home

Who Won?

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

< Obama's Triumphant "Compromise" | Grover Norquist Is Smiling >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 09:58:28 AM EST
    IMO, it's both. Boehner doesn't go around making ridiculous statements like Gingrich did and certainly Obama is no Clinton when it comes to negotiating. Boehner is not a bomb thrower that makes himself look crazy like Gingrich did. He is a very slick negotiator dealing with an inept negotiator by the name of Obama.

    Obama is no Clinton?? (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by jmacWA on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:00:30 AM EST
    I have to agree, but I would say I have yet to see that Obama is even a Democrat.  Granted that's the letter behind his name, but you could certainly fool me.

    Parent
    He's (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:02:56 AM EST
    a garden variety Reagan Republican. That's the conclusion that I have come to.

    Can you imagine the fun Bill Clinton would have had with the tea party? He would have relished making fun of them and their ideas.

    Parent

    Obama's using Boehner as cover (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:08:27 AM EST
    to do what he wants; I'm not sure he realizes that when it all hits the fan - and it will - his "they made me do it" excuse is not going to hold much water.

    Two words: Deficit Commission.  No way to believe Obama was ever opposed to this craziness with that thing sitting squarely in the picture - especially because he ignored the will of Congress, which was not to have such a commission, and went and created one by executive order.

    The patient is hemorrhaging and Obama's giving blood-thinners; I guess the bleeding will eventually stop, but only because the patient is dead.

    Parent

    have to repost this Obama quote on the deal (5.00 / 0) (#25)
    by kmblue on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:27:16 AM EST
    Like any worthwhile compromise, both sides had to make tough decisions and give ground on issues that were important to them.   And I certainly did that.
    Some of the cuts we agreed to will be painful. Programs people rely on will be cut back.  Needed infrastructure projects will be delayed.  And I would not have made these cuts in better circumstances.

    Only part I agree with is the part I bolded.
    All hail the Caver in Chief!

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:11:48 AM EST
    that's the other theory out there.

    Too bad he's not smart enough to realize that it's probably going to cost him reelection.

    Parent

    Today my local paper reported that (5.00 / 0) (#31)
    by hairspray on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 03:01:52 PM EST
    Obama needs a fired up union movement for 2012.  The report cited a fired up California union movement but did acknowledge the silence from the WH on the union busting in the upper midwest.  How will the "handlers" get them ready to put on comfortable shoes and walk for Obama in Wisconsin and those other states?

    Parent
    one should consider (5.00 / 0) (#15)
    by observed on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:05:46 AM EST
    Medicare already dead. The question is whether social security can be saved. If not, cairo is the only path left, given that president target practice has no primary challenger


    Not so easy on that one (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:07:36 AM EST
    Seniors vote.

    The Medicare Ryan Plan is a head fake for other cuts imo.

    Parent

    who could have guessed (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by observed on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:12:46 AM EST
    That community org really was a big deal on his resume


    It was laughable (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by cal1942 on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 02:53:09 PM EST
    during the primaries that the Obamaphiles would point to the title community organizer in response to arguments against him.  To some it was their final put down.

    Parent
    OUCH! (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:18:11 AM EST


    Good show. (5.00 / 4) (#26)
    by lentinel on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:30:55 AM EST
    Let's claim similar "victories" in Iraq, Afghanistan and LIbya and get the hell out.

    By yesterday, Boehner was (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 09:54:04 AM EST
    clearly playing on the house's money--no pun intended.

    Did you catch the fact that Obama actually agreed to a ton of awful policy riders?

    I did not pay attention (none / 0) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 09:55:06 AM EST
    It was too depressing.

    Parent
    One thing I've learned about (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 09:56:05 AM EST
    this Presidency is that it is wise to assume that things could always get worse.

    I'm personally at a loss for what to do.

    Parent

    There's nothing to do (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 09:57:50 AM EST
    Obama is focused like a laser beam on the one thing that matters . . . to him, reelection.

    HE is doing what he thinks helps that. And he is listening to Geithner about it.

    But as Ezra points out, he actually is jeopardizing it.

