To arms! To arms! Fractures in the caucus!

From Newsweek/Daily Beast's Daniel Stone I enjoyed this tidal melodrama, which however was washing out even as it was washing in:

There already are some fractures in the Democratic caucus, which suggest Obama’s announcement Monday won’t be his final position on the issue [my emphasis]....

White House officials would not say just how flexible Obama is on the issue, but a source with knowledge of the discussions over tax cut policy admits that the president will negotiate on the matter.

Which is like advertising your car for "$1,000, or best offer." Now, the hapless car-owner may not realize that he has already and most assuredly kissed a thousand dollars goodbye, but I can guarantee you the president knows that his quarter-million threshold is as shaky as Foster Brooks in the morning.

Indeed, there is no fracture, never was a fracture, not even a bruise. The rapidity with which Democratic congressional leaders countered with a million easily betrayed the party's prearranged, orchestrated compromise.

But damn, how those five words thrilled: fractures in the Democratic caucus. It's a phrase prekeyed into most journalists' pads, and generally its meaning is even worse than it sounds. This time, though, well, it was a bit watery.

Comments

[Robert Lipscomb]

I will go you one better. Three-and-a-half years in, Obama has a pretty good handle on the cowardice of the Democrats in congress and the senate. They might have posed a problem for him when he needed their help to do something, but they pose no real problem when he is trying to kill something, such as the Bush tax cuts.

Once the cuts are killed, he will only need their help to create something they already desperately need. Then he is in position to kill what congress does unless it conforms to his wishes.