It would probably be a fruitless endeavor to attempt to convince the Times that the (lamentably few) Republicans who oppose New START are not merely posturing to deny President Obama a fleeting political victory. In truth, the provenance of their recalcitrance stems from legitimate concerns over safeguarding America's unimpeded ability to protect herself, and her allies. This includes the right to pursue and develop any and all defense systems we see fit. In spite of countless assurances from the treaty's defenders, the question of whether this pact satisfies those concerns remains open, at best. For that reason alone, the treaty ought not be rushed through a discredited Congress during a Christmastime lame duck session.
This is not about "victories" for individual politicians. It's about whether the United States of America's most crucial interests are advanced, or at a minimum, protected. The Times' rank political spin cheapens this debate.