David Frum, of all people, gets this right (h/t Digby):
To the uninstructed eye, however, it looks like Obama has set up yet another lopsided bargaining table: He needs the Republicans to give him something, anything, that he can claim as a victory. ... [But] if they give him something, anything, it will be represented as a defeat. The president’s own weakness has had this perverse effect on his political opponents: it has reduced the value of his own concessions (no matter how big) and hugely exaggerated the significance of any offset he achieves (no matter how small).Digby ominously (and also correctly) adds:
I've written before that I think Boehner wants to let his Tea Partiers run free, so I suspect everyone will play this out until the very end and then Obama will get his symbolic face saving concession. The majority that votes through these massive, painful spending cuts in the House will likely be composed of far more Democrats than Republicans. It may take all of them. Isn't that special? [Emphasis hers]Obama's need to concede is much discussed. Frank Rich chalks it up to this: "He falls hard for the best and the brightest white guys." I'm not so sure. Ken Silverstein has Obama's number in 2006, long before "hope and change," in an article called Barack Obama, Inc. Maybe he's just doing it because he wants to.
GP
