The few GOP moderates left confess their deep frustration.

“It seems like moderation in Washington is a vice,” said Rep. Brian Bilbray, a centrist Republican from California.

I’ve never before heard Bilbray referred to as a “centrist.” Bilbray was a member of the class of 1994 who lost his old House seat in 2000, then stayed in Washington as a lobbyist for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which advocates “a temporary moratorium on all immigration except spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens and a limited number of refugees.” Bilbray returned to Congress in a 2006 special election, which he won in part by accusing his Democratic opponent of soliciting votes from illegal aliens. Since then, Bilbray has maintained a 92% rating from the American Conservative Union, which makes him an “ACU Conservative” in their ranking system. He voted against increasing the minimum wage, voted to repeal the Washington, D.C. gun ban, voted against a ban on anti-gay job discrimination, and voted against expanding SCHIP. When Tom Tancredo quit his leadership of the Immigration Reform Caucus in 2007, Bilbray replaced him.

So, in Politico-speak, he’s a centrist. Strange.

The Obama campaign didn’t exist to make me feel good, and the Obama presidency won’t either. I don’t especially like his people punching the dirty [flipping] hippies under the bed, but on the other hand if they manage to convince people that Obama is a sensible centrist who wants to do sensible centrist things like build SUPERTRAINS, get out of Iraq, not torture people or invade random countries, strengthen labor protections, reduce income inequality, improve education, provide health care for people, and reduce poverty, while those DAMNED DIRTY HIPPIES just won’t shut up about their magic ponies, it’s fine by me.

For years we’ve had Democrats railing against those crazy hippies as an excuse to not do all of those things. If Obama’s people are going to rail against the hippies and use it as an excuse to do them, fine with me. If.

Obviously, the media is making far more out of this Democratic divide than exists in the real world, but critics would be well-served to wait and see how Obama actually governs before freaking out about how he’s ignoring progressives. If it turns out that he totally sucks or flails completely and doesn’t deliver any of this stuff, which I’m kind of doubting will be the case, there will be four years to criticize him, with good reason — and then you can vote his sorry butt out of office in 2012.

But the post-partisanship that Obama campaigned on requires concessions from the left as well as the right, and if Obama’s strategy does prove successful for implementing even a few of the things on Atrios’ laundry list — especially considering the disastrous path the country appeared to be on for the past 8 years — it will be hard to argue that sacrificing a liberal Democratic cabinet for the greater good wasn’t worth it.

We are not going to be hampered by ideology in trying to get this country back on track. We want to figure out what works [...]

If you can show me something you are doing that’s working, or if you tell me that this program or this regulation is hampering us from doing smart things that will advance the interests of our state, then you’re going to get a ready ear. [Emphasis added.]

The remark drew applause from many of the governors, who probably can name a few environmental regulations or worker protections unpopular with business interests in their states.

But while the comment is surely less popular with liberal activists, they can probably take comfort knowing that Obama has a 96 percent lifetime rating from the League of Conservation Voters and drew broad support from labor unions during the primaries, as well as the general election campaign.

While he may be willing to listen to the governors and open to some changes, it seems unlikely that he would turn his back on the concerns of these core Democratic constituencies.