The pestering overlords have been repelled. The despots of do-gooderism bested. The phony saviors of proles and plebs are dazed and confused. They’ll be back for more, of coursevery soon.

But for the beleaguered, a fleeting respite. Not so long ago, those of you who opposed nationalizing health care were accused of promoting death and sedition — or even worse, selfishness. Today, Democrats are calling for patience and dialogue.

What’s changed? The solution? The problem? Nah. Principles? Those cheap things? The only thing more flexible than a political conviction is an Obama campaign promise.

For a case study on malleable values, take Colorado’s Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet. In December, CNN host John King asked him if “every piece of evidence tells you, if you support that bill, you will lose your job, would you cast the vote and lose your job?”

Our hero answered, “Yes.” The senator even commemorated his own gutsiness via press release. He then voted for the Senate health care bill — a surprise to no one.

Well, this week, the political world, as it tends to, was upended. And only hours after the president capitulated to the will of voters and called for a slowdown, Bennet — by mere happenstance, no doubt — chimed in that, you know what, he too believed Congress should slow down.

The voters of Massachusetts “didn’t just elect a senator,” he explained, “they sent a message to Washington that I have heard all across Colorado.”

Why, one might wonder, would a senator — willing to pass reform even if Colorado voters objected only a month ago — give one whit about the message sent by the Bay State or the Square State? Not very long ago, this guy was willing to lose his job, no matter what the consequences.

Coloradans might be telling Bennet something. They may not. They may be telling him something else completely tomorrow. But, if left to him, Coloradans would have the federal government making their most private choices. If it were up to Bennet, his constituents would be busy paying off dubious debts to Nebraska, Louisiana, California, unions — and anyone else clever enough to get their kickback.

Which makes the rest of Bennet’s platitudinous non-sequitur even more curious.

The senator pledges to “continue to fight against the backroom deals and special interest handouts” and hopes “the rest of Washington will join me.”

Join him? This would be tricky if you bear in mind that Bennet has done absolutely nothing to fight backroom deals or special interest handouts. The very bill Bennet staked his Senate seat on — by his own admission — is loaded with shady handouts. Presumably by “fight,” Bennet meant that he once grumbled about the ugly process on the Senate floor.

When I asked a Bennet spokesperson how the senator had stared down evil in Washington and lived to tell about it, she explained that he “was the first Senate Democrat to call out the deal struck on health care reform in December, to which a number of others followed and arguably led to a request that the deal be removed from the bill.”

Arguable, indeed.

After all, using this logic, one could point out that Bennet’s complaints followed a few dozen Republicans. Was the GOP fighting special-interest handouts? Did Bennet join them?

Bennet, like many others, had a magnificent opportunity to demonstrate independence by voting “no” on government-run medicine. Bennet had a chance to overcome his ethical misgivings regarding transparency and fishy deals then. Now, however, he is about political survival — the real message taken from Massachusetts.

The interesting thing about political grandstanding is that the neighborhood you pick to do it in better be one you’re prepared to live in for a long while.



E-mail David Harsanyi at dharsanyi@denverpost.com.