Now here's a not unfamiliar lede:
The budget scoreboard so far: Republicans 1, Democrats 0.
Democrats threw in the towel Friday, just two days after delivering a chest-thumping rejection of the GOP plan to ...
Etc., etc., and so on. You know the story, the pattern, the altogether recognizable disgust in the pit of your sickened stomach.
True, there is (possibly) a strategic upside to this seeming abomination of a cave-ation: "Senior Senate aides say that by averting a shutdown over the short-term bill, Democrats have positioned themselves as responsible stewards of government spending, which will help them when the two sides grapple with the longer-term budget and raising the statutory limit on the national debt."
But the appearance is grim. Quite grim. "What’s the use of a hard line," asked one Democratic aide, "if you’re going to back off it in two minutes? These guys are the worst at playing chicken that I’ve ever seen."
Which reminds me of that underlying difficulty that has awaited Obama before his every turn: In their fatiguing complaints about the president's "timidity," progressive activists too often neglect that he has from the start been burdened by an essentially conservative Congress -- one that is itself decidedly timid.
"Democrats in Congress didn’t have clear backing from a White House anxious to avoid the political risk of a shutdown," writes Politico's Jonathan Allen -- although "economic," not "political" risk, would have been more accurate -- "and they faced serious pushback from some of the 23 Senate Democrats up for reelection in 2012."
Just as they, and the president, faced serious pushback from Senate Democrats up for reelection in 2010.
Obama's is not timidity; it is, rather, an intelligent balancing of progressive desires with conservative realities.
I believe the reporting on that is backwards. As I understand it, the 2 week deal is essentially a pro-rated version of *Obama's* budget plan. In other words, it was the Republicans who backed down.
Posted by: Chris Andersen | February 28, 2011 at 02:03 PM
I agree with Chris Andersen ... that Politico headline should read: "Republican Spin" rather than "Republican Win". The idea that this was a "win" for the Republicans is just baloney!
Posted by: Ansel M | February 28, 2011 at 03:02 PM
Why am I not surprised when the media spins this in the Republicans' favor?
And of course look for the PL to start screaming how Obama's sold us out, how he's a failure, how we should primary him in 2012, and etc., etc., etc....
Posted by: Marc McKenzie | February 28, 2011 at 06:39 PM
Yes, McKenzie, it's always the Professional Left's fault. When will the Professional Left be good Democrats and not reflexively attack other Democrats? You know, like the way you never reflexively attack other Democrats, oh...wait. Tell me, when will you stop screaming how the "PL" has sold Obama out, how they're a failure, etc.,etc.,etc....? Bor-ing.
Posted by: wtf | February 28, 2011 at 08:18 PM
@wtf: It's simple--I'll stop griping when THEY stop griping and actually focus on the Republicans.
I'm all for honest criticism of this President, and hell, he is for it as well. But as PM has pointed out numerous times, the PL does not give a s&@t about actually focusing their criticism on the Repubs and keeps flinging the mess at the one guy who is trying to fix the mess left behind by his predecessor.
That's why I complain about them--and no, it isn't all the PL's fault, but they don't help matters by whining about Obama and saying the nonsense they did in 2010 ("We're sitting this one out!!) or threatening to primary Obama in 2012 or putting out the same old doggerel about "They're all the same."
EOL
Posted by: Marc McKenzie | February 28, 2011 at 08:47 PM
Hmm, McKenzie, Obama's not THAT into honest criticism: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/02/25/whistleblowers
I understand he wants to look ahead, not backward. No criminal investigation of war crimes or Wall Street. That is the pragmatic thing to do, right? Except when it's looking back at whistleblowers. No problem investigating those "crimes." Those people need to go to prison. (The GOP must be forcing him, right?)
And please, before you start on about how investigations of the organized crime of Wall Street is not politically feasible, please remember Obama himself told the bankers his administration was "the only one thing between you and the pitchforks." He knowingly protected them from a just retribution.
Posted by: wtf | February 28, 2011 at 09:37 PM