Well, that didn't take long.
Less than 24 hours after Lawrence O'Donnell twice proclaimed Obama's 11-dimensional genius for checkmating Mitch McConnell in a "clean bill" corner, we get a spate of news stories that confirms what I suspected — that the Dems may turn the McConnell window of opportunity into a door to Reagan dreams.
In plain words, Obama doesn't want a clean bill after all; he wants his original, safety-net-shredding offer.
Here's Ezra Klein in the Wash Post (h/t Glenn Greenwald; my emphasis):
In my Bloomberg column today, I argue that the Obama administration is much more intent on reaching a deficit deal, and much less intent on making revenues a major part of it, than is commonly assumed. That’s led them to offer Republicans a deal that is not only much farther to the right than anyone had predicted, but also much farther to the right than most realize. In addition to the rise in the Medicare eligibility age and the cuts to Social Security and the minimal amount of revenues, it’d cut discretionary spending by $1.2 trillion, which is an absolutely massive attack on that category of spending.That's the fact, and Klein is good on the facts. The rest of the article deals with Klein's view of their reasoning. Feel free to read; but agree or disagree with the reasoning, for Klein the facts above are not in dispute. This is what Obama wants.
This deal isn’t just a last-ditch effort to save the economy from the damage of a federal default. The White House would far prefer this deal to the McConnell plan, which would lift the debt ceiling without making any cuts at all.
Paul Krugman sees this as well (emphasis in original):
What Obama has offered — and Republicans have refused to accept — is a deal in which less than 20 percent of the deficit reduction comes from new revenues. This puts him slightly to the right of the average Republican voter.The chart in that short post is especially telling. It shows how Republicans, Indies, and Dems would balance Tax Increases and Spending Cuts. The most conservative group (Repubs, natch) want 26% tax increases. Obama wants 20%.
So we learn two things. First, Obama is extraordinarily eager to make concessions. Second, Republicans are incredibly unwilling to take yes for an answer — something for which progressives should be grateful.
About that chess game — if you look behind you and the 11-dimensional genius isn't back there, whispering great strategy into your shell-like ear, he's the guy across the board taking your pieces.
Occam's Switchblade: He's not weak, but strong; his apparent goals are his real goals; he's usually successful; and he does what he does because he wants to.
UPDATE: Digby piles on:
So basically they really are still counting on Morning in America to magically appear in time and think that massively cutting government will ruin the Republicans' plans to complain. (Maybe that explains the Reagan comment yesterday.)Indeed.
GP
