The good news: Joe Klein, who spent a career posing as an "objective" journalist and Washington inside-the-Beltway wise man, is finally unmasked . Fortunately, Joe Klein's by-line now appears under the label of "commentary." He is off the streets and safely contained on the op-ed pages of TIME magazine.

The bad news: There are still a host of reporters out there covering national government who are not out of the closet.

From the most recent issue of TIME, Joe Klein's assault on the President:

The Headline: "An Administration's Epic Collapse: In the face of three scandals. Bush offers only more relentless partisanship" (full article here).

Klein: A Pew poll had it about right: a substantial majority of the public remains happy the Democrats won in 2006, but neither Nancy Pelosi nor Harry Reid has dominated the public consciousness as Newt Gingrich did when the Republicans came to power in 1995.

That is probably because Nancy Pelosi is so humble and retiring and does not go looking for ways to place her name on the top of the page--unlike that dastardly megalomaniac, Newt Gingrich. No way is it because the media treatment of Pelosi and Gingrich are as different as lightning and a lightning bug. Hold on, Joe Klein has a better answer:

Klein: There is a reason for that. A much bigger story is unfolding: the epic collapse of the Bush Administration.

Please. Go on.

Klein: The three big Bush stories of 2007...precisely illuminate the three qualities that make this Administration one of the worst in American history: arrogance (the surge), incompetence (Walter Reed) and cynicism (the U.S. Attorneys).

One of the worst in American history? That is a big claim. Thanks, though, for a recap of the DNC talking points. Anything else?

Klein: Iraq comes first, as always. From the start, it has been obvious that personal motives have skewed the President's judgment about the war. Saddam tried to kill his dad...

Is there anything more hackneyed and more facile than this line of argument? Perhaps next week Klein and Rosie O'Donnell can explain the real story behind the 9-11 attacks.

Klein: Bush's adolescent petulance [is on display] in his decision to ignore the Baker-Hamilton report and move in the exact opposite direction: adding troops and employing counterinsurgency tactics inappropriate to the situation on the ground.

[The] surge was attempted with too few troops (especially non-Kurdish, Arabic-speaking Iraqis), a purposely misleading time line ("progress" by September) and, most important, the absence of a reliable Iraqi government.


That's what General Klein says anyway. Once again, this essay reads like a cut-and-paste job from Democratic press releases. Does anyone find it noteworthy that Jim Baker supports the surge? Does anyone find it noteworthy that the surge may be working?

Klein: "There was no way [Bush] was going to accept [the Iraq Study Group findings] once the press began to portray the report as Daddy's friends coming to the rescue," a member of the Baker-Hamilton commission told me.

Does Joe Klein know that one of "Daddy's friends" is now running Defense? And, by the way, does Klein know that Bob Gates was a member of the Iraq Study Group? Does Klein feel at all compelled to mention any fact, no matter how pertinent, that does not mesh perfectly into his thesis?

Klein: General David Petraeus has repeatedly said [this won't work].

Bald-faced lie. Unconscionable intellectual dishonesty.

Klein: Bush's indifference to reality in Iraq is not an isolated case. It is the modus operandi of his Administration. The indifference of his Environmental Protection Agency to the dangers of carbon dioxide emissions was rejected by the Supreme Court on April 2.

More sweeping statements buttressed by a "non sequitur."

Klein: The President is a hypocrite and demagogue. Walter Reed [is] the latest example of incompetence in this Administration. It puts the lie to the President's rhetoric concerning getting the troops "what they need." Paul Rieckhoff of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America [says]..."this Administration governs badly because it doesn't care very much about governing."

Who is Paul Rieckhoff again? FYI: Rieckhoff's website here. I have heard of the VFW, however. Here is their website (here), which essentially agrees with Bush on the timetable.

Klein: Compared with Iraq and Walter Reed, the firing of the U.S. Attorneys is a relatively minor matter.

Nevertheless, it is the clincher for Klein. It proves that the Karl Rove is the root of all evil.

Klein: When Bush came to office--installed by the Supreme Court after receiving fewer votes than Al Gore--I speculated that the new President would have to govern in a bipartisan manner to be successful.

1. Another boilerplate shot at the President: "selected not elected." Was Klein on vacation in 2004?

2. Does anyone in their right mind think that bipartisan government is possible in this polarized era? If Bush had let down his guard for one second, the Democrats would have crucified him. If Klein really made that prediction, I suspect it was disingenuous.

Klein: I've tried to be respectful of the man and the office, but the three defining sins of the Bush Administration--arrogance, incompetence, cynicism--are congenital: they're part of his personality. They're not likely to change. And it is increasingly difficult to imagine yet another two years of slow bleed with a leader so clearly unfit to lead.

Who suffers from extreme partisanship? The political scientists call that brand of heavy-handed analysis partisan perceptual distortion. I call it egregious self indulgence.

From last week: "NPR and the President: An Unfortunate and Misleading Angle on the Press Conference" here.

More on the media: "Friendly versus Unfriendly" here.