In my view, Obama could satisfy is need for bipartisan outreach without setting himself up.  He could, for example, suggested the the Republicans come to him with their suggestions.  Instead, he went to them.  He could have suggested that he was open to their ideas, but at the same time, he needs to make it known that it is him that they need to convince, since the bill will pass no matter what with the majorities that he has.  Put the onus on the Republicans.  If they don't get something in the bill that they wanted, then they fail.

There will be no change without changing the village. They live in an alternate universe in which no matter what the election returns say, conservative policies are always preferred and liberals are the reason for the country's problems. This is what "post-partisanship" means in practice. The majority of people may want something different, but the conservatives don't and they still rule the political establishment, if only out of habit and by default. The only question is how long the Obama administration will persist in believing that they should appease the villagers rather than taking their case directly to the American people.

1. They get the Tax Cuts extended and
   
2. When things go badly, they get to claim that they were the minority and virtually powerless. It's the Democrats with the majority in BOTH houses and the Presidency who are to blame.
   

I'm beginning to fear he doesn't have any passion because he doesn't have any clear ideas, vision or commitment.

He told the House Republicans that he "didn't have any pride of authorship" in terms of the bill. Why not? Does he or doesn't he believe in the policies contained in the bill?

i think it's pretty clear that Obama is trying to do two things with, as you put it, his schtick.

First, it's obvius that he wants to illustrate to the public the Republican tendency to sacrifice (historically failed) principle for good government.  Argue all you want about the merits of the bill, what the public sees is concilatory behavior by a President that really doesn't have to be conciliatory.  So, he's betting that the Republicans are going to be perceived as uncompromising and also as a party that simply can't admit that their economic views have been rejected by the elecorate.  

That has the potential, assuming the bill is in any way effective, to strengthen the impression of Obama as an honest broker who's willing to listen, even when the other side isn't.

Second, he's delivered on a promise to be inclusive.  That's what the public sees.  Sure, he's excepted himself in some cases from his own promises, but on this, the big one, he's followed up.  the public sees him doing this, and then they see the Republicans engaging in the same rhetoric that we've heard for years.  who wins that PR battle.

I think that Obama is looking for this situation to pay forward in terms of credibility and public approval.  He's controlling the message, despite the media's fawining over Republican obstructionists.  He's the one that looks good...the Republicans look like ostriches.

"Sure, Obama doesn't need Republican votes, but he still wants them. He doesn't want his recovery plan to be seen as partisan. Meanwhile, Republicans don't want to be seen as complicit in a policy that violates their basic principles."

LINK

I say he should forget the Post-Partisan(bull)ship and push through everything that can help our nation get back on its feet, and let the GOP vote against it every time. It just gives the campaign commercials easy targets, and puts us back on track.

The Senate GOP are already feeling some heat to moderate. Move On and another liberal group are going public with ads featuring Rush saying ''I hope he fails'' juxtaposed with a banner asking ''do you agree with Rush?''...yea, like americans want the economy under Obama to fail..