The White House's Definition of Bipartisanship

Big news out of the Senate this morning, where the Health Committee has passed its bill on a party-line vote. For some background on the bill -- I haven't read the new amendments, so certain parts of this might be out of date -- see this post. But for the importance of this vote, see this Bloomberg article, in which Rahm Emmanuel argues that the HELP process was, in fact, a bipartisan effort as the White House defines it. Full Story »

Posted by Derek Hawkins
Tags Help
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Derek Hawkins - Jul 16, 2009 - 6:17 AM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Derek Hawkins - Jul 16, 2009 - 6:17 AM PDT

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Derek Hawkins
3.5
by Derek Hawkins - Jul. 16, 2009
See Full Review » (2 answers)
Shawn Powers
2.2
by Shawn Powers - Jul. 16, 2009

Maybe I've missed something, but this seems to pointing out the painfully obvious. I think more could be written about the redefinition of bipartisan (away from votes and towards ideas), as it is a smart rhetorical move by the Obama administration that they will surely draw from to help the dems get more swing voters in 2010. Also, maybe reading the new amendments prior to publishing this story would have been a good idea, no? This is the problem when the MSM start picking up young, ... More »

See Full Review » (11 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

2.4

not enough reviews
from 2 reviews (30% confidence)
Quality
2.2
Information
2.0
Insight
2.0
Style
3.0
Context
1.0
Expertise
2.0
Originality
1.0
Relevance
4.0
Responsibility
3.0
Popularity
3.1
Recommendation
2.5
Credibility
3.5
# Reviews
1.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!