Huffington Post is reporting that,

Democrats have offered, in a series of high-profile negotiations, to slash trillions in spending, much of it hitting the elderly, the poor and the middle class.

Later, the article states,

But more than anything, lawmakers will likely target Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a host of other social programs that help those with the fewest advocates in Washington, including people on food stamps, veterans, retiring federal workers, home health care workers and the elderly.

This is it.
Just about everyone here agreed, to greater and lesser extents, that Romney was worse than Obama. People who were actually for Obama (as opposed to just being afraid of Romney) signalled that once he was reelected, he would be free to show us the fighting spirit and "heart" than they know he has.

OK.
Done.

If Obama goes along passively and gives us another "deal", known now as a "bargain", we will know the truth about what the next four years have in store for us.

If he comes out and fights, takes it to the people a la Kennedy vs US Steel, we might have something.

The fiscal cliff poses an interesting problem for self-styled deficit hawks. They've been going on and on about how the deficit is a terrible thing; now they're confronted with the possibility of a large reduction in the deficit, and have to find a way to say that this is a bad thing.

[snip]

So they're left making a mostly incoherent case: it's too abrupt (why?), it's the wrong kind of deficit reduction (???), and then this:

a better approach would be to focus spending cuts on low-priority spending and on changes which can help to encourage growth and generate new revenue through comprehensive tax reform which broadens the base - ideally by enough to also lower tax rates.

Low-priority spending? I think that means spending on poor people and the middle class. And isn't it amazing how people who claim to be horrified, horrified about deficits can't stop talking about cutting tax rates?

Krugman would like to show these people the door:

It's not just the fact that the deficit scolds have been wrong about everything so far. Recent events have also demonstrated clearly what was already apparent to careful observers: the deficit-scold movement was never really about the deficit. Instead, it was about using deficit fears to shred the social safety net. And letting that happen wouldn't just be bad policy; it would be a betrayal of the Americans who just re-elected a health-reformer president and voted in some of the most progressive senators ever.

Is there anyone in the media - other than Mr. Krugman - who is asking the right questions and pointing out the utter hypocrisy of the deficit hysterics?  

No, this is following the same old script: identify the message the powers-that-be want to deliver, and then deliver it; don't ask questions, don't push back.  

From Americablog:

Here's the ultimate Beltway insider, Bob Woodward, on Meet The Press with David Gregory. It seems that someone leaked Obama's 2011 Grand Bargain memo to House Speaker John Boehner. First, Woodward's on-air comment (my emphasis):

"This is a confidential document, last offer the president -- the White House made last year to Speaker Boehner to try to reach this $4 trillion grand bargain. And it's long and it's tedious and it's got budget jargon in it. But what it shows is a willingness to cut all kinds of things, like TRICARE, which is the sacred health insurance program for the military, for military retirees; to cut Social Security; to cut Medicare. And there are some lines in there about, "We want to get tax rates down, not only for individuals but for businesses." So Obama and the White House were willing to go quite far."

Here's a link to the memo itself, which should - at a minimum - stop any discussion about Barack Obama as the champion of the middle class, the old, the poor or the sick.  

And if anyone wastes one molecule of oxygen or ink on the but-Romney-and-the-Republicans-would-be-worse, then shame on you.  Really, because while you're making excuses and telling us all to wait and see what the final proposal looks like, the Grand Bargain will be proceeding apace.

Yeah, there're all kinds of political chess moves being made here - someone in the WH leaked the memo to Woodward, who used Meet the Press to announce it.  Why the leak?  Is this all about "how close" the two sides are?

I don't know.  All I know is that whatever message people thought they were sending to Obama, he has no plans to honor it.

From David Dayen comes this gem:

The fiscal madness in Washington has now intersected with a recent development, the sellout of certain progressive organizations. Change.org recently announced they would rebrand themselves as less a progressive social movement site, but a one-stop shop for anyone of any ideology that wants to use petitions to leverage a particular policy.

Change.org allows users to launch and sign petitions, and the company has had some high-profile successes. Change.org currently operates under a values-based client policy, only accepting advertisements from progressive organizations that share its values. The new policy will be closer to "a Google-like open advertising policy in which determinations about which advertisements we'll accept are based on the content of the ad, not the group doing the advertising," according to a company FAQ sent to staff [...]

Change.org did not plan to reach out to its base of progressive users about the change. "[W]e have no plans to proactively tell users about the new design or our new mission, vision, or advertising guidelines," reads one document.

This policy has been instituted quickly. In fact, Change.org, while still the location of petitions to keep Erskine Bowles out of the Treasury Secretary job, also welcomes corporate CEOs - whose spokesperson is the one and the same Bowles - on the site to promote cuts to social insurance programs.

Dday's final thought:

I wonder why any progressive organization would have anything to do with Change.org at this point, however.

From the formerly lofty perch that Republicans inhabited 18 years ago, when they held the governor's office and six of the seven other statewide elected offices, had a majority of members in California's congressional delegation, and controlled and both branches of the state legislature, it's been a precipitous and difficult fall from political grace.

As of Tuesday night, Democrats have a firm grasp on all of California's eight statewide offices from governor to education superintendent, and they further hold 39 of 54 U.S. House seats and 75% of all legislative seats in the Assembly and State Senate. In short, the GOP has been thoroughly marginalized in the state that's home to one in eight Americans.

And to rub salt into the wound, voters there also approved Proposition 30 by an 8-point margin, which effectively raises income taxes on income above $250,000 and increases the state sales tax by a quarter-point to shore up funding for public schools.

(To top it all off, San Diego residents also elected a Democratic mayor for the first time in nearly four decades.)

With all due respect to my Atlantic Seaboard-centric friends and members of the Beltway media, I'm sorry, but this is news.

I ran a 1:34 half marathon in college and could turn in a sub-6 without problem during a 10K (not anymore). Broadwell ran a 1:36 half marathon last year. So I'll retract and say yes she probably (and likely) can turn in a single 6 minute mile in the midst of a five mile run. (whether Petraeus could keep up with her I have no idea)

One of the clearer explorations of the political motivations and questions. I think BTD said this morning that the 'un-named FBI employee' that told Cantor about the investigation was the very FBI employee that Kelley brought her concerns to at the beginning. I think it seems likely that Cantor's aim in contacting Mueller was to make sure Mueller knew that the pols knew about the investigation, and thus it was bound to become public.

Jeff Smith ‏@TVsJeffSmith

FBI confirms to @WSOC_TV they're inside the house, but won't say why. I'm seeing 6 agents with cameras and lots of boxes. link