Krugman slams centrists

[Marzupialis]

Centrists go around pretending that there are two extremist parties in the USA; but today Paul Krugman points out that a Centrist group that offered an alternative to both parties (called "Americans Elect) was a big FAIL. Krugman adds that there is already a centrist party: the Democratic Party:

PAUL KRUGMAN, 5-14-12: So why Americans Elect? Because there exists in America a small class of professional centrists, whose stock in trade is denouncing the extremists in both parties and calling for a middle ground. And this class cannot, as a professional matter, admit that there already is a centrist party in America, the Democrats — that the extremism they decry is all coming from one side of the political fence. Because if they admitted that, they’d just be moderate Democrats, with no holier-than-thou pedestal to stand on.

Americans Elect was created to appeal to this class of professional centrists — which meant that it was doomed to go nowhere. Because outside that class, the large number of people who believe in all the good stuff the centrists claim to favor are, you know, going to vote for Obama. The large number of people who don’t believe in any of that are going to vote for Romney. All AE could ever have been was a distraction; and it turns out not to have managed even that.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/thing-falls-apart/

[Liberal_in_LA]

1. kick

[bvar22]

2. Krugman naills it,

....and it is getting worse:

*Paul Wellstone... KIA

*Howard Dean.... discredited, marginalized, banished

*Cynthia McKinney..... attacked, isolated, marginalized, cut off from Party support, expelled

*Eliot Spitzer...... Honey Trapped, discredited, isolated, expelled

*Anthony Wiener..... marginalized, discredited, isolated, expelled

*Russ Feingold.... attacked from The Center, marginalized, isolated from party support, exiled

*Alan Grayson .... attacked from The Center, marginalized, isolated from party support, exiled

*Dennis Kucinich ... attacked from The Center, discredited, marginalized, isolated, redistricted, exiled

*John Edwards.... expelled and demonized for weakness in his personal life that regularly goes unpunished for others

*Dan Rather... set up and bitch slapped by the Conservative Media over a minor offense, and left hanging

The downfall of some of the above can be partially attributed to their own personal foibles,
but in every case, the party leadership was quick to condemn and abandon, and made no effort to embrace or assist any of these Liberals in their time of need. There ARE politicians in BOTH parties guilty of far more serious transgressions who managed to survive their troubles because of Party support.

*Maxine Waters... currently under attack

*The Congressional Black Caucus..... admonished by the President to quit whining, "Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes" and get behind the President's agenda.
(When has he EVER spoken to the "Blue Dogs" like that?)
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-tells-blacks-stop-complainin-fight-015928905.html

*The Progressive Caucus.... no seats in the cabinet, almost none appointed to positions of any power in the Executive Branch, the White House doesn't take their calls.



*Democratic Primaries 2010.... Strong pattern of endorsing and supporting Blue Dogs and Big Business Conservatives,
even including one "former" Republican running against more Liberal, Pro-Working Class challengers.
(See: Arkansas, Pennsylvania and others)

The pattern is clear.


---bvar22
A mainstream/Center loyal FDR/LBJ Working Class DEMOCRAT,
now relegated to the "Fringe Left" wing of the "New Democrat" Centrist Party.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

6. Indeed, the pattern is CRYSTAL clear --

The DLC/Rahm wing dream of creating a permanent centrist Party has all but been achieved.

[Dont call me Shirley]

7. Van Jones, Shirley Sherrod, exiled.

[bvar22]

9. Thanks.

Two more to add to The List,
in addition to ACORN.

[Yavin4]

8. To Further Prove Your Point

Newt Gingrich, adulterer, was very close to winning the 2012 Republican nomination for president.

[hifiguy]

14. I wish I could rec this post 1000 times

Thank you, bvar!!

