they tell us what we already knew. Obama is a very careful, don't-rock-the-boat, establishment centrist with perhaps mildly liberal leanings but with no ideological predilections strong enough that he would take any political chances fighting for them.

In the midst of the wideranging praise for Bob Gates am I the only one who worries that he was implicated in the Iran-Contra scandal that set one of the templates for unitary executive assertions of executive power as well as providing training ground for traitorous scum like Elliot Abrams and John Poindexter (not to mention Gates himself)?

Its just another piece in the as yet admitedly very incomplete jigsaw puzzle that consistently suggests that Obama will do nothing to counteract the dangerous precedents of the Bush Administration.

Maybe Obama will surprise me, but I doubt it.

How can anyone have respect for Congress or the Democratic party when they pull bullshit like this? Torture is just not something to play political games with -- if you have any principles at all.

Feinstein I'm not as surprised by. We've seen her true colors (she has none) in the past but I'm at least a little bit more surprised by Wyden.

Hey Ron: whichever finger-in-the-wind lackey you're listening to on this point, just stop.

As usual, Glenn's reactions are all spot on. While most of the media has no feel at all for what really matters and are frequently wrongheaded, Glenn is consistently rightheaded.

Thanks again, bro.

Nailed it!