And oddly, the Post's ombudsman thinks the paper is losing credibility because a sports reporter tweeted an untrue rumor about a league penalty somewhere. Oh, that and the increasing number of grammatical errors. Could it be that Balz's item was intended for the Onion?

I'm a bit disappointed that Obama hasn't been more polarizing, personally. If a whole group is going to hate you and call you a Kenyan-Socialist-Fascist-Muslim-Terrrrist anyway, you might as well forget trying to involve them in the process.

This is such a perfect example of the Corporate Media and it's propaganda in order to confuse the typically stupid/ imbecile American. It's rewriting the actual history that this Corporate pigs are so good at BECAUSE OF THE IMBECILIC NATURE OF THE TYPICAL AMERICAN. The actual reality is very, very different that slim bag Baltz presents today. In reality, Obama immediately reached out to the Repiglicans. I remember shortly after he was elected that Micth 'the corporate bitch' McConnel went so far as to say how happy he was the Obama actually 'listened' to what he had to say, and was willing to 'work with me'. Shortly after this, when Obama had a meeting with the Repiglicans, including bitch McConnel, over the health care reforms Obama put his cards on the table in terms of what he was really to 'negotiate' over. The Repiclican response when he asked for what they were willing to negotiate over ? FUCKING NOTHING. This is actual reality.

my response to mr. balz essay (as emailed to him 10 mins ago)

Your latest piece of crap has to seriously make me wonder whether they (WaPo) do any sort of a) background check b) basic reading and comprehension testing (I'm sure critical thinking/reasoning is a bridge too far these days for you guys...) or c) bothered to check whether anything on your resume was remotely true. This article you have "written" about Obama being more polarizing than any other President happens to be, one of, if not THE, most idiotic pieces of junk I have read in the last year. At no point do you or your brethren bother to challenge any of the daily lunacy that comes out of the NRCC/NRSC/GOP. I cannot remember how times I read about "death panels" in this dying newspaper. You lot are a sad, pale image of a bygone era when journalism mattered, and counted - perhaps even informed the electorate. That was when you mattered. Not anymore. The continuing death of journalism can be directly attributed to navel-gazing idiots such as yourself. If I may paraphrase the movie Billy Madison, "Mr. Balz, what you've just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent bar-napkin essay were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

And yes, I am canceling my subscription.

Polarizing??? How about putting to rest 'bipartisanship'? Every single time the GOP doesn't want to answer a question, have an agenda, tell the American people what they are REALLY about they say 'Obama TOLD us he'd be bipartisan!' And since Obama and the Dems did not do EVERYTHING the GOP wanted, they said no to everything and blamed it on bipartisanship or lack thereof. And the media (sheep) faithfully recorded it.

Balz's idiocy is much like the phony BS both Bush and Rove tried to peddle.....that they were "perplexed" and "didn't realize how hard it would be" to change the tone in Washington....conveniently forgetting that they were responsible for 99.99999% of the divisive, ugly tone...

To anyone with a brain, Obama has been anything but polarizing...like the commenter above, I wish he WERE polarizing....instead, his bending over backwards to seek cooperation with the lunatics of the Republican party has cost him and the country dearly..

Ever heard of me?

With due respect to Dan Balz,

Presumably Steve Benen fails to realize that he is part of the problem when he writes like this. Benen catches Balz regurgitating baseless Republican talking points...but makes extra sure to not actually embarrass Balz.

By and large, ethical journalists and pundits fail to police their own. They treat each other like fraternity members, not fellow professionals.

If good journalists want their profession to stop circling the drainpipe, the burden is on them to speak up when they observe crappy journalism.

Don't blame Roger Ailes for hiring every major Republican presidential candidate, relentlessly libeling Obama and ACORN, donating heavily to GOP candidates and then showing up to sit in the front row of the White House press briefings. Blame every ostensibly professional journalist for letting it go without comment, much less outrage.

That damn partisan Obama, steamrolling Republicans at every turn, investigating and indicting Bush/Cheney on war crimes, closing Guantanamo, bringing all the troops home, dismantling the illegal surveillance state, ending DADT, ramming a public option down Repubs throats...Oh wait.

John Cole: "I really don't understand how bipartisanship is ever going to work when one of the parties is insane."

