And in the political analysis, there is only one player who came out of this with everything he wanted: Barack Obama.

Obama wasn’t trying to advance a policy objective. Not even once did he let the articulation of such a thing pass his lips. Rather he had two specific objectives that he had to get at all costs:

1) To get Republicans to propose specific spending cuts that Democrats can use against them in the coming elections, while not making any such proposals himself; and
2) To silence the fiscal debate until after his election in 2012.

The president won on both counts. Everything else that was at stake in the negotiation was a nice-to-have for him, not a need-to-have.
.
.
.
The downside for conservatives is clear: We’ve lost our last chance for a meaningful discussion on fiscal reform, until there’s another financial or economic crisis.

And in the political analysis, there is only one player who came out of this with everything he wanted: Barack Obama.

Obama wasn’t trying to advance a policy objective. Not even once did he let the articulation of such a thing pass his lips. Rather he had two specific objectives that he had to get at all costs:

1) To get Republicans to propose specific spending cuts that Democrats can use against them in the coming elections, while not making any such proposals himself; and
2) To silence the fiscal debate until after his election in 2012.

The president won on both counts. Everything else that was at stake in the negotiation was a nice-to-have for him, not a need-to-have.
.
.
.
The downside for conservatives is clear: We’ve lost our last chance for a meaningful discussion on fiscal reform, until there’s another financial or economic crisis.