Sports analogies are great. Their simplicity often allows you to re-examine situations to reveal alternate possibilities.

After President Obama announced the back room deal with Senator Mitch McConnell to extend the Bush Tax cuts I was ready to peel the Obama sticker off my car. I was outraged. How could any Democrat president compromise with the slimy, self-centered GOP? With three weeks to go before the December 31st tax expiration his deal was referred by one congressman as “punting on third down.” The subsequent uproar across the country has been aimed at the president. Why did he betray us?

Well, McConnell had been very clear all along what game the GOP is playing – nothing gets past until the Bush tax cuts are extended. If the game clock was to run out and the tax cuts expired the GOP would’ve nailed the Dems in 2012 for raising taxes during a recession. With the senate’s 60 vote filibuster rule nothing was going to happen and the clock running out favored the GOP.

So, using the football analogy let’s cast the president as the head coach, the house as the defensive team and the senate is the offensive squad and maybe we will see plausible logic for what the president did.

There are two good reasons to punt on third down. One is to surprise the other team and with hopes to recover a fumble in their territory. The other reason is when the coach has no confidence in the quarterback’s ability to gain yardage on the upcoming 3rd down. So, to save yardage, he decides it’s better to punt on 3rd down.

At the Saturday session (12/4) Harry Reid was only able to raise 53 votes toward getting the tax cuts extended for those making under $250,000. The ball was not being moved and the game clock is running out. BTW, 53 votes is the same number that Judge Clarence Thomas was confirmed back when it only took a simple majority to make something happen.

It’s clear to me now that Obama had lost confidence that Harry Read would ever get a first down and so he “punted” while there was till time on the clock. If he hadn’t acted and agreed to a “framework” the senate wouldn’t run out the clock and unemployment insurance would stop for millions. Why would the GOP flinch? They had the Dems in a bind of their own making. Harry Reid and the Democratic majority could’ve changed the 60 vote rule in 2009 but he didn’t. It was a huge fumble.

Having to get 60 votes to get a bill passed is like agreeing to start your offense on the 10 yard line while the other team gets to start on your 40. The absurdity of Reid counting on Joe Lieberman as his 60th vote has proven time and time again that the senate needs a new quarterback.

Once the “deal with the devils” was announced Obama was criticized for chastising the Dems and not the GOP who have been holding the unemployed hostage. When his team is not scoring points the coach yells at his team not the opposition. The congressmen in the house and Dems across the country ought to be screaming at Harry Reid and the Democrat Party not the president.

Obama probably made the most difficult decision of his presidency but I believe he did it to save the unemployed from deeper economic distress and give them hope for a better future.

So, while it is terrible economic policy to give the rich tax breaks it’s even worse not to provide unemployment benefits to those unfortunate to have lost their livelihood. The economic stimulus and social justice benefits may outweigh the short-term costs.

Let’s hope so. And let’s hope the senate gets a new quarterback or at least a new play book.