Everyone knows Good Cop, Bad Cop.
You have gruff and uncompromising on one side, and then someone else shows up sweet as pie. The goal is to get something you want that they do not want to give up.
So is Mr. Obama’s compromise on stopping a tax increase part of the good cop bad-cop formula?
The House had already voted on their version of ‘compromise’ legislation, which is to raise taxes on anyone making more than 200K to 250K/year. On the other side we have Harry Reid, who has wanted to hog tie something similar to anything he thinks he can get Republicans to vote for, responding to Mr. Obama’s apparent reconciliation with a cold “we’ll have to take a look at that” attitude. Between these two slices of bad cop is the anointed one, announcing his willingness to sign on to the Republican plan to avoid any tax increase at all.
But is this a legitimate move or just theater? Is Mr. Obama seeking political capital knowing his own party will not force him to sign such a measure; betting that his public capitulation will soften the knees on any one of a hand-full of RINO’s who are more inclined to raise taxes than stand firm on principle?
Obama has never before demonstrated a wiliness to compromise on anything. Even after November 2nd, every hint at relaxing the progressive agenda was followed up with a rebuke. We have no reason to believe any of the ideologues with which he surrounds himself is thinking outside the progressive box; it has to be about revenue, and more of it. So what is the real game?
My guess would be that Reid will stop the tax hikes but only if he gets something in return. He has an amnesty bill, a pro union bill, Don’t Ask Don’t tell, and a raft of other wish list items he would love to have wrapped up and under Mr. Obama’s "Holiday" Tree before the Lame Duck dies. If he can just tie a bill to stop tax hikes to something else and the Republican’s balk, he can then blame them for failing to pass a fix while Obama washes his hands of the failure; “I was ready to sign it,” he’ll say, "but those obstructionist Republicans would not play ball with me.”
Obama can nothen paint himself as the better man, the media gets to charge up the echo chamber, and the democrats running in 2012 get campaign material before their majority leaves The Hill.
Meanwhile, the Republicans who stood on principle—as directed by the electorate—get stuck explaining themselves to livid talking heads and maybe a few voters until the New Year, after which (I suspect) we’ll find Obama can decide which way he’d like to go, though I doubt he’ll have to wait until then.
Reid will drag this down to the wire. He’ll use the calendar for as long as he can, and in the end we will find a Snowe or a Collins cracking under the weight of January 1st. The Obama ‘compromise’ rhetoric will be more than they can handle. The tax hikes will be stopped at the last possible moment, followed by another piece of theater portraying Obama the merciful. But what will we have to give up to the gangster-progressives so Obama can paint himself a new halo heading into the 2012 election cycle and who will be the weak link that cracks?
