The GOP has just filibustered a nominee for secretary of defense, an historic and precedent-setting event. Unless you read the New York Times, in which case they apparently didn’t:
Republicans said they intended to allow a vote on their former colleague when the Senate returns from a break in 10 days, but Democrats said the Republican position amounted to a historic filibuster of the nominee for a post that is usually filled with bipartisan support.
That’s right, we can no longer say with certainty that obstructing a vote by requiring a supermajority is a filibuster. It’s a difference of opinion now. They even went so far as to point out that there was no doubt that it was a filibuster, even though they didn’t have the balls to say it:
That forced senators like John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, veterans of the Senate Armed Services Committee who have said that they find the act of filibustering a nominee for defense secretary distasteful, to cast a vote that had the same result as a filibuster, even if they refused to call it that.
Yeah, because McCain and Graham are the ones who refused to call it a filibuster. The Washington Post did it right:
Falling one vote shy of the 60 needed to move forward on the nomination, the Hagel filibuster brought stark condemnations from President Obama and Senate Democrats for its precedent-setting nature — the first time a defense secretary nominee had been filibustered. The setback came during what many believe is a critical period for the Pentagon as it winds down troops from Afghanistan and implements costly budget cuts.
Even Fox News called it what it was:
Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked — for now — Chuck Hagel’s nomination to lead the Pentagon, marking the first time the chamber has successfully filibustered a Cabinet nominee.
Shame on the New York Times.