Tester’s Calculating Flip-Flop on Dreamers

by William Skink

Democrat apologists like Don Pogreba want us to think a politician like Jon Tester, up for reelection, has “come around on Dreamers“. That vote against Dreamers in 2010? That was just political calculation:

At the time, I speculated that it was a misguided political calculation that Republicans could successfully exploit a vote to protect these kids as there’s almost nothing Republicans like more than demonizing immigrants, especially if they are people of color.

Well, Tester won re-election against Dennis Rehberg despite the vote and criticism from the online left. And more importantly, he’s come around on supporting the DREAMers, issuing a statement arguing that Congress must act to protect them.

Immigration is an issue that has been politicized in Montana recently thanks to do-gooders in Missoula who think a community with an affordable housing crisis and low-wage job opportunities in the service sector is a good place to relocate refugees fleeing the chaos of American foreign policy. This will provide Tester cover for flipping his position on supporting Dreamers.

Non-collaborating environmentalists do not enjoy the same support, however, so don’t expect Tester to “come around” on his depiction of non-collaborators as extremists and his lies about litigation of logging sales. The calculation here is that enough of the environmental movement has been absorbed by the corporate path of collaboration, so chasing the support of the people who helped Tester first get elected is no longer necessary.

The “online left” that Pogreba thinks he represents has not stood up to Tester’s lies about logging and demonizing of non-collaboraters as extremists. Even now, when criticism is brought up, any smear that distracts from valid criticism is allowed.

A comment from “mtcreels” is a perfect example. Despite a commenting policy that asks commenters to stick to the topic of the post, and the claim that anonymous comments are policed more stringently, this conspiracy smear is still standing:

mtcreels: @JC: given the despicable September 11 truther garbage on your blog, you’re not in any position to be giving sanctimonious lectures about integrity.

This tactic continues to be useful to the useful idiots who think Tester is anything other than a corrupt politician with a broken moral compass that only points to maintaining power through electoral victory. If we are just crazy conspiracy theorists than anything else we say can just be dismissed.

Another tactic that will be trotted out is the lesser-evil argument. This is already happening, as evidenced by this comment from Pogreba:

I’m sure Matt Rosendale or Troy Downing will be good for environmental group fundraising, but they sure as hell won’t be good for the planet and the policies they’d help support would make the Tester Logging Bill look like the greatest piece of environmental legislation in human history.

The lesser-evil argument was also used to justify voting for Hillary.

How did that work out?

Democrat apologists seem to think doing the same thing will produce different results this time.

And we are the crazy ones?

About Travis Mateer

I'm an artist and citizen journalist living and writing in Montana. You can contact me here: willskink at yahoo dot com
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Tester’s Calculating Flip-Flop on Dreamers

  1. *Eric says:

    Sorry JC – despite my disagreements with Jon Testers politics, we’ll probably be stuck with him.

    The Democrats, the party of the rich, have already pumped $5 million bucks into re-buying his seat, which is enough to intimidate any potential primary challengers, and be tough for even a great GOP candidate to overcome.

    And Tester has already chosen ‘safe’ groups to support, the number one being veterans, and while he won’t publicly come out and support more taxes, special rights for gays, and abortions on demand, those groups won’t ditch him, because they have nowhere else to go.

    • Big Swede says:

      Not only is he sitting on a nice pile of money he’ll forbid other K street contributors from writing checks like he did in 2012 against Denny.

      “Democrats on K Street are warning their corporate clients: Give to Republican challengers in the 2012 election, and you’ll regret it come tax reform time.

      Lobbyists are getting that message from allies of powerful Democrats such as Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who is closely watching support for Rep. Denny Rehberg, a Republican challenging Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). Baucus supporters fear that if Rehberg ousts Tester, Baucus could be next to face a serious Republican challenge in the state.
      One K-Streeter close to the Baucus operation said the senator considers a gift to Rehberg a contribution against him. Another Democratic lobbyist told a client to take his name off a Rehberg fundraising event because it would be hurtful to his company, according to sources.”-Politco

  2. petetalbot says:

    I figured you supported Tester’s original stand on DACA since you’ve vilified refugee resettlement in post after post. But no matter, if Tester’s change in heart gives you an opening to dump on all Democrats, where you stand on the issue is irrelevant.

