Villagers Haz A Sad Over President's Speech

The Beltway Village media need to maintain the fiction that both political parties are to blame for the heated "partisanship" in Washington, not acknowledging (as political scientists Norm Ornstein and Thomas Mann have in their book "It's Worse Than It Looks") that the Rethugs bear the most responsibility by far for the dysfunction. For the Villagers, it's a combination of terminal cynicism and a desire to make sure Rethugs return their phone calls and include them on the cocktail circuit.

So it wasn't especially surprising when the Villagers' delicate "bipartisan" feelings were hurt by the President's failure to kneel rhetorically to the Rethugs in his second inauguration speech yesterday. After four years in which the Rethugs plotted to make the President a one-termer even at the cost of wrecking the economy, and after Obama repeatedly supported measures that were once Rethuglican-endorsed, one would think that the Villagers would have noticed. As Steve Benen writes in the MaddowBlog:

"Taken together, it seems many pundits and Republicans agree: Obama should be nice and bipartisan, reaching out to the right at all times, careful not to upset delicate sensibilities. Since his inaugural address didn't do this, it somehow came up short.

Indeed, this seems to be a strain of thought that's dominated much of the political discourse in recent weeks. How dare Obama nominate a Republican Defense Secretary he knows Republicans don't like! How dare the president present an ambitious agenda to prevent gun violence over the objections of his critics! How dare Obama use his inaugural address to present an unapologetic vision of progressive governance in the 21st century!

Who does this guy think he is, the newly re-elected president of the United States?"

He dares, and good for him that he does.