[JDPriestly]

28. +10000

[tex-wyo-dem]

37. Yep...you nailed it, bvar22!

When you take down the scenery and remove the facade, in reality we have a one-party system now, and that one party answers mainly to their wealthy and corporate masters. You have, quite nicely, exhibited what happens to those on the left who decide to step out of the DLC/third-way line.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

40. Add to that the DNC's tepid support for Barrett in Wisconsin to defeat Walker

Now that it is closer to the June 5th election and the DNC has not provided requested financial support, the DNC's chair stated that they will host a fund raiser later this month (May) but "the exact date has not been set."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/15/scott-walker-recall-dnc-debbie-wasserman-schultz-fundraiser_n_1519576.html#comments

This is already May 16th.

[Blue_Tires]

52. yeah, that was the plan from the start

[LiberalLovinLug]

59. And one more ....

Paul Krugman....dismissed by The Center, marginalized, and ignored by MSM

[Number23]

65. You can take your concerned notice of the President's words to the CBC off your list

of... whatever point it is that you are trying to make.

The meme that the president "scolded" and "talked bad" to them has been brushed off by just about everyone that realizes that it was a theme started by folks that really don't give a shit about black people and just want to gin up some manufactured drama between the president and black Congresspeople.

[bvar22]

66. I will be glad to do that just as soon as you....

...post a reference to a single occasion where President Obama spoke with the Blue Dogs or "Centrist" obstructionists
in the same tone and language,
extra credit if you can find an instance during the Great Health Care Reform fiasco.

"Take off your bedroom slippers, put on your marching shoes,” President Obama said at the CBC Foundation’s annual dinner Saturday night. “Shake it off. Stop complaining, stop grumbling, stop crying.”--- President Obama to the CBC
after several members of the CBC, including Maxine Waters, had asked the President WHEN he was going to do something about Black Unemployment.

"Take off your bedroom slippers" to the CBC?
Really?

"Stop crying"?
Really?

There are STILL many people upset about this chastising.
IF this type of language had been used to "rally" the Blue Dogs to get with the program on Health care Reform (among many other issues) it would be no big deal,
....but he hasn't.

I stand by my post.


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Number23]

67. I stand by what I said too

And I'm much more content to believe the incredulous laughter of CBC members after they found out they were supposed to be outraged by what the President said to them than what some anonymous poster with an agenda said on a web site.

And yes, we know there are STILL people upset about the "chastising" and I've already correctly characterized who they are.

[bvar22]

68. I see you FAILED to respond to my challenge,

....much like the President failed to respond to the CBC challenge about when he was going to address Unemployment..


Yes. The CBC officially laughed it off.
What other option did they have?
After all, Obama is better than Mittens.

[Number23]

70. Your "challenge" has nothing to do with anything that I've said

I asked you to remove your "concern" for the CBC from your list of... whatever (I can't imagine anyone from the CBC would be happy to be on any list that makes excuses for the behavior of John Edwards and Eliot Spitzer in order to slam this president) and you responded with whatever you copied and pasted from your oft repeated list of grievances.

And for the record, this incident happened way before anyone knew that Romney would be the Repub nominee. This was before the Repub primaries even began. And Cummings et al response to the manufactured drama (again, ginned up by people who were just trying to create tension between the president and his black supporters) was laughter but also annoyance that they even had to respond to this transparent idiocy to begin with, a sentiment which I also felt at the time. The fact that you have decided to once again breathe life into this is... interesting.

[bvar22]

71. EXACTLY!!!!

"Your "challenge" has nothing to do with anything that I've said"


Surrender accepted.

[Number23]

72. lol The only "surrender" I'll ever make to you is to surrender to the knowledge

that you would tout the "virtues" of lecherous scumbags and gin up fake outrage over an incident that was dismissed as a cynical, transparent and beyond pitiful attempt to lessen the president's support amongst blacks more than 8 months ago than give this president any credit.

Here's a hint: Obama is more popular amongst blacks than any member of the CBC is among THEIR OWN CONSTITUENTS. That means that the CBC's black constituents are more supportive of this president than they are of their own black reps in Congress. So, that old "Obama talked down to the CBC" bs only holds sway with those who are trying to stir the poop, apparently completely unaware that no one is falling for it and they are only making themselves look like fools. And as said, the fact that this was dismissed more than 8 months ago and here you are still touting it and "accepting surrender" from someone who is only trying to make you aware of how transparent you look is deliciously hilarious.

