Article first published as GOP vs. Dems; No Compromise Equals No Solutions on Technorati.

Politics can be very complicated, or at the very least confusing. Case in point: what is it about the Republican pronouncement of “NO COMPROMISE” that President Obama and the congressional Democrats don’t understand?

Did they miss it when John Boehner, the presumptive Speaker of the new Republican controlled House, announced that, “This is not a time for compromise?”  Perhaps they misunderstood high-ranking Republican House member, Mike Pense of Indiana, when he said, “Look, the time to go along and get along is over,” even though he reemphasized, stating, “If I haven’t been clear enough yet, let me say again: No compromise.”

Is it possible that the President took Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s statement that, “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president” as some sort of conservative jest?

It’s hard to tell what the President hears when congressional Republicans throw down the gauntlet and demand that he move in their direction. But, in response to the wave of emboldened Republicans taking intransigent positions against any sort of compromise, President Obama told the nation, “I believe there’s room for us to compromise and get it done together.”

The saying goes, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” Fool me over and over again, and maybe the people who believe I’m actually being fooled are the ones being hoodwinked. Is President Obama really so foolish as to believe that the Republicans will engage in open, good-faith negotiations, or is he merely a performer in a stage show written and produced to convince the American people that somebody in Washington wants the status quo to change?

When the President spoke in Cleveland in September, he came out swinging. He artfully painted the Republicans as the champions of the very wealthy and articulated a plan for the extension of the Bush tax cuts that drew a line in the sand, defining $250,000 of taxable income as the divide between the middle-class and upper-crust. It was the perfect issue for the closing weeks of campaign 2010, but cowardly Democrats backed away in fear that the Republicans would paint them as tax-and-spend liberals.

Well, not only did the Democratic retreat fail to impress any independents, but it also ensured that there would be no resurgence of enthusiasm within progressive ranks. In fact, the real story of Election 2010 wasn’t the great turnout of Republican supporters, but rather that blacks and young voters stayed home. If even half of those who poured out to the polls in 2008 had been moved to vote, the election results would have been much different.

But whatever the case, the 2010 election is over, the Democrats got their collective butts kicked, and the Republicans have already started Campaign 2012. Republican leaders now insist that the election was a refutation of President Obama’s policies and promise a Republican led Congress that will focus on jobs and the deficit.

Americans rightfully rejoice that the promised focus is exactly where it should be, but in what has become the united chorus of one-trick-pony conservatives, the legislative remedy being offered is the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. In fact, fed by their new found sense of power, Republicans have become more intractable regarding any compromise on the wealthfare benefits and now insist that the extensions for the rich be made permanent.

Prior to the election, Republicans seemed amenable to a potential decoupling of the cuts along the lines suggested by President Obama. The notion was that cuts for the top 2% might be extended for a limited time period while those for the bottom 98% were made permanent. But according to House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, there will be no such compromise. In a recent interview, Cantor told Greta Van Susteren of Fox News that the election gave the GOP a mandate to hold fast and accept only an extension of all cuts.

Just how the Republican leadership can reconcile their position on the tax cuts with their promise to focus on either jobs or the deficit is the subject of some serious snake oil peddling.

According to Cantor, it’s all about clearing up that “uncertainty“ the Republicans keep talking about: “We’ve got to put certainty back into the game and get these tax rates to stay the same.” But of course this is complete nonsense, since whichever way the cuts are decided, once the decision is made, the uncertainty is removed.

To the man, each of the Republican leaders has also associated the cuts for the top 2% with small business, claiming that 50% of small business revenue will be affected. Sadly, the small businesses they’re referring to are large hedge funds, law offices, and billion dollar companies like Bechtel and Koch Industries. These are the clients of the Republican Party, not the 98% of all small businesses that make less than $250K.

The sad truth is that no respectable economist believes that cutting taxes for the rich will do anything to create jobs. That horse just doesn’t run anymore — not since the results of 8 years of the Bush presidency where such cuts were a mainstay were tabulated and found to be severely lacking. The worst job creation record since the 1940s and the first decline of median household income of any cycle since 1967 are not sound arguments for repeating the policy.

And where the tax-cuts-create-jobs argument is no more than a con-job, even that bar is too high when discussing the impact on the deficit. Virtually all reputable economists agree that tax cuts are the worst form of economic stimulus, and cuts for the rich the worst of all. The Republicans are essentially without even a distorted con to explain away the $700 billion cost of the tax cuts for the top 2% over the next 10 years.

The cuts the Republicans are fighting for won’t create jobs but will add significantly to the deficit. These “fiscal conservatives” espouse fiscal responsibility and feign help for small business and middle-class America but willingly sacrifice both for the wellbeing of their corporate overlords. And the Democrats respond by offering compromise.

