Under the current definition in Congress, a bill is bipartisan if a certain number of one party or the other, vote for a bill sponsored by someone from the opposite party. So if a bill sponsored by Ted Kennedy receives votes from Republicans, the bill is considered bipartisan.

Now, Obama Administration goons David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel are trying to get the definition of bipartisan changed. Wonder why? Could it be because Cap and Trade, Healthcare, the Stimulus, and other jewels of ignorance are mainly Democrat babies and they need the cover of “bipartisanship”?

The new definitions are pretty vague and ridiculous if you ask me. Rahm Emanuel wants to call a bill bipartisan if they simply made a good faith effort to negotiate. That’s rich, “I’m sorry officer, I made an effort not to speed, but I realize I was going 80 in a 45”. I’m sure that would keep you from getting a ticket now wouldn’t it?

Another idea being floated by Axelrod and company is how many ideas of the other party are included in the bill. Let’s pretend that healthcare is steamrolling its way through congress, oh wait, we don’t have to pretend. A republican Senator throws out an idea like, doctors have to wait 8 months to get reimbursed. The Democrats take it and run, that’s the only idea that makes the bill from republicans. Would they call it bipartisan? From Slate:

Bipartisanship, whether in fact or in name, is worth holding on to because Obama’s promises to end the partisanship in Washington was a central appeal of his candidacy. Plus, independent voters, who have been drifting away from Obama, tend to like the concept.

Bipartisanship is well and good, but if you are losing every fight, what’s the difference. I’d rather lose a fight actually fighting than lose a fight trying to get along with the guy pounding on my head.

My guess is the Republicans in congress don’t have the backbone to oppose this latest round of garbage out of the Administration.
After all, they don’t want to be called partisan.

But it would be lovely if everyone would remember, before Obama’s definition of bipartisanship is used, how much bipartisanship the Democrats showed the Bush Administration. Virtually none.