[bvar22]

73. Pretending to Laughing Off failure...

...is a common but rarely successful attempt to salve the damaged ego.

You should have added one of these for emphasis:

I stand by my post,
and until YOU can produce a single occasion where the Blue Dogs, or ANY other conservative Democratic caucus or group were chastised with the same tone and language,
ALL your frantic rationalizations, diversions, pretend obtuseness, and Ad Hominems amount to nothing.

[Number23]

74. And the desire to continue to brazenly tout something

that has been written off as racially insensitive and insulting to the community that you purport to be so CONCERNED about is much more damaging and indicative of much worse than a bruised ego. Much, much worse indeed.

And my ego is not bruised in the least, but well massaged and at the peak of health. I have beautifully made my point over and over again. I knew I'd struck gold by my first post because of your sudden need to change the subject. I said you need to remove your "Obama was just terrible and mean to the CBC" from your List of... Whatever, and then you suddenly pivot and start braying about the Blue Dogs.

CLASSIC projection. CLASSIC distraction. CLASSIC "you just called me on my shit and let everyone know I don't know what I'm talking about." But if the smiley eases your pain, then you use as many as you need to.

[bvar22]

75. More Bluster and Smoke.

When you can answer the Challenge,
you WILL have a point,
but until then,
Bluster & Smoke.

9 other DUers read, understood, and agreed.
Perhaps there is something amiss with your comprehension.

[Number23]

76. LOL! When you have to resort to "nine other people agreed with me"

Last edited Fri May 18, 2012, 08:43 PM - Edit history (1)

your argument (as weak and questionable as it was to begin with) is lost. With a capital L.

My "smoke and bluster" is based on actual facts (you can look up the reactions from CBC members yourself and see how disgusted they were that white folks (and it was almost ALWAYS whites edit: with the exception of the loathsome Cornel and Tavis of course) were the ones telling them they had been "talked down to" by this president) and is backed up by a hell of a lot more than the high fives from 9 anonymous souls on the Internet. Lord, have mercy....

[bvar22]

77. The fact that 9 others "understood" the "point" of my post...

...IS relevant when ONE is pretending to NOT understand.

You:
"whatever point it is that you are trying to make."

If 9 random people understand,
and ONE claims confusion,
the PROBLEM is either poor comprehension or willful ignorance with the ONE.

I love the Congressional Black Caucus.
They are true Democratic party HEROES fighting in the trenches.
I STILL hurt for that day in 2000 when they gathered in Unity and went to the Senate to protest the stolen election in Florida,
and not a single Democratic Senator would STAND with them or even acknowledge their valid concerns.
Boy, was THAT a low point in the history of the Democratic Party.

There IS a malodorous history of the CBC having to fight their battles on their own over the last 20 years.
Conyers being relegated to a basement room to hold his Impeachment/War Crimes hearing without a single celebrity "Centrist" Democrat offering assistance or even acknowledging the battle he was fighting,
and that is only one instance.
There are others.

How many members of the CBC or the Progressive Caucus were given a position on Obama's cabinet,
or appointed to any position of authority and power on ANY White House committee or organization?

But the CBC are heroes and Democratic Party soldiers.
They WILL bide their time and bite their tongues, a survival skill learned over centuries.
They WILL put on a Public Face of Laughing it Off,
but NO intelligent human being can fail to observe the tone and language used in that Awards meeting.


You claim to offer facts, but you don't.
You offer only conjecture, opinion, and wishful thinking.

You STILL have FAILED to respond to my challenge:

"There are STILL many people upset about this chastising.
IF this type of language had been used to "rally" the Blue Dogs to get with the program on Health care Reform (among many other issues) it would be no big deal,
....but he hasn't.

<snip>
"until YOU can produce a single occasion where the Blue Dogs, or ANY other conservative Democratic caucus or group were chastised with the same tone and language,
ALL your frantic rationalizations, diversions, pretend obtuseness, and Ad Hominems amount to nothing. "

Well?