Just what part of slam dunk, hanging curve, lob-ball pitch do the Democrats not understand?

The Democrats need to go back on November 15 and work to pass the extension of the Bush tax cuts for those making under $250K during the lame duck session. It’ll be interesting to watch the Republicans argue why the very rich need the cuts and explain to the American people why increasing the deficit for those who don’t need the money makes sense. Their argument promises to be a mind-numbing spectacle of double-talk and diversion.

This is a win-win for the Democrats — any compromise is just once again playing into Republican hands and allowing them to set the agenda and color the conversation. The Democrats need to accept the fact that the Republicans who would not negotiate in good faith while in the minority are certainly not going to do so now. They need to figure out that the Republican campaign for 2012 has already begun and launch their counteroffensive. If they’re not willing to do so, they might as well just start packing their bags now.

---

Article first published as I Think I’ll Vote Republican — NOT! on Technorati.

On this, the eve of Glen Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally in Washington, I think it a good time to reflect on what it means to be a conservative in 21^st Century America. Beck has scheduled his rally on the anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “March on Washington.” According to Beck, the purpose of the rally is to celebrate “upstanding citizens who embody our nation’s founding principles of integrity, truth and honor.” Such patriotism, such vision, a staunch supporter of the Republican Party, Beck is at the core of contemporary conservatism.

So, what is it that defines today’s conservative? What is the Republican plan for the future of America?

John Boehner shared the Republican vision for America earlier this week. And fortunately for conservative voters, the Republican platform is far more simple than that of their Democratic counterparts. Republicans don’t spend all that wasted time worrying about equity and ethics and all that stupid liberal stuff. Heck, when your objective is limited to maximizing the profits of big-business and minimizing the tax burden of the top 2%, all that fairness stuff just gets in the way.

Oddly enough, the new Republican Party looks an awful lot like the party of George Bush. So drastic is the likeness, that topping their list of priorities is the extension of the Bush tax cuts — for even the very rich, permanently. They even espouse the same disproven Bush tenet that tax cuts pay for themselves. So, although economists contend that the $678 billion price tag to extend the cuts for the top 2% will directly impact the deficit for which the Republicans feign concern — not to worry — we just need to cut spending.

Ah, but where to cut? Not defense! Oh no, the Military Industrial Complex is the heart and soul of conservative America — not to disparage the fossil fuel industry or the gun lobby. But, with defense costing over $1 trillion and representing more than 25% of the budget, where better to slice? Wait a minute . . . what would George Bush do? That’s it — Social Security can be privatized! Never mind that it’s solvent through 2037 and that with minor tweaking it can provide a vital safety net well into the next century; it’s a huge pool of money just begging to be exploited.

But, what about jobs? The problem is that Americans still expect far too much in compensation for their labor. But is it government’s responsibility to get people back to work? Unemployment is actually a good thing, for business, so long as you don’t have to pay benefits. There are really few things better for corporate profits than an abundant supply of labor so desperate for work that pay-scale and fringes no longer matter. So, the solution is self-evident: oppose any government funding of benefits, rail against government investment in infrastructure or energy or anything else that might tip the balance of economic power, and for God’s sake make sure nothing stops the flow of jobs overseas.

So, less taxes, fewer entitlements, an eager workforce, it’s music to the ears of contemporary conservatism. And the final ingredient to restore the Bush recipe for a prosperous upper crust — more deregulation. Just keep those oil wells pumping, those insiders trading, that gas flowing, and blessed will be the fruit of the offshoring multinational. The heck with the environment. What’s a little oil spill here and a little flaming water there? Businesses have to compete on a global scale, and worrying about the environment just isn’t good for profits. Besides, if you’re already exploiting the people, who gives a care about the planet?

Does any of this sound at all familiar? It should, because it’s Bushonomics 101. Today’s Republican Party promises a full return to the very practices that produced the most meager job growth since the 1940s, resulted in the first decline in median household income of any cycle since 1967, set modern records for the concentration of wealth at the very top, crashed the economy, brought us the Massey mine disaster, filled the Gulf with oil, and divided our nation.

The only real difference between the Bush Republicans and the Boehner, McConnell, Palin, Beck contingent is that where the Bushies confined their fear mongering to terrorists and certain foreign enemies, the 2010 Republicans have turned their sites inward. American citizen or not, if you’re Islamic or Mexican, Black, gay or liberal — you are an “Other,” and that makes you the problem . . . or rather the solution, because wealthy or not, the Republicans still need votes, and with a platform that only benefits 2% of the population, distraction is everything.

