What's your point, oh gifted one?
In my book, negotiation is part of the compromise process. Political compromise is the settlement of differences reached by mutual concessions and blending qualities of two different things. A person that is not open to any type of tax cuts, isn't open to compromise either. Example. Bush wanted a $1.6 trillion tax cut and the Democrats wanted a $900 billion tax cut. The two sides compromised and decided on a $1.35 trillion tax cut.
Political compromise is the settlement of differences reached by mutual concessions and blending qualities of two different things.
Again, I'm forced to use my business experience. In any deal I've ever negotiated I've expected to compromise, but there were boundaries...in this case civil law, and there was the minimum I would accept.
It seems to me that CFR breached the boundaries (the Constitution), but must have given W the minimum he would accept. While I can't imagine what this was, I'll agree to it.
The idea of negotiating myself into a position that favors the other side in return for future concessions is something I've never done. Agreeing to something that is against the law is also something I couldn't do.