I stand by my post.






You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses, rationalizations, diversions, Logical Falacies, fantasies, wishful thinking, dodging, smoke screens, and willful ignorance.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Number23]

78. Blah blah blah

Lots of words saying nothing. "But nine people agree with something I've said that's completely wrong and utter garbage!1!!1" is not a compelling argument.

I'm sure you've got a great explanation in that post somewhere but I stopped reading after your header. Here, allow me to put you out of your misery. I'll take the words of Elijah Cummings over yours any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Maxine Waters has since her statements on the issue become once again one of the president's STAUNCHEST supporters, though she has gotten much more quiet since the bogus ethics charges against her came out.

&feature=player_embedded

I've taken the liberty of transcribing the most salient points here. Beginning at the 3:54 second mark even though this is still Al Sharpton talking, his comment has particular relevance to this conversation:

Sharpton: I don't understand why we are getting into these DISTRACTIVE FIGHTS when we've never done this to any other Democratic president. (Distraction is the perfect word for this stupidity. And the fact that you have devoted so much time, energy and effort to these meaningless, dishonest and transparent DISTRACTIONS is as I've already said -- very telling)

Cummings: Well, Rev. I'll tell ya... I SEE ALL OF THAT AS A DISTRACTION. (Emphasis again mine). I think this president has done a remarkable job, actually and the other night when he spoke before the CBC and our guests, I did not get the impression, I did not feel insulted at all. As a matter of fact, I felt that this was a leader who was standing up and who was saying you know, we've accomplished alot. And we've got alot of people in pain. But we have got to finish the job. And I'm rallying you and I'm asking you to just stick with me so that we can finish the job. And that's the impression I got.

Keep in mind, Rev, 99% of the people when I looked around GAVE HIM A STANDING OVATION after he said what he had to say. I just think it's important that we don't get distracted and forget what the alternative is regarding the Republicans.

You're welcome. A full throated show of support from Cummings who acknowledges that the president's comments were extraordinarily well received by the vast majority of people in attendance at the CBC dinner. Good enough for me. Good enough for anyone.

I know you keep clinging to your feeble challenge like a drowning man to a life boat, but the fact of the matter is this was a non-issue EIGHT MONTHS AGO and it's even more of a non-issue now. The only people keeping this going are those trying to stir some shit between the president and his black supporters and everyone knows it. Now, I know you are desperate for reasons to criticize this president but as I've said since the beginning of this now incredibly tedious conversation, you really should remove your "concern" for the CBC from your List of... Whatever point you're trying to make.

[2ndAmForComputers]

3. Anything by Krugman, I upvote first and read later.

[99Forever]

4. K&R

[Hell Hath No Fury]

5. K&R

Thank you for confirming what many of us liberals know, Mr. Krugman.

[bvar22]

10. The BIG Problem I have with "Sensible Centrists"...

...is that they agree with Republicans way too often.



"In politics the middle way is none at all."
-President John Adams


[font color=firebrick size=4][center]"The only thing in the Middle of the Road
are Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos."--Jim Hightower
[center][/center][/font]

[Salviati]

20. Yup, too often centrists are like "independents" or "libertarians"

They're really just republicans with enough good sense to be embarassed about it.

[Hatchling]

46. Too often independents seem more liberal than centrists. nt

[SemperEadem]

60. my sentiments exactly

[KG]

11. slammin' DURec.

[ProSense]

12. Oops:

Ralph Nader was pushing Americans Elect
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002364725

The death of a dubious idea
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002688367


The promoters of the organization should have been a big clue.

[mother earth]

13. If true progressive ideals were adopted and fought for, we'd ALL be democrats.

What we have in this country is the oligarchy of the corporate states of America, the best gov't money has bought, hijacked democracy of the elite.
And when they couldn't win the election, they stole it, and now we have a centrist black president and a right wing Etch-A-Sketch king to choose from so we can argue about gay rights...no disrespect to the GLBT, but there are pressing issues at stake that no one is addressing.

K & R for Krugman.

