What the hell are you trying to say?

Over at Politico, John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei ponder the massive success – yet devastating failure – of the phenomenon that is the Obama Administration.

They begin:

The passage of financial reform, just a couple months after the passage of comprehensive health care, should decisively end the narrative that President Obama represents a Jimmy Carter-style case of naïve hope crushed by the inability to master Washington.

It’s true: whatever we think of them, Obama has had some legislative successes. This, the authors say, is evidence that he can “master Washington.”

Of course, Obama’s had large Democratic majorities, headed up by ideological soul mates, helping him. Given that advantage, one might wonder why he hasn’t accomplished more, and why the accomplishments he’s got have been so hard to come by. Harris and VandeHei don’t mention that.

Later in the article, they do mention:

The problem is that he and his West Wing turn out to be not especially good at politics.

Well, which is it? Has he “mastered Washington,” or is he “not especially good at politics?” Unless he’s at the head of a military coup, it can’t be both.

Read the whole thing, and tell me if I’m over-reading this. Via Memeorandum.