Sidney Lumet passed away yesterday. He was one of the great film directors of our time. But I had not thought of just how great. Digby is one of the great bloggers we have. But I am especially grateful for her bringing Dennis Hartley's insights on film to our attention. Last night, Hartley wrote a post (Digby adds a nice postscript on how Network shaped her blogging) about Lumet's works. Go read it.

Via Politico: Obama advisor David Plouffe said this morning on Meet the Press that President Obama will make a major address on the budget later this week, which will include "finding savings in Medicare and Medicaid." More from Reuters, which says the address will be on Wednesday.

Plouffe also said that even if Rep. Paul Ryan's medicare kill bill passes the House, it won't become law. (Does he mean it won't pass the Senate or Obama will veto it?)

Ezra Klein saying Obama's health care law (The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) already addresses Medicare problems and will do a lot more for containing costs than Paul Ryan's kill bill.

Ezra highlights two documents to make the point. One is the Congressional Budget Office's Long Term Budget Analysis and the other is Kaiser's summary of the Affordable Choice Act (the Medicare portion begins on page 8.) [More...]

Fred Armisen is back as President Obama on SNL tonight, addressing the budget deal.

"In a true example of compromise, I am pleased to say no one got everything he wanted and everyone walked away unhappy."

The New York Times reports President Obama will continue to push a path to the center for his re-election campaign.

When was he anything but centrist? Who but conservative Republicans trying to disparage him ever cast him as a liberal? Apparently, some Democrats are now becoming uneasy with Obama's centrism and compromising ways:

The question of where Mr. Obama’s bottom line is on Democratic priorities will be that much more urgent to his party as House Republicans, energized by their success in resetting the terms of the debate in Washington, press an aggressive conservative agenda in the coming months that includes deeper spending cuts and a fundamental reshaping of the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Obama does not seem concerned: [More...]

Bernie Madoff was recently interviewed in prison by Financial Times. Like always, he takes full responsibility and insists none of his family members were involved. He says his illegal activity began in the 90's. The trustee has said Bernie's illegal activities began in the 80's. He also predicts the trustee will not only recover all the principal invested by the victims, but some profits as well:

“I said at the very beginning when I met with the SEC and Picard that my hope is that everyone will receive their principal [which amounts to $20bn]. Back then, everyone laughed. But [Picard] has already recovered $10bn and he will cover $20bn easily. If he is successful, he may get $50bn. That means that there will be $30bn profits to go around, which would make me one of the greatest money managers in modern history.”

[More...]

And why shouldn't he be? He has won. Since December, he has been on a roll.

In December, after The Deal, I wrote "[a]t this point, Barack Obama's legacy will be the enabling of the GOP's Norquist strategy to demolish the social safety net. The Deal is the first step."

Yesterday was the second step. I wrote in December that Part 2 of The Deal is spending cuts.

Part 3 will be an attempt to undo the New Deal.

Speaking for me only

Not that this is a serous question. The victory for Boehner was so complete, that even Ezra Klein noticed:

Boehner, of course, could afford to speak plainly. He’d not [only] just won the negotiation but had proven himself in his first major test as speaker of the House. He managed to get more from the Democrats than anyone had expected, sell his members on voting for a deal that wasn’t what many of them wanted and avert a shutdown. There is good reason to think that Boehner will be a much more formidable opponent for Obama than Gingrich was for Clinton.

So why were Reid and Obama so eager to celebrate Boehner’s compromise with his conservative members? The Democrats believe it’s good to look like a winner, even if you’ve lost. But they’re sacrificing more than they let on. By celebrating spending cuts, they’ve opened the door to further austerity measures at a moment when the recovery remains fragile. Claiming political victory now opens the door to further policy defeats later.

(Emphasis supplied.) Boehner may be more formidable than Gingrich. It is hard to tell because Obama is no Clinton when it comes to political bargaining.

Speaking for me only

His Saturday address:

A few months ago, I was able to sign a tax cut for American families because both parties worked through their differences and found common ground. Now, the same cooperation has made it possible for us to move forward with the biggest annual spending cut in history. And it’s my sincere hope that we can continue to come together as we face the many difficult challenges that lie ahead – from creating jobs and growing our economy to educating our children and reducing our long-term deficits.

President Obama is celebrating The Deal to extend the Bush tax cuts and cut spending on programs for the most needy in America. You have to be a little scared about what further triumphant compromises Obama has in store for us. What a disastrous Presidency.

Speaking for me only

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan proposed a budget plan for 2012. It's scheduled for a vote next week. Among its features: Ending Medicare and gutting Medicaid.

[T]he nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has outlined what adoption of this proposal to supplant Medicare with vouchers and private insurance exchanges would mean. The overall cost of healthcare would go up, and retirees' out-of-pocket medical expenses would double — an increase that would push tens of millions of people living on fixed incomes over the financial brink.

Ryan calls his plan "The Path to Prosperity." For who? No surprise here: it calls for further tax reductions for corporations and wealthy individuals. He claims to be saving Medicare, notwithstanding his plan would push tens of millions of people over the financial edge. Ryan writes: [More...]

President Obama briefly spoke from the White House tonight. His statement aired on the White House website and Facebook. Via CNN:

The president said the agreement "invests in our (America's) future while making the greatest annual spending cut in our history." Thanked House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for their "leadership and dedication" during the negotiation process.

I wouldn't describe this deal as historic. It's more like the all too obvious final scene of a badly scripted movie. And the spin begins. A Democratic source tells CNN:

[T]he budget deal would cut between $38 and $39 billion dollars over the 2011 fiscal year.

Reid and Boehner released this statement: [More...]

Update: They've got a "handshake deal" and will go for a one week continuing resolution. Great, so now we can listen to both sides spin victory all weekend?

10:38 p.m. ET - CNN Senior Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash reported there has been a handshake agreement on a framework to fund the government for the remainder of the fiscal year and a short term continuing resolution funding the government until Thursday.

****

Get ready for the last minute budget deal. How did Boehner do? Via CNN on Twitter:

9:20 p.m. ET - @teapartynation: Boehner is selling us out tonight. We will primary Boehner next year. #tcot #teaparty #GOP #TPN #TPP #SGP

[More...]

Matt Yglesias writes:

Why are Democratic leaders so spineless? Ezra Klein points to persuasive polling evidence that the Democratic [constituency] likes it that way [. . .] A more general point I would make about this is that left-wing intellectuals and writers often write as if left-wing intellectuals and writers are “the base” of the Democratic Party, then observe that the leaders of the Democratic Party aren’t very left-wing, and then write about the phenomenon of the Democratic Party leaders’ ignoring their base. [. . .]

(Emphasis supplied.) That's true. But Yglesias ignores the pundits who rationalize, defend, and even urge, spinelessness by Democratic leaders. I happen to not think much of the poll result that Ezra and Yglesias are trumpeting (what does that poll really mean?), but it is telling to me that that it is used to buttress the general Ezra Klein line that Dems should be spineless in their political bargaining with Republicans. Obviously I disagree with that strategy. But my point is Yglesias implies that it is only "base claiming" pundits that make unfounded claims of "support." But the Beltway Bloggers and Pundits do it too.

Speaking for me only