[Tarheel_Dem]

17. Did anyone not know that the president was "black"? Not sure why it was necessary to use that...

as a descriptor. Since you didn't describe Mitt Romney as a (WHITE) "right wing Etch-A-Sketch king", I wondered why you thought it necessary to introduce the president's race into this discussion. How is that relevant? And is it such a bad thing to "argue about gay rights"? We're all "evolved" enough to walk and chew gum at the same time, aren't we?

[mother earth]

27. Apologies, it's just that after two steals we were allowed the real win,

it was because they siimply could not deny that election...precisely because, IMHO, because it was a first.
And Romney is beyond white, and completely out of touch with reality, completely clueless on what it is to be middle class, much less to know poverty.

As for gay rights, of course it's long overdue, but it irks me to no end that economic
issues seem lost as a topic of discussion in the election that promises to be the most expensive on record
during a time comparable to the Great Depression.

I'm so tired of centrism that keeps us stagnating and in endless status quo.

[Tarheel_Dem]

34. "I'm so tired of centrism that keeps us stagnating and in endless status quo."

Your frustration is noted. However, my suggestion for the future would be to drop the use of race, unless you make it clear why you've opted to go that route, when trying to make a point about "centrism" of all things. I won't belabor the point, but as the reader it struck a wrong chord with me.

To your larger point re: centrism, Pres. Obama is exactly who I voted for. He ran as a moderate, despite what the resident revisionists would have you think, and he has tried his best to govern center-left. I know that pisses some people off, but there were only two choices that were acceptable to the rank-n-file in '08. It was clearly a choice between BHO & HRC. The candidates who ran to the left of them were peeled away like the skin of a tangerine, and if we're honest, although they had very devoted followings, most of the party never took their GE chances seriously.

[mother earth]

57. Look, not trying to do 2008 over, although JE was on message (unzipped tho he was, unknown to

us), the middle just results in more of the same. At this point haven't we all had enough? It's time to go full on new tactics, it's called
going left & being progressive - the last road taken & the real hope, the only and best one that's never allowed as an option. I agree with K, always have.

Europe is just saying no to austerity & nothing middle road about it, Boehner the do nothing Congress better pay attention.
Obama has the opportunity to take this & run with it, the momentum is coming his way once again. I hope he can lay his centrism aside and embrace the real base.

[Tarheel_Dem]

58. "embrace the real base."? I am the base. 4th generation Democrat here.

And what does European austerity have to do with Pres. Obama? I'm not sure what you're getting at. I think you meant to assign the blame for those austerity proposals at a target named Paul Ryan. Remember him?

I miss statesmen. Our answer to GOP extremism (Tea Party), can't be extremism of our own. I miss the Ted Kennedy's, the Lincoln Chaffee's, and others who were able to put aside their party identity for the sake of the country. I don't want us to become screaming hateful howler monkeys just to oppose teanuttery.

The best legislation normally comes from us working together, with the opposition. But if your only concern is winning at all cost, no matter the issue, then you'll always be disappointed. I know it's a dirty word now, but we used to "compromise" with one another. This ain't Venezuela.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

41. Agreed. No disrespect towards that issue, but why are all other issues now invisible?

Not one bankster in prison, although there is some recent talk about the FBI investigating events relating to a $2 billion loss.

Not one war criminal prosecuted. Not one.

Massive unemployment. On a scale that we haven't seen since the 1930's.

No renegotiation of NAFTA. Plus another "free-trade" agreement in the works.

And notwithstanding the Republican's another choice of a nutty candidate for the presidency, some polls indicate that the race may be tighter than what is should be.

[WillyT]

15. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

16. I agree AE was a joke, but let's be real PK, there are extremes on both sides. Not sure if Paul....

is decrying "centrism", or just the notion of them. Considering who he supported in '08, I find it difficult to believe that PK has had some major conversion.

