He’s an editorial columnist for The Washington Post. I rarely read anything he writes unless it’s linked to by one of the blogs I read. I’ve stopped mostly doing that because people just rip him mercilessly. Well, today I stumbled across his latest column and now I understand why he sucks.

The most common complaint about Broder is that he values bi-partisanship for it’s own sake. In other words, if one Republican and one Democrat can agree, it’s a sign that a bill or issue is good. This is an absurd position for so many reasons. For example, on telecom immunity, some lobbying associations are strong enough and well-funded enough to buy the votes of both parties. This is clearly what’s going on with the FISA/Telecom Immunity debacle that made it through the Senate yesterday.

In this latest column, he praises the stimulus package because it passed with overwhelming majorities in the House. It’s a sign that the “voters’ message is getting through” to Congress. The only problem with the entire Op-Ed is that it doesn’t actually look at the bill. It mentions no provisions directly, doesn’t discuss whether it’s actually a good bill except in passing, and offers no opinion on whether the bill will do anything useful.

In other words, it’s devoid of any value or insight at all. And he gets to write these twice a week. What a waste of column space.