With Republicans training their cross-hairs on Obama in preparation for 2012, it's doubtful the president will be able to engender Republican cooperation with his agenda, no matter how nicely he asks. And even if he were to get cooperation, the sides are on such totally different sides that it's unlikely they'd be able to hammer out a deal. What Obama wants is the appearance of reaching out to Republicans, so that when they refuse he can jam his way through and tell the independent voters "hey, I tried!". He did the same thing with ObamaCare during that phony "healthcare summit" in March of 2010. A line from the TV show "King of Queens" comes to mind..."Me and my wife know all about compromise. Like that time she wanted to get a cat, and I didn't want to get a cat, so we compromised and got a cat." But really, with all the spending that's happened already, the winner of this particular battle is small potatoes in the bigger picture. The bigger picture is 2012, and Obama's rhetoric tomorrow should be a foretaste of how he portrays himself during the campaign. If it is, I think the bipartisan distrust of government is the best chance to make him a one-term president. Namely, Ron Paul. I don't think people's disgust with the policies of this administration are equaled by a love of the Republican alternatives. It's only been 3 years since Bush had even lower poll numbers than Obama does now, and peoples memories aren't that short. I really think the "change" and "break from the Washington status quo" rhetoric that Obama used so effectively last election would still reverberate with voters if only they had a candidate they actually believed represented that change. Namely, Ron Paul. Have I made my point clear?