Article first published as Thirty-one Cowardly Democrats on Technorati.

President Obama took the initiative earlier this month to use his bully pulpit and give the Democratic base a reason to get out and vote in November. He started the final weeks before the election out stumping and defining the differences between the parties. Democratic voters could feel the momentum start to build. But one week later, the cowardly lions on the left began their customary collapse, and with their tails between their legs decided to join ranks with the Republicans.

To his credit, the President first took the podium in Milwaukee on Labor Day and revealed his $50 billion infrastructure plan. Two days later he came out swinging in Cleveland and attacked the Republicans on everything from their obstructionism to their factitious support of small business. He focused much of his message on the $250,000 line drawn in the sand over the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts and set the stage for an 8-week fight over who really represents the middle class.

But obviously not up for the fight, on Wednesday, 31 Democrats broke ranks and signed a letter to Speaker Pelosi advocating for the extension of all of the Bush tax cuts, including those for the top 2%. The letter starts with “In recent weeks, we have heard from a diverse spectrum of economists, small business owners, and families who have voiced concerns that raising any taxes right now could negatively impact economic growth.” In other words — we don’t have the courage of our convictions and believe that we may lose votes if seen as supporting tax increases.

The single page letter goes on to attempt to justify the cowardice, stating that the upper tax brackets include only 2%-3% of tax payers, but that “they are responsible for 25% of national consumer spending.” It states further that 70% of our economy is driven by consumer spending, therefore “this is not the time to jeopardize further growth.” Of course ALL of these statements are true, but the conclusion is a non sequitur fallacy.

People in the group in question would be reporting $250,000 or more in taxable income. By definition they would already have the money to continue their 25% of consumer spending. They are obviously not the people being adversely affected by the economic collapse or they wouldn’t be reporting such high income. Contrary to what the letter implies, most economists agree that the money saved by this group would largely be set away in savings and have no impact on stimulating the economy. Besides, as the President has articulated, the rich would still be receiving the very same tax relief on the first $250,000 as everyone else.

The letter also offers up the same tired Republican distortion regarding the overlap of the top 2% and small business. Reciting statistics stating that “up to one-third of high-income taxpayers are small business owners,” these Republicrats assert that expiring the cuts for the rich will cost jobs and harm the recovery. Of course they know better than that. They know that only 2%-3% of real small businesses fall in to this category. They know that the “small businesses” in this group are actually the largest law firms, hedge funds, and other elitists that employ very few people. This is pure “I’m not a tax raiser” politicking.

Liberals need to seriously consider whether or not there’s anything on the planet more cowardly than a congressional Democrat. This entire maneuver is because they’re worried that the mean old Republicans might spin their support of tax cuts for only the middle class into perceived support for raising taxes, even if on the rich . . . poor Democrats. So, instead of saying, “Hell yes! We support relief for the middle class,” the Democrats are willing to bow down again. Football fans will recognize their strategy in the many NFL teams who go into a “prevent” defense in the fourth quarter to protect a lead, and ALWAYS wind up losing. Democrats play not to lose while the Republicans play to win.

Democrats need to learn that public opinion follows spin, so instead of letting the Republicans do the spinning, the damn Democrats need to get out there and tell the story. The only reason the Republicans get away with adhering to a strict loyalty to the upper 2% and still get elected is because the Democrats allow them to get away with a constant barrage of fact-free propaganda. Republicans by necessity use distortion, hyperbole and outright lies to obfuscate their true agenda, but the Democrats are too afraid to expose them, fearing that public opinion may not roll their way.

Now, even on an issue where the Democrats are obviously acting on behalf of 98% of the population (whether the people know it or not), these cowardly 31 are still too timid to push the agenda. What exactly do these mice stand for?

Fortunately, at this point, Speaker Pelosi is holding strong, and still has the support of the majority of Democrats in the house. At least Madam Speaker has some conviction and fortitude. It’s high time that the rest of the Democrats get behind the President and help define why people should vote for them. After all, if the people want to elect a Republican, why would they vote for one who’s a Democrat?

