I’ve used that label to describe The New York Times editorial page for the better part of a decade. The filibuster is either a great evil or an honorable tool depending on who it is being wielded against. And then we get this:

Thankfully, some Senate Republicans also seem to understand the importance of the United States following through on its national security commitments.

Of course, they didn’t feel this way when the nation was Iraq and we had more than 100,000 troops on the ground.

Allahpundit put it well:

You know, in a way, I admire their shamelessness here. The NYT editorial board isn’t stupid; surely they know how preposterous it is for them to be taking a line this hawkish (especially on a war as compromised as this one is) after the past eight years. But darn if they didn’t do it to help Obama out. No pretense of consistency or neutral principles, just raw partisanship. There’s honesty in that, as hackish as it is.

Shorter Allahpundit: Partisan, not principled.