Was it just the (R) after his name?  If so, Obama just needs to find where the Generic Republican Store is located.

It's so hard to pin down what it is that matters to Obama; I am convinced that he is more concerned with process than he is with principle, which is why pragmatism appeals to him: it helps the process.  It also has a way of undermining principle, and that explains why no matter how many "wins" Obama notches into his belt, they are not likely to strengthen principle - no matter how many dimensions in which the game is played.

The guy is clearly a wimpy, clueless flake.

exactly wrongheaded IMO

wapo here

Still, the reversal should not discourage Mr. Obama from seeking bipartisan cooperation. Maybe he didn't sufficiently think through the merits of handing a key economic position to someone with a radically different philosophy. But he's right that some of the hard things he wants to accomplish can't be done without Republican help. On one such goal -- entitlement reform -- Mr. Gregg may be a better ally in the Senate than in the Cabinet. There could be redemption all around if the New Hampshire Republican, in what he says will probably be his last two years in the Senate, helps the president he says he admires put the nation on a sounder fiscal course.

Party first. Country always always last. Welcome to today's Republicans.

Staffer F. Re: Judd Gregg dropping out, a contact suggests this connection to the Abramoff probe and staffer "F" in the Abramoff indictment are more decisive explainer:

A former top staff member to Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who is President Obama's choice to be commerce secretary, has come under the scrutiny of federal prosecutors investigating the Jack Abramoff gifts-for-favors scandal, according to public records and sources.

Governing elites in Washington and Wall Street have devised a fiendishly clever "grand bargain" they want President Obama to embrace in the name of "fiscal responsibility." The government, they argue, having spent billions on bailing out the banks, can recover its costs by looting the Social Security system. They are also targeting Medicare and Medicaid. The pitch sounds preposterous to millions of ordinary working people anxious about their economic security and worried about their retirement years. But an impressive armada is lined up to push the idea--Washington's leading think tanks, the prestige media, tax-exempt foundations, skillful propagandists posing as economic experts and a self-righteous billionaire spending his fortune to save the nation from the elderly.

These players are promoting a tricky way to whack Social Security benefits, but to do it behind closed doors so the public cannot see what's happening or figure out which politicians to blame. The essential transaction would amount to misappropriating the trillions in Social Security taxes that workers have paid to finance their retirement benefits. This swindle is portrayed as "fiscal reform." In fact, it's the political equivalent of bait-and-switch fraud.

Defending Social Security sounds like yesterday's issue--the fight people won when they defeated George W. Bush's attempt to privatize the system in 2005. But the financial establishment has pushed it back on the table, claiming that the current crisis requires "responsible" leaders to take action. Will Obama take the bait? Surely not. The new president has been clear and consistent about Social Security, as a candidate and since his election. [Uh, must have been really subtle; guess I missed that clarion clarity. jawbone] The program's financing is basically sound, he has explained, and can be assured far into the future by making only modest adjustments.

But Obama is also playing footsie with the conservative advocates of "entitlement reform" (their euphemism for cutting benefits). The president wants the corporate establishment's support on many other important matters, and he recently promised to hold a "fiscal responsibility summit" to examine the long-term costs of entitlements. That forum could set the trap for a "bipartisan compromise" that may become difficult for Obama to resist, given the burgeoning deficit.

Atrios wrote that he would mobilize the blogosphere if Obama says he's going to "reform" SocSec. Atrios needs to be doing something right now. We can't wait for Obama to be compromised by some awful compromise.