[JAbuchan08]

18. Great, so if there are extremes on both sides go ahead and list them...

n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

19. Ever visited wsws? I mean, really. Hell, I think Greens can be extreme, but then I'm a Democrat.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. But they are in parties that call themselves to the left of the Democrats

The right wing extremists are all in the Republican party. They have a huge say in its direction, too - look at Paul Ryan's pisspoor excuse for a budget, or all the crap that happened in the Republican primaries.

There are no equivalents in the Democratic party.

[Tarheel_Dem]

24. Come on muriel, you & I both know that we all get lumped in as "the left". I guess my point is.....

that the Tea Party is a party within the Republican Party. There are Greens, Socialists, LaRouchies, the newly founded Justice Party, and various and sundry anarchist wannabe's that get lumped in with the Democratic Party. And while they certainly don't have the same influence of the Tea Party, they do exist.

[muriel_volestrangler]

30. I think you're completely wrong

Bernie Sanders may get lumped in with the Democrats; but, no, those beyond don't (and Sanders is not extreme). Yes, those other parties (as opposed to the tea partiers inside the Republican party) do exist, but they are tiny, as is their influence.

Exit poll data from voters in the Florida primary Tuesday shows support for the Tea Party is strong here, as it was in South Carolina.

About two-thirds of primary voters in Florida say they support the Tea Party, and nearly 4 in 10 say they strongly support the Tea Party. About half of primary voters in New Hampshire were Tea Party supporters, according to a report on the New York Times web site on the exit poll information.

According to the Times, the data also found:

“Florida’s primary voters are somewhat more conservative than in 2008, but are more moderate than Iowa and South Carolina.

http://htpolitics.com/2012/01/31/exit-poll-data-shows-strong-tea-party-support-among-voters/

There has never been anything remotely like that level of support for the Green etc. Party policies in Democratic voters.

[Tarheel_Dem]

33. Okay, I never said they were "influential", I merely observed that they do exist.

Look no further than FDL; wsws; the loyal followers of Ralph Nader, et al. I know exactly what you're trying to convey, however, I'm having a problem with Krugman's newfound uber liberalism, given that he supported Hillary in '08. You know, Hillary Clinton? DLC Member? If that's not "centrist", I don't know what is.

[muriel_volestrangler]

47. He says the Democrats are centrist; he critcises the AE "centrists" with quotes

He's not saying he's an 'uber liberal'. He is slagging off Americans Elect for claiming they are "centrist", but for then ignoring that Democrats like Obama, and, I'd say, Clinton, are already centrists, and then claiming that a new party or movement is needed for centrists (and for which the person suspected of being the preferred candidate of the money-backers was an enthusiastic privatiser of Social Security, which doesn't look centrist at all).

Don't assume that, because Krugman calls Democrats centrist, he means it as an insult, or that he must therefore be 'uber liberal'.

[Luminous Animal]

31. The Tea Party is not an actual party thus, unless they run for a non-partisan office, they MUST run

as a Republican or Libertarian or any other official party recognized by localities or states.

Green Party members run their own candidates because it is an organized political party that follows the rules and registers as a distinct political party in order to run for office under the Green Party Banner.

[JAbuchan08]

64. But the "centrists" are not reacting to wsws, they're reacting to Obama

who is a centrist reacting to such wild eyed radicals as believe the Bush tax cuts should not have been extended and things of that nature.

[Egalitarian Thug]

26. False equivalency.

"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"

[me b zola]

21. K&R

[Jamaal510]

23. This is just my opinion, but on a political spectrum

I see right-wing politics as fascism, and centrist politics as fascism-lite. Conservatives want policies that pamper the 1% and policies that bring us back to the gilded era (where minorities and women had less power), and centrists sometimes support those type of policies.

Political experts and pundits like to talk about there being "two extremes", but I never got what was so extreme about left-wing politics. Liberals are the ones who want gays to have the right to get married, people to stop being thrown in jail over marijuana, a stronger safety net for the working class, liberals want clean air and water, they want to preserve women's right to birth control and abortions, no money in politics, and the 1% to pay more taxes so tax rates will be fair.

[xchrom]

25. I have a particular loathing for dem centrists.

Honestly - they need to be republicans by affiliation - do to Haley Barbour what they did to Spitzer and the rest in 'the List'.

