Dear Blue Dog Bartlebys: Do Your Effin' Jobs. Or Quit.

Seems that a bunch of our favorite 'centrist' Congresscritters were spooked (like the scared rabbits they are) by Tuesday's voting, and want to cower in their offices and avoid any controversial votes between now and the 2010 midterm.

Brilliant.  That'll sure get the base to turn out for them, won't it?

From The Hill:

Vulnerable House and Senate Democrats want their leaders to skip the party’s controversial legislative agenda for next year to help save their seats in Congress.

In the run-up to the 2010 midterm elections, they don’t want to be forced to vote on climate change, immigration reform and gays in the military, which they say should be set aside so Congress can focus on jobs and the economy.

“It’s hard; the most important issue in front of us is the economy right now, and that’s where most of us really want to stay focused, the economy and jobs, that’s what our constituency is concerned about,” said Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D), who is facing a tough race next year in Arkansas.

Rep. Bob Etheridge (D), a centrist contemplating a run for Senate in North Carolina, helped Democratic leaders in the summer by voting for climate change legislation on the House floor.

He now wants Democratic leaders to narrow their focus on jobs and the economy.

“Three things ought to be the top priority: jobs, jobs and jobs,” he said.

Lincoln said that lawmakers should focus on passing healthcare reform and wait until next year to effect financial regulatory reform and reduce unemployment.

“That’s an awful lot to bite off and chew for right now,” said Lincoln, who described herself as “not in a hurry” to tackle climate change, an issue she has some jurisdiction over as chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee.

Sen. Evan Bayh (D), who is running for reelection in conservative-leaning Indiana, said “jobs should be our top priority and we shouldn’t do anything that detracts from that,” echoing a sentiment of many colleagues in similar positions.

Bayh said he recognizes that Congress should be able to “walk and chew gum at the same time and hopefully do more than one thing,” but that controversial issues will become especially difficult next year.

Climate change legislation would be “difficult to accomplish under the best of times and doubly so when the economy is not at all good,” Bayh said.

...

Some Democrats are worried the ambitious agenda could make winning reelection that much harder.

“If it was up to me, I would figure out how to handle the war and fix the economy,” said Rep. John Tanner (Tenn.), a senior centrist Democrat who has found himself in the crosshairs of the National Republican Congressional Committee, which has recruited a promising GOP challenger.

Tanner worries his party may be trying to bite off too much in the 111th Congress.

“For all of these big issues, the trick is — to use a football analogy — to go for a first down instead of an 80-yard Hail Mary,” he said. “Some of the more philosophically driven people want to do an 80-yard Hail Mary, but getting first downs is how you legislate over time.”

A group of vulnerable Democratic lawmakers see healthcare reform, climate change and immigration reform as desperation passes down the length of the political playing field. They acknowledge that healthcare reform may very well pass, but they say that climate change and immigration reform have dim prospects.

Rep. Bobby Bright, an Alabama centrist viewed as one of the most endangered Democrats in the House, said that many Americans feel alarmed by the drastic legislative changes moving through Congress. He said leaders should consider breaking up sprawling controversial bills into smaller pieces that voters would not find so daunting in size and scope.

“Maybe this healthcare bill is going drastically too far,” he said. “If we could take it in smaller steps, we could build confidence.

What a bunch of worthless grovelers.

Look, that's the point of having a government: to deal with problems that need to be addressed on a national level.  If you guys don't want to be part of that, then QUIT.  Resign.  Give your seat up, so someone else who isn't petrified in fear of what the wingnuts might say, or what the voters might do, can use it, since you're not going to.  There are only 535 people in this country who get to vote on Federal legislation.  If you don't want to be one of them, fine - but step down.  If you won't lead or follow, then get the fuck out of the way.

Like it or not, it's your job to deal with tough issues.  If you don't want the responsibility, then run for the goddamned Library Board back home.

And can we all admit that the 'jobs' bit is a pathetic dodge?  You guys don't like deficit spending, at least deficit spending that will help ordinary people.  And you don't like raising taxes.  So you're not going to borrow or raise taxes to do anything that will create jobs.  That doesn't leave much, does it?

Oh, wait, I know: you'll come up with a bill to gut regulations that protect workers and consumers, and call that a jobs bill. 

Pathetic.