Legal Commentary

The Relationship Between The Post Partisan Unity Schtick And The "Centrist Pose"

By Big Tent Democrat

Commenting on Atrios' point on the false idea of "centrism," Krugman writes:

[C]entrism is a pose rather than a philosophy. And to support that pose, the centrists are demanding $100 billion in cuts in the economic stimulus plan — not because they have any coherent argument saying that the plan is $100 billion too big, not because they can identify $100 billion of stuff that should not be done, but in order to be able to say that they forced Obama to move to the center.

As a self admitted Centrist poseur, this is what shocks me - that anyone thinks of "centrism" as anything but a pose. But then "post-partisanship" is just a schtick. But it harms policy if the person doing the schtick does not realize it. Now Obama is saying ALL the right things, and I am happy for it, but is the damage already done? Krugman asks:

[S]houldn’t Obama have made a much bigger plan, say $1.3 trillion, his opening gambit? If he had, he could have conceded to the centrists by cutting it to $1.2 trillion, and still have had a plan with a good chance of really controlling this slump. Instead he made preemptive concessions, only to find the centrists demanding another pound of flesh as proof of their centrist power.

Krugman calls the question obvious. I think he knows the answer is obvious as well. Of course. Oh by the way, for those who want to be the progressive flank of the Democratic Party - the answer is obvious on how they should interact with Obama - demand MORE Progressivism. Always. Let him move to the "center" off of progressives, not be forced to the right by the likes of Collins and Nelson.

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on February 06, 2009 (boomark / email).