And yet, Obama still tries.

It takes Two to make Love, War, and Tango.

-That "aisle" he is always urged to reach across is a TWO WAY STREET!

Kudos to Mr. Balz for coming up with newest, most antiseptic way of calling Obama uppity:

"Obama would have been better off trying to assess what the public was prepared to accept, rather than to have acted in ways that assumed he could change it."

The other thing is that too often Benen uses this blog to simply complain about the GOP working the refs.

Look, the GOP is going to call Obama polarizing. That's their job. They relentlessly called Bush "popular" -- and got plenty of Democrats to join in -- long after Bush's 9/11 honeymoon ended. Politicians are SUPPOSED to be advocates for their parties and ideological positions. Obviously the lies can -- and sometimes do -- go too far. But a healthy amount of bullshit is to be expected in politics.

There is something kind of sad and pathetic about Democrats who constantly yearn for Republicans to be honest and fair in their rhetoric. Please. That will happen right after Kobe Bryant calls a foul on himself in the 4th quarter of game 7 of the NBA finals.

You gotta remember it's always the presidents fault, unless he's a Republican.

Can anyone think if an instance when Republican leadership compromised on any major issue?

They think bipartisanship is doing things their way, election results be damned.

"Polarizing" = "It's the bitch's fault her husband hit her."

Hey Dan, I double-dare ya:
Write an article that calls Mitch McConnell 'polarizing'. or John Boehner. Or Newt Gingrich.

C'mon, you can do it.

You're being way to kind to balz, Steve.

of course all of this right wing rhetoric,like 'polarizing", was all the rage when propagandists like Benen were hurling it against fellow democrats, Bill and Hillary Clinton. You opened that can of worms yourself. See the bed? Lie in it.

Yes it's true. Obama is a polarizer.
Elect a black* man President and all the racist fuckwits will get polarized. There sure are a lot of them, aren't there? I'm embarrassed for my country. Embarrassed? I am deeply ashamed.

Yes, I know that President Obama is bi-racial. But it's enough to make him a n****r in some people's eyes.

the president is polarizing because southern whites really hate him...fauxnews is #1 because they clean up with southern whites...the gop leads the generic ballot because of southern whites' overwhelming preference for republicans...

He's got a very "polarizing" skin color.

Godwin alert:

I suppose the Jews were also very 'polarizing' in Nazi Germany.

and;
Gaylib is an assh*le. I say this only because he is very polarizing.

One of the puzzling questions about Barack Obama's presidency is how the post-partisan candidate of 2008 became the polarizing chief executive of 2010. The answer may be surprising. He was far more polarizing from the start than many recognized.

Not true. Many of us recognized from the start that Obama would be "polarizing" because the Republican party is full of racist twits who couldn't stand the fact that a black man was in the White House.

Since when did carrying out the desires of the overwhelming majority come to be known as being "partisan". Obama offered his hand constantly, asked for repub inputs to ind solutions only to get the finger and be demonized by republicans.

To a republican "polarization" means refusing to do things their way. Being partisan is exactly what they are as every action is "party power first"...country last. Solutions are not allowed if it means dems might look good or solve national problems.

Remember that comment from Palin, "...how's that hopey changey thing workin' out for you"?. That comment clearly states they only want failure unless they are in power. But when they are in power, failure is all we get. These goobers would jump at the chance to be Chinese billionaires....Palin certainly couldn't get enough money being gov. and all that work was just too much and definitely not enough recognition for that beauty pageant mentality.

Bush said it best with, "Money trumps...er ..a...peace sometimes". A republican mantra

If you read the report, you will find Balz has pretty much mischaracterized the research and opinions of the experts he is citing. The picture they paint is more complex and less blaming of Obama.

Perhaps we should just get everyone is washington some polarized sun glasses.

My suggestion makes as much sense as anything Balz spewed in his ridiculous column.

Obama is a fraud and always has been.

STOP DELETING COMMENTS you prat.

With due respect to Dan Balz?? What respect is due Dan Balz? The guy is a ridiculous hack.

Riddle me this: why is Dan Balz is a Washington Post reporter and Steve Benen a Washington Monthly blogger?

Right, we live in upside-down land.