There is something bizarre about watching Barack Obama discover his inner Bubba. When he stepped up before audiences in Cleveland and Milwaukee, he rolled up his sleeves so he'd look less like the "suit" he is (there's nothing wrong with being "a suit," but you've got to claim it). And this Ivy Leaguer, who has a million-dollar house in Chicago, who sends his children to an exclusive private school, tried to convince the working men and women so artfully arranged behind him that he is one of them.

Specifically, that he resents "rich people" and they should, too.

Bubba-dom is the centerpiece of the Dems' bid to wring some desperately needed votes out of the question du jour: Should the Bush-era tax breaks expire.

Never mind whether, while we're in the doldrums, it makes sense to deprive the economy of whatever wind it's getting from lower taxes. Never mind what will be best for this country — both the working folks that Obama treats like stage props and "the suits" who run the businesses that employ them.

Instead, the Dems seem intent on whipping up class jealousy, redirecting Americans' frustration with their own circumstances into resentment of someone else's.

It's a diversionary tactic any pol would be proud of. It's in the fine tradition of "Don't look at the economy, look at the Mexicans." With that, Republicans elevated what is in many communities a non-problem with immigrants into a fire that consumes so much political passion that it distracts people from the real problems.

And it's threatening to take tax policy in directions that'll only hurt us.

The piece that gets the most attention has to do with personal income tax — specifically, whether the cuts should be maintained for single filers with $200,000 in income and couples with $250,000 or more, and whether the top rate should rise from 35 percent to 41 percent..

Ignored in the wrangling is the part of the tax code that encourages — or discourages — investment in business.

Right now, the top tax rate on dividends is 15 percent. If Congress doesn't intervene, it will shoot up to 39.6 percent. The tax rate on capital gains — the appreciated value of stock — will jump by one third, from 15 percent to 20 percent.

By cutting into the return investors get, these tax hikes will give them less incentive to put up the capital that corporations rely on to grow, to take risks and to come up with the innovations that are the defining strength of the American economy.

Why would we want to that?

Oh, right: because it's largely higher-income people who buy stock and receive dividends. And in a tactic that has defined their response to the economy and the stimulus and is getting more unsavory and irresponsible with time, the Democratic leadership is offering people of means as the whipping boy.

Often, when I'm writing about tax policy, I have in mind a guy who works in a tire store. All day long he wrestles tires on and off wheels and wheels on and off cars. When he comes home his hands are banged up and his back hurts and he has to figure out how what's left of his paycheck after taxes will stretch to pay for a new furnace or college for the kids.

I always ask, about any tax spending: Would he think this is a good use of his money?

But we also need to think about the guy who owns the tire store, maybe a chain of them. If taxes are too heavy-handed, he'll have less money and less incentive to open a new store, to pay a new worker — or even my guy.

There are millions of my guys. Many of them work for small businesses whose owners fall into that tax bracket that the Democratic Party has its eyes on. And many work for corporations. Make it less appealing for investors to lend them capital, by buying stock, and there'll be less to launch new ventures and hire workers.

Markets aren't perfect, but I think we can agree that they're at least more efficient than Congress. What isn't?

So let's try letting Americans keep more of the money they make and decide for themselves where it goes.

Instead, Congress and the president have been picking winners and losers. The winners: automakers, government workers, teachers and bankers. The losers: most everyone else.

For example, taxpayers were forced to send their hard-earned dollars to pay for new cars for people who traded in clunkers, or maybe they got one themselves. But what about those who didn't want a car, or to subsidize a neighbor's purchase? What about those who would rather spend their money on a new roof or maybe orthodontia for a child?

What has Congress got against roofers and orthodontists? Except that they don't belong to unions that send heaping doses of votes and donations the Dems' way — if they're continually stroked.

Capó is associate editor of the editorial page. Contact her at ccapo@dailypress.com or 247-2837.