The NY Times drops the mask again

Remember this story in the NY Observer about a year ago about simmering resentment from the Times staffers towards the editorial page?

Said one staffer, “Andy’s got 14 or 15 people plus a whole bevy of assistants working on these three unsigned editorials every day. They’re completely reflexively liberal, utterly predictable, usually poorly written and totally ineffectual. I mean, just try and remember the last time that anybody was talking about one of those editorials.

Fast forward to the new Republican Congress and we have this gem in an otherwise balanced editorial:

For months, congressional Republicans have been drawing up plans on how they would run Congress if they won the Senate in November. In anticipation of more jockeying and complicated procedural fights on the floor, members of both parties have built up their staffs, bringing back some experienced veterans.

"Procedural fights?"  In other words, the filibuster, that crude cudgel of obstruction when it's in the hands of the Republicans and a principled tool of opposition when in the hands of the Democrats.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.  Golly, I wonder if they'll endorse Hillary in 2016.