    Parent

    Pretty soon (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:00:15 AM EST
    I expect to hear him talking about "cutting our way to prosperity." Because everyone knows how sound the economics are behind that. The government is light a family or a business, and it needs to tighten up.

    Parent
    I hope everyone now (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:03:21 AM EST
    understands why I was so livid about The Deal.

    This was all so predictable after that.

    Parent

    Yup (none / 0) (#14)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:05:04 AM EST
    Remeber Ezra (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:06:38 AM EST
    celebrating The Deal? As if today was not going to be the natural progression of events?

    Though I bet by tomorrow he'll be back on script.

    Parent

    Yes I do (none / 0) (#17)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:07:20 AM EST
    Political seppuku (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by TJBuff on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:20:47 AM EST
    Well, a fool and his presidency are soon parted, if he's listening to Geithner.

    Parent
    The only (none / 0) (#6)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 09:59:52 AM EST
    thing to do is run a primary opponent against him if issues matter at all to the base.

    Parent
    You have to be a pretty discerning (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:02:00 AM EST
    reader to understand just how much Obama gave up in the last 6 months or so. The media is much happier to report the fact of a "deal" than on any of the specifics. Never mind the implications.

    Parent
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:03:59 AM EST
    too bad. Obama will do what the GOP could never do: destroy the party.

    Parent
    Nah (none / 0) (#13)
    by andgarden on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:04:51 AM EST
    He will just make it mean even less than it did before.

    Parent
    Well, one thing (none / 0) (#33)
    by sj on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 06:50:51 PM EST
    would be to stop accepting blue dog types as suitable candidates (at any level) because they're "electable".  They were instrumental in validating Republican positions.  They don't have any trouble opposing their party leadership.  The Dems were destroyed from within.

    Are you planning on voting for him again?  I expect so.  You've said you'll vote a straight Party ticket.  What incentive is there for any change in political direction?  They're counting on "nowhere else to go", but both roads lead to the same destination.  And oddly, it appears that the Dem road isn't the one with detours.  It's getting us to Grover Norquist's world faster than it would under Republican leadership.

    I'll never vote Republican in the hope that we would get true political tension.  But the Dems are no longer an opposition party.  And it has been expedience that put us there.  Gagging the mouths of the more traditional Democrats who might aspire to an office so that an "independent" Democrat can claim it.  

    I don't know what they expected, but I expected this.  But even I expected it on a smaller scale.

    Parent

    These are mostly just piffle (none / 0) (#34)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 08:18:43 PM EST
    The votes on PP and health care will be under the 60-vote (ie filibuster) rule, so they're not going to pass, or on the wild chance that one of them does, can be vetoed.

    THe D.C. abortion thing is maddening, but I'm given to understand by news coverage that Obama already signed legislation somewhere along the line with that provision, so it's redundant.

    The audit stuff is fine with me.  If we've done this right, they should prove the value of the programs, not undermine them.  But I haven't hear an explanation of who/what does the audits, have you?

    Parent

    Any more Obama victories like that (none / 0) (#21)
    by TJBuff on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:12:01 AM EST
    and we'll be celebrating the inauguration of President Boner in 2012.

    The American people won! (none / 0) (#27)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 10:33:10 AM EST
    Just kidding.  ;)

    That's what will (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by cal1942 on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 02:55:39 PM EST
    be tomorrow's theme on Meet The Press.  

    Parent
    Hence, my snark. (none / 0) (#32)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 04:36:23 PM EST
    Those Sunday shows have become even more disingenuous than usual.  And it's pretty clear they have their marching orders:  Convince everyone that Obama really is everything he said he'd be and more.  And to make sure not a single fact gets in their way.  

    Parent
    Update on the appeal (none / 0) (#28)
    by Boomer on Sat Apr 09, 2011 at 12:55:41 PM EST
    The briefs have been filed and the case coming up for oral argument before the court of appeal next week (4/12/2011).

    After carefully looking at the briefs filed by both sides and my 30 years experience following criminal and civil appeals, this case is in play and likely to be reversed.