---

The man who wants to be Speaker of the House, John Boehner, spoke out against Democratic leadership earlier this week. A string of cheap attacks and tired one-liners, Boehner’s diatribe was pure substance-free political posturing. He called for President Obama to fire his economic team, extend tax cuts for the wealthy and to put the brakes on spending. Lacking any shame, the congressman actually had the temerity to suggest the nation needs a “fresh start,” with “people willing to accept responsibility” in charge — as if he or any of his big-business Republican cronies have accepted one iota of blame for crashing the economy and killing millions of jobs, or for doing everything within their power to stall recovery.

The would-be Speaker, obviously intent upon leveraging public concern over jobs, used every opportunity to label the administration’s programs as “job-killing.”  Weaving the term into every topic, “job-killing tax hikes,” “job-killing regulations,” “job-killing agenda,” Boehner evoked the reaper 12 times in all. Condemning the recent $26 billion stimulus bill, Boehner stated that it, “funnels money to state governments in order to protect government jobs.” Of course, he was referring to 161,000 teacher jobs, as well as 158,000 jobs for police, firefighters and healthcare workers. But those jobs weren’t worth saving to John Boehner. He continued his criticism with, “Even worse, the bill is funded by a new tax hike that makes it more expensive to create jobs in the United States and less expensive to create jobs overseas,” which would be alarming — if it were true, which it’s not. His “job-killing tax hike” was actually the closing of a loophole that encouraged corporations to ship jobs overseas.

What Boehner did reveal of the Republican plan for creating jobs appeared to be vintage Bush. It’s the same old recipe that drove the nation off a cliff the last time around — more tax cuts for the rich and less regulation. Conveniently ignoring the fact that President Obama wants to extend the Bush cuts for everyone making under $250,000, Boehner told the crowd that, “Raising taxes on families and small businesses during a recession is a recipe for disaster — both for our economy and for the deficit. Period. End of story.” He’s right, so if he truly believes what he says, he should stop fighting for cuts for the top 2% and join the Democrats in providing relief to everyone else — including all but 2-3% of small businesses.

Boehner is truly a master at the art of double-talk. He claims to advocate for small business, stating that expiring the cuts for the top 2% would, “affect half of small business income.” But he fails to mention that the “half” he wants to protect are “small business” only in terms of the number of employees. Boehner’s half makes 50% of the money, but consists of the wealthiest hedge funds, law firms and lobbying outlets, and comprise no more than 3% of the actual small businesses.

Amongst the newly formed ranks of Republican deficit hawks, Boehner also called upon President Obama to, “submit to Congress for its immediate consideration an aggressive spending reduction package.”  Of course, being a good Republican, Boehner did specify that the freeze should only be for non-defense spending.  But that’s just the tip of his forked tongue. Avoiding the disproven claim that tax cuts pay for themselves, Boehner is left with no explanation for his logical inconsistency in demanding spending cuts to fight the deficit, yet supporting $678 billion in millionaire tax cuts to choke revenue.

One lie after another, Boehner’s critique of the Obama Administration was as fact-free as his economic plan for the future. But possibly his most egregious distortion was regarding the stimulus. A critic from the beginning, according to Boehner, the program, “has gotten us nowhere.” Sadly, many voters will believe this whopper, even though it has absolutely no basis in reality.

Perhaps Boehner had not yet read the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on the stimulus. The CBO analysis found that the stimulus had raised the GDP by 1.7% to 4.5% and increased the number of people employed by 1.4 to 3.3 million. In response to Boehner’s fallacious claim, Mark Zandi, former economic advisor to John McCain, took issue and stated that, “Without the stimulus spending, instead of a 9.5 percent unemployment rate, we’d have an 11.5 percent unemployment rate.”

But, the facts regarding jobs and unemployment really only scratch the surface. The real impact of the stimulus is still in process. It is creating jobs in the present, but it promises to create far more in the future. The program is investing in research and infrastructure, providing seed money to jump start alternative energy, modernize transportation, fund ground-breaking medical advancements and enhance technologies such as broadband and smart grids. And in so doing, the program is also transforming the way government works.

Ever the champion of the status quo, it’s easy to see why John Boehner doesn’t appreciate the progress funded by the stimulus. When Boehner says it, “has gotten us nowhere,” what he means is that it has prevented the huge drop in wages his corporate cronies so desperately desire, and that it’s also paving the road away from dependence on fossil fuels. A green America with well-paid Americans working in new industries is Boehner’s worst nightmare. He and his Republican brethren are just fine with things the way they are.

In Boehner’s own words, “It’s time to put grown-ups in charge,” and since it’s obvious that the congressman never even learned the most basic rules of adulthood, like telling the truth and practicing what you preach, he must not be referring to himself. So, let’s all hope he gets his way and voters make the intelligent choice in November —  they put the grown-ups in charge and vote Democrat.

---