Everyone must be fed up now of saying and hearing phrases like 'it's all changed' or 'we've never seen anything like it' about the new Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition.
As the incomparable, indefatigable and unfailingly cool BBC Political Editor Nick Robinson said as yet another unforeseen corner was turned: "Huw, I've run out of superlatives."
Fair enough - but we journalists have to get our heads pretty quickly around the ways in which the coalition and proposed parliamentary reforms will change our terms of trade.
Some pretty tired tropes and assumptions have underpinned our interviewing and reporting for a generation - some reasonable, some less so. And my own hands are not clean on this one.
'Are you doing what you said in your manifesto?' always seemed to me an essential and therefore reasonable question.
Is the governing party united, of one mind and marching in lockstep behind the Prime Minister? Hmmm ... never been sure about that one.
Can we build excitement around the dissent of an awkward squad who might just threaten government business ... or even bring the government down? Guilty, especially in the latter days of John Major, but never terribly happy about it.
So ... how relevant are these when we know both parties have had to trim their manifestos?; that there are two parties in government and acknowledged differences between them?; that, on some issues, the parties are explicitly not expected to support each other?; and that the 55% rule - if it comes into force - on fixed term parliaments means a government defeat even on a confidence measure won't automatically trigger a general election (though in all probability it would)?; that a defeat on government business might trigger a rethink rather than a new election?
One of our (OK ... my) old favourites is 'nailing' the cabinet minister we know opposes a policy in private but - under the convention of collective responsibility - has to support it in public. A winner from Francis Pym to Clare Short.
But how useful is this now when, under the two parties' coalition agreement, Liberal Democrat MPs, including one presumes the new Energy Minister Chris Huhne, can continue their opposition to nuclear power by abstaining in Commons' votes?
And that Conservative MPs - again, presumably including the payroll vote - will be able to campaign against Alternative Voting in the referendum on electoral reform?
Political journalism has invented some mighty powerful myths that have never actually corresponded to the way in which politics is done. Nor, as it happens, to the way most of us live our lives.
The myth of the leader; who is either all-knowing and all-powerful or broken and beaten. Never anything in between - you know, like normal people.
The myth of responsibility; which means every minister must know the whereabouts of every paper clip in his/her department or 'take responsibility' for his/her ignorance/failure and resign. Never, of course, stay on to put it right - you know, like in normal life.
The myth of unanimity; no political party has ever been unanimous on all issues - yet we've always (OK ... I've always) stuck to the fiction that unanimity is the norm and rubbed our hands in glee when we've found MPs who've gone off our myth's script.
It may take a while to adjust: when the Guardian's Polly Toynbee wrote that the new coalition "will wobble" she was and is correct.
It will - but the question for us journalists is this: will we be able to report, probe and analyse those wobbles in ways that don't assume the old myths we created to frame our political journalism?
It may just be, you know, that coalition government will force disagreement, dissent and debate out into the open - and that we and our audiences might get used to it.
It may just be that it becomes normal to see and hear a Prime Minister - or Deputy Prime Minister for that matter - thinking out loud. And that even we journalists realise that, far from being a sign of weakness, indecision or lack of authority, it's ... well, what normal people do when they're faced with a tough decision.
Because, let's be honest with ourselves, political journalism and interviewing as a string of 'gotcha' moments hasn't exactly elevated either politicians or us journalists in the estimation of our publics.
