Whether you're avidly pro-deal or vehemently anti-deal, one universality applies: The House's unfolding shenanigans today, and perhaps into tomorrow, are sure to be fascinating.
On the one hand, President Obama's luck may hold, in that House Republicans may yet be able to recognize an enduring political gift when they're handed one. This is what GOP Rep. Tom Cole so correctly meant earlier today when he said on MSNBC that his party, once but only if this fiscal deal is in the bag, will be "infinitely stronger." Perversely, it's the deal's better angel--the lack of spending cuts--that will justify the GOP's continuing pestilence, once they begin re-whooping and re-hollering about the dreaded debt ceiling.
On the other hand, Obama's luck may collapse. House Republicans might wipe their brows and pocket their gains and thank their lucky stars that the oxygen masks dropped. They can appreciate that yet another tomorrow is happily secure. The righteous battering they would have taken over again defending the $250,000+ crowd and obstructing unemployment benefits and child tax credits, etc., etc., might well have interfered with and even lethally overshadowed their coming, melodramatic debt-ceiling hysteria. If they pass this bill, however, that righteous battering--that softening up, in effect--will convert to a big wet kiss.
Either way, today is going to be a fascinating ride.
No. It was lucky for Mark Sanford when Michael Jackson died and took the attention off Sanford's extra-marital trail walking.
Obama's "luck" falls into the category of 'the harder I work, the luckier I get."
Posted by: Beauzeaux | January 01, 2013 at 01:11 PM
Or with the most toxic term of the artificially created fiscal cliff removed, the middle class tax increase, the administration will be in an enviable state. The rest of that artificial cliff isn't all that troubling.. Doesn't defense spending need to be cut? Isn't that one of the reasons the US is unable to properly finance social programs that other industrialized countries with less per capita GDP do better? The debt ceiling debate is going to bite the Republicans in the ass. They think that will give them the leverage to force the Democrats to do their dirty work by damaging social programs that have taken years to build. But I can see no compelling reason why the Administration shouldn't just say no. Let the Republicans put forward a bill to to that if they dare. Let them argue that necessity of killing Medicare to save it, while at the same time proposing endless increases to defense spending. If I were the president I would just say no. I would say you don't save the navy by sinking half of it.
Posted by: Peter G | January 01, 2013 at 02:35 PM
Ah twas to good to be true. But you are certainly right about it being fascinating. Damn! What next?
Posted by: Peter G | January 01, 2013 at 05:27 PM
I am neither avidly pro-deal or vehemently anti-deal. From what I have seen of it, it sounds pretty good for our side.
But what I am vehemently against is this "all or nothing" approach to political analysis. The idea that "avidly pro-deal" and "vehemently anti-deal" are the only allowed positions is just insulting and useless as commentary.
Posted by: Chris Andersen | January 01, 2013 at 10:58 PM
Our created system of government was/is a system to give voice to people of unchanging opposing viewpoints who eventually have to reach some middle ground called "compromise" no matter how long it takes, without killing each other in the process. Thus, our government operates in the realm of the possible, not the probable, not the preferable, and certainly not the perfect. The deal is OK, for today. And, there is always tomorrow.
Posted by: BobH | January 02, 2013 at 12:20 AM