President Obama spoke briefly from the Rose Garden this morning about the economy. He acknowledged that the recovery is still fragile, but offered assurances that his team was, “hard at work on additional measures.” He offered few details, but pulled no punches in blasting GOP leaders for their obstruction of relief for small business. “I ask Senate Republicans to drop the blockade,” the President urged, referring to the persistent GOP filibuster of a small business aid bill that’s been stalled in the Senate since shortly after the House passed similar legislation this past March.

The small business aid bill, last blocked from going to the Senate floor at the end of July, includes $12 billion in tax relief and also creates a $30 billion fund intended to facilitate lending to small businesses. The tax breaks, designed to stimulate growth, include deductions for capital equipment investment and credits for new hires. With the large banks still withholding any funding for small business, the loan fund is designed to allow community and regional banks, those with assets under $10 billion, to fill the void. Small businesses need money to expand, and according to Bob Coleman, publisher of the Coleman Report, which provides information on small-business lending, many businesses are postponing expansion while they wait on the outcome of this bill.

Republicans in the Senate have spoken out against the bill, likening it to the TARP, which they all supported, but which has since fallen into disrepute. They label the bill as more Democrat spending, even though it’s fully paid for. Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell explained that the Republicans had already been given 3 amendments to the bill, but that “three amendments is not enough.” Democrats countered that the border security provision offered by Republicans had nothing to do with small business, and that they would not allow the Republican maneuver to add a permanent extension to the Bush tax cuts. Republicans also complained about the $1.5 billion in aid to farmers contained in the bill, so Democrats removed the provision, but were still not able to sway any Republican support.

In his speech today, President Obama stated of the bill that, “there’s no reason to block it besides pure partisan politics.” Dean Baker, of the Center for Economic and Policy Research seems to be in agreement. Speaking in July, he characterized the standoff like this, “The Democrats want to hand money out to small banks and win some support among traditionally Republican backers, while the Republicans don’t want the Democrats to have any achievements to show when they campaign.” Even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who typically sides with Republicans, is fully in favor of the legislation.

So, how is it that the Party who purports to be a champion of small business, comes to resist, so adamantly, a bill designed to help that very segment? This is the same party that bases their defense of extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich on the detriment their expiration would have on small business, yet they won’t support this fully funded stimulus. Conservative voters should take heed, because this is just another piece, amongst a vast body of evidence that indicates where Republican loyalties are tied.

President Obama did mention a few other examples of efforts being pursued by his administration. He emphasized that they were still fighting for the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the middle class. Although he gave no indication of how they might achieve that without also extending the cuts for the rich. They are incapable without GOP support, and thus far, Senate Republicans remain firm in their resolve to force an across the board extension, that adds $678 billion to the deficit from relief for the rich, or nothing at all.

The President stated that further tax cuts to encourage businesses to create jobs in the U.S. were being considered. He also listed initiatives being pursued, such as, “rebuilding more infrastructure for the future” and “redoubling our investment in clean energy and research and development.” But he gave no details on these items, nor did he even mention the current stimulus, which is actively moving these initiatives forward. The stimulus which is so often maligned by conservatives, but credited by economists for avoiding 2 addition percentage points of unemployment and adding millions of jobs, is also providing a critical service in moving our nation into a clean, alternative energy future and building infrastructure in the areas of public transportation and a smart grid.

Much to the disappointment of many progressives, the President’s speech failed to clearly identify the severity of our current economic problems or the details of the administrations plan to address them. With both consumers and businesses tucking their money away, there’s little hope that things will change without further stimulus, but in an election year where the deficit hawks are out hunting for prey, Democrats appear to lack the resolve to promote such a bold action. The alternative is obviously a very slow recovery in which the middle class foots the lion’s share of the bill — and minus the public wherewithal to understand that the deficit has merely been presented to conveniently block further corrective action, we appear to be doomed to stew in this status quo.

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.