Yesterday, Axelrod seemed to concede to HuffPo that Dems would probably not be able to extend the middle class cuts permanently and would have to extend both temporarily, because it's the only way of ensuring that the middle class cuts don't expire. "We have to deal with the world as we find it," Axelrod said. "The world of what it takes to get this done."
In subsequently statements, Axelrod and White House comm director Dan Pfeiffer strongly denied that this amounted to giving in, adamantly asserted that the White House position had not changed, and repeated the call for a middle class tax cut extension.
But neither Axelrod's statement nor Pfeiffer's statement reiterated Obama's call for making the middle class cuts permanent, a demand that has been at the core of the White House's brinkmanship with Republicans. This is the crux of the issue right now -- whether the White House will stick with that goal, or not.
The key word is "permanent". The President's position is that since he's giving up the permanance of the Middle Class Tax Cuts, and the Republicans are also giving up permanance of their Tax Cuts for the rich, a compromise has been achieved.
In the real world, we call this punting.
I'd still veto the whole thing. Why participate in the GOP's fiscal fraudulence?
As much as I love the President, I gotta say, he seems to always want to keep his powder dry for a later fight that never happens because he's still working to keep his powder dry.
Anyway, this Greg Sargent piece meets my standard of good reporting. I learned something I didn't know before. Thus, news is produced. (You can learn something from this, Huffington Post).