Until the democratic party deals w/ crap centrists dish out - there can be no political solutions. Just the same old 'fail upwards' approach.

Centrists gave us bank bail outs, 2 failed wars, etc.

[tex-wyo-dem]

39. Exactly!

Our "two-party system" relies on balance to work properly for the majority, but when one party is centrist (or more acurately, right-leaning centrist) and the other is batshit crazy fascist right, there is no balance. The left oposition party should be, well, true left in order for any assemlence of balance.

But the current situation is all by design to slant the playing field wildly in favor of the wealthy elite. In reality, elections have much less consequence for them (the 1%) than they should. You might call it a win-win for them.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

42. Bail-outs. Failed wars. True. But they are not finished yet.

How soon for the next massive bail out? How soon before a confrontation with Iran?

[raouldukelives]

53. Amen to that. nt

[bullwinkle428]

29. K&R. Democratic centrists apparently feel the recall fight

in Wisconsin isn't worth pursuing.

[eridani]

32. He forgot to mention shilling for online voting? n/t

[Bonobo]

35. The powers that be already have the upper hand.

Either Dems represent the better angels of our nature by fighting for and making a case for a more ideal system of fairness and equality or they can go fuck off.

Same for all the centrists here and elsewhere.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. If only Krugman had the intellectual horsepower of Geithner or Summers

Last edited Wed May 16, 2012, 07:41 AM - Edit history (1)

then he could put on his big-boy pants and sit at the Democrat's table. He's intelligent enough, I suppose, but no standout. And he seems to have a fondness for the 99%, which is really pretty distracting.

Sincerely,

Third-Way Manny

[Dragonfli]

38. Hello Third Way Manny, I am DLC Dragonfli! (new and improved for the ultimate centrism)

It is very easy, just adopt all of the Republican Ideas from the early nineties and punch the hippies until they bleed.

It is the destiny of our party and the only way to beat other Republicans, I mean those Damn Republicans.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

43. OK. You've convinced me. I'm in.

But do we have to limit the adoption of Republican ideas to just those from the early nineties?

[Dragonfli]

44. Why no!!! Each year we get to move further right, as far as the envelop will bear

As long as we don't move too fast beyond say, a 10 year lag, to do so may alert the rubes, er frighten our less enlightened constituency.

Remember, to move forward, to move forward is mostly moving right, but into the future.

The country needs sensible policies if we are to continue to move it to the RIGHT place for prosperity (and large donations )

[AnotherMcIntosh]

45. So we're safe for 10 years before we have to adopt all the current Republican policies? Whew.

[ProSense]

48. Why is Paul Krugman Misrepresenting the Demise of a Wall Street Funded, Right Wing...

Why is Paul Krugman Misrepresenting the Demise of a Wall Street Funded, Right Wing, Entitlement-Bashing Front Group?

Paul Krugman’s partisanship has become so shameless that we are giving him the inaugural Eric Schneiderman Decoy Award for his post “Things Fall Apart“. The Schneiderman Decoy Award goes for exceptional achievement in turning one’s good name over to particularly rancid Obama Administration initiatives.

Krugman’s post didn’t merely contain some cringe-making fawning over Obama; it was egregiously incorrect on the development that prompted the post, that of the death of Americans Elect, a shadowy group that had was out to sponsor a Presidential candidate. It’s hard to believe that Krugman does not know the orientation and aims of this failed effort.

Tom Ferguson, a political scientist who is widely considered the top expert on money in American politics, called out Americans Elect in March as a group out promote a right-wing, anti-entitlement message as “centrist” (for the record, polls regularly show majority votes in favor of preserving Social Security and Medicare). He also deemed their effort to be dead on arrival:

<...>

Krugman instead, loudly, treats the centrist claims of the now-defunct Americans Elect as accurate:

<...>

Krugman has taken some brave stands in the past, but this sort of shameless distortion of facts to make a case for Obama diminishes him, and won’t resonate with anyone other than Democrat loyalists. The sooner Krugman recognizes this fact and starts taking up more worthy causes, the better.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/05/why-is-paul-krugman-misrepresenting-the-demise-of-a-wall-street-funded-right-wing-entitlement-bashing-front-group.html

Evidently, Yves Smith believes Krugman is the enemy.

