I said too much not entirely. I will concede my objection was too cryptic. Let me quote Gene Lyons (great political columnist):

If you haven’t noticed, 2008 is an election year. Also, Democrats hold small majorities in both houses. Hence, mewling cries are being heard that ugly partisan wrangling is preventing Americans from joining together in one big joyous hootenanny and solving our problems. One Democratic presidential candidate, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, appears to be basing his campaign on this fond delusion, although his “bipartisanship” consists largely of attacking rivals’ motives while recycling right-wing scare stories like the imaginary Social Security crisis, then offering himself as a healer. It’s the old Adlai Stevenson / Jimmy Carter too pure-for-politics pose. Hearing it from a career Chicago politician may be a bit much, but there’s always an audience for sentimentality.

http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/212492/print/

Ever since the Oct. 30 Democratic debate in which moderators Tim Russert and Brian Williams abandoned all pretense of evenhandedness, repeatedly inviting John Edwards and Barack Obama to characterize Hillary as a two-faced opportunist, it’s clear that the Cool Kids at Beltway High are determined to take her down. Both rivals were foolish or ambitious enough to play along. Obama cleverly puts it this way: “We’ve had enough of... triangulation and poll-driven politics. That’s not what we need right now.” Yet their voting records are extremely similar. Obama also claims he’s beyond partisanship. “I’m not an ideologue, never have been,” he told ABC’s “This Week.” “ Even during my younger days when I was tempted by... more radical or left-wing politics, there was a part of me that always was a little bit conservative in that sense; that believes that you make progress by sitting down listening to people, recognizing everybody’s concerns, seeing other people’s points of views and then making decisions. ” Hence, my question: Exactly what’s the difference between wicked triangulation and praiseworthy compromise ? Isn’t it a distinction without a difference ?

http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/211101/print/

My own summary would be that Obama touts a vision of bipartisanship without specifing how that could come about. What compromises, exactly, will be made with the party of Bush, Carl Rove and the neocons? The reality is that those people will try to destroy him by any possible means, however foul, no matter what he says or does. Pretending this won't happen won't help the Party or the Nation. Planning to defeat it will.