New York magazine’s latest cover piece, on the troubles of the Obama administration, laments the “American public, with its chronic impatience and a collective attention span measured in angstroms.”

(A couple of readers point out that an “angstrom” is a unit of length, not time, so isn’t appropriate in the measurement of attention spans.)

UPDATE: Now they tell us: “Obama’s was not a candidacy, to put it mildly, in which substance played a starring role.”

I like John Heilemann, his articles and perspective are always interesting, but if you’re going to say something like that, you probably ought to acknowledge whether you’re just noticing this now, or whether you noticed it then and just ignored it because you liked the candidate so much.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Why I like Heilemann: His ability to get quotes like this one:

For Obama, the problem is less acute than it is for congressional Democrats up for reelection in the coming mid-terms. But a problem it still is – not only for his own reelection effort three years from now, when the effects of reform will still be minimal, but because of the atmosphere the entire health-care endeavor has engendered in his party on the Hill. “The House is angry at the Senate, the Senate thinks the House is crazy, and they’re all pissed at the White House for not exerting adequate leadership over the process and for taking its eye off the ball on the economy,” says the Democratic strategist. “I don’t think the White House understands what’s going on or how bad it is.”
Had Emanuel or Axelrod been present two weeks ago when the members of the House Democratic caucus held their weekly meeting in a windowless room in the Capitol, the picture would have been all too clear. The frustration with Obama’s perceived fecklessness on unemployment was simmering, with open attacks on his economic team and emotional calls for a second stimulus. The next day, Pelosi announced she intended to introduce a jobs bill before year’s end, while across the Hill, Reid signaled his interest in doing the same in early 2010 – although congressional aides noted tartly that the White House had “yet to get onboard.”
These rattlings presage the sort of conflict that’s likely to attend the critical, maybe seminal, hundred days that lie ahead for Obama. The White House may or may not climb aboard a jobs bill, but its enthusiasm for the prospect is roughly equivalent to that of a 6-year-old confronted with a plate of cauliflower. Obama and his budget chief, Peter Orszag, have been sending clear signals for weeks that the administration intends to focus in its upcoming budget on fiscal restraint “on at least mapping out the path it will take to wage an assault on Mount Deficit. But congressional liberals have close to zero appetite for such a hike. “If the White House comes out in January all deficit hawkish,” says the strategist, “House and Senate Democrats are going to have an anti-Obama tea party of their own.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Another “wow” quote: “One Democratic congressman predicts that fully half of his caucus will oppose the escalation. ‘Obama is going to get his ass kicked on this,’ the congressman says.”