There are too many people focused on creating the impression that both parties are the same, infighting and/or trying to portray Obama as evil while the Republicans and their allies are steadily implementing their agenda---at the state level, via the courts and in Congress.

Focus!

Court strikes down NLRB rule to speed up union elections
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002692110

[Comrade_McKenzie]

49. Centrists are the most useless people in politics... nt

[patrice]

50. Given: The center is SKEWED to the Right. This makes it PRIME political real-estate.

Last edited Wed May 16, 2012, 05:12 PM - Edit history (1)

Hence these phony "Centrist" fronts backed by anonymous super-pacs, like Americans Elect (which I intuitively recognized the moment I saw it) and Movement to Amend IMHO.

Anything that looks too-good-to-be-true, usually is.

There aren't a whole lot of people around with the courage, politically and otherwise, to go to "the center" and to seek authentic ground there from which to build real strength for the arduous and increasingly dangerous drive to the Left toward the AUTHENTIC CENTER.

[Alcibiades]

51. Americans Elect was a terrible idea

What's remarkable is that there are quite a few notable political scientists who have signed on to this thing, folks who themselves certainly know that the entire premise of "Americans Elect" is vapid and meaningless: if you don't like the two-party system, then you need to call for fundamental changes to our first-past-the-post voting system, rather than some silly non-binding web-based poll. If centrists are turned off, they should realize that most proportional systems do result in a party system that features a "party of the center." These parties are often as irrelevant and fickle as centrists themselves, but they do exist.

[patrice]

55. Any "third" or "center" anything that doesn't admit your basic point: "need to call for fundamental

changes to our first-past-the-post voting system", IMHO, is either naive or manipulative and that goes for a current messiah around here known as Movement to Amend.

[xtraxritical]

54. Wow, there's a ton of trolls here.

Vote a straight Democratic ballot, get rid of talabanista republiCONs and have a good life!

[Dragonfli]

56. Please retract your statement, Centrists are not trolls, they are the heart of our great party! /nt

[patrice]

61. Thank you! for how you framed this critique.

[Dragonfli]

62. .

[on point]

63. NAILED IT! As usual...

[bvar22]

69. Where is "The Center"?

Here is what the MAJORITY of Americans (Democrats AND Republicans) want from OUR government!

In recent polls (2005!!!) by the Pew Research Group, the Opinion Research Corporation, the Wall Street Journal, and CBS News, the American majority has made clear how it feels. Look at how the majority feels about some of the issues that you'd think would be gospel to a real Democratic Party:

[font size=3]1. 65 percent (of ALL Americans, Democrats AND Republicans) say the government should guarantee health insurance for everyone -- even if it means raising taxes.[/font]

2. 86 percent favor raising the minimum wage (including 79 percent of selfdescribed "social conservatives&quot .

3. 60 percent favor repealing either all of Bush's tax cuts or at least those cuts that went to the rich.

4. 66 percent would reduce the deficit not by cutting domestic spending but by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes.

5. 77 percent believe the country should do "whatever it takes" to protect the environment.

6. 87 percent think big oil corporations are gouging consumers, and 80 percent (including 76 percent of Republicans) would support a windfall profits tax on the oil giants if the revenues went for more research on alternative fuels.

7. 69 percent agree that corporate offshoring of jobs is bad for the U.S. economy (78 percent of "disaffected" voters think this), and only 22% believe offshoring is good because "it keeps costs down."

http://alternet.org/story/29788/

8. 92% of ALL Americans support TRANSPARENT, VERIFIABLE elections!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x446445

Where is the "Centrist" Coalition that fights for the above issues?
One is forced to look waaaaay out to the "Far Fringe Left" to find anyone even willing to talk about these issues.
No wonder so many Americans have lost interest in voting,
or feel that Government ignores them.


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]