Biparti-zaniness II

Shorter David Ignatius: clearly, this Obama-thing is a fraud since he had nothing to do with confirming Bush's SCOTUS nominees.

Obama has been running for president almost since he arrived in the U.S. Senate in 2005, so his Senate colleagues say it's hard to evaluate his record. But what stands out in his brief Senate career is his liberal voting record, not a history of fighting across party lines to get legislation passed. He wasn't part of the 2005 Gang of 14 bipartisan coalition that sought to break the logjam on judicial nominations, but neither were Clinton or other prominent Democrats. He did support the bipartisan effort to get an immigration bill last year, winning a plaudit from McCain. But he didn't work closely with the White House, as did Sen. Edward Kennedy.

In one paragraph, Ignatius helps to clarify the "true" Obama: 1. He's been running for president since he arrived in Washington (I thought it was kindergarten); 2. he's liberal (a bad thing); 3. he's not a brave interparty fighter, like "moderate" John McCain; 4. he refused to work with the Bush White House like Sen. Kennedy (ask Kennedy how that went).

Whee.

I hope Obama sews things up on Tuesday, but no matter what, it's going to be a long year.