The Bipartisan Divide
Obama wants to redefine bipartisanship. Will Republicans go along?
There is another term for what Obama is doing that would be consistent with his previous definitions. In a 2007 interview with Frank Rich, he said: "There are some times where we need to be less bipartisan. I'm not interested in cheap bipartisanship. We should have been less bipartisan in asking tough questions about entering into this Iraq war."
The president has made the case for health care as a national priority. If he thinks Republicans aren't meeting the challenge of the day, then he should go his own way. That might be the right thing to do instead of engaging in "cheap bipartisanship." But to take that route and call it bipartisan would be cheap.
John Dickerson is Slate's chief political correspondent and author of On Her Trail. He can be reached at slatepolitics@gmail.com. Read his series on the presidency and his series on risk. Follow him on Twitter.



Steve Jobs’ Dream Device Has Arrived, and It's Made by Microsoft
There Is Nothing Miraculous About a Tornado, Wolf Blitzer
A Huge Discovery About Prime Numbers—and What It Means for the Future of Math