    As to The Montana Post’s commenting policy: Mtcreel’s comment was a legitimate response to JC — at least as relevant as the non sequiturs you often add at the Post. You still have access there, too, so I’m not sure what you’re whining about.

    Great thread above, though, from Dreamers to environmentalists to conspiracies to commenting. But I’m glad we continue to offer fodder to this oh so provocative site.

  3. steve kelly says:

    When was the last time K Street lost a Montana Senate race? Just one big, happy plantation exporting (worthless commodities) raw materials to wealthier states and offshore. One should at least be impressed with the ability of tv propaganda to convince semi-literate slaves to loot their own “backyard” for a few shekels, leaving nothing for future generations. Can’t wait to see what the “better deal” is all about.

  4. steve kelly says:

    Or, maybe someday, Democrats will “calculate” the cost of wars of aggression. We’re bombing at least 8 countries, of which only 2 are “authorized.” http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2016/Costs%20of%20War%20through%202016%20FINAL%20final%20v2.pdf

    • JC says:

      Pretty much a military coup against Trump (for what that was worth) has been finalized. Oligarchs are running the show, siphoning public debt for private profit in their transnational military-industrial corporations. Generals are the enforcers. And when it comes time to pay the piper, the deep state will be so ensconced in their bunkers, gated estates, private isles and getaways, that when the austerity hits hard here in the “homeland” the only security to be enforced will be that for debt servitude. Of course, WWIII could change the equation rather significantly. But who’s paying attention to that?

  5. Big Swede says:

    I couldn’t agree more with Liz about helping our own poor here rather than taking on additional immigrants.

    • if you are really concerned about “helping our own poor then I assume you have contacted your state rep to tell them you oppose the cuts that will impact the most vulnerable in Montana, right?

      • Big Swede says:

        When it comes to “helping the poor” lets just say that I’m way above the average Montanan.

        What I find most interesting tho is the nature of the cuts. They always have to be directed toward the unfortunate and not any where else for the maximum effect.

        Maybe we can get some news crew out on the streets jerking away some homeless guys sandwich.

        • JC says:

          Do I detect a hint of compassion amidst the sarcasm?

          Actually, I think that agency/dept. heads target the cuts at those populations they think will be most adversely impacted — and will raise the most agitation. The goal here being to force the Leg to come back and revisit the budget and funding mechanisms, so yeah “maximum effect”. Of course, if the gambit fails, then it is “the unfortunate” who will be made much more unfortunate.

          If anybody would look at the nature of many of these cuts, they do several things, including: the loss of matching federal funds (so the cuts here are amplified); they force people needing care to discover it in jail or state institutions at a far greater cost to the state budget than community provided services; they exact costs directly upon communities through increased crime, family disruption, decreased productivity, etc.; and last but not least, the individuals impacted by the cuts lose what meager dignity and quality of life they have and are driven further into the despair of old age and disability, mental illness and addiction, irreparable felonious red sheeting, and suicide.

          Of course, maybe this is the intended result. If so, it comes to our state, families and individuals at a greater cost than the provided services would have cost. But moreso it seems to have been intentional, hidden austerity on the part of our governor and legislature, and the outcome is a game of chicken with the state’s most vulnerable in the crosshairs.

  6. djinn&tonic says:

    None of these fucks work for the average working man, I see you fucks week after week playing this game, as if these politicians care what you think. They don’t give a fuck about you or me. It’s a lose-lose game for us and a win-win game for them. Tester! Champion of the Veterans for a decade or more!!! Are they so lucky?

  7. Worth noting here that Tester only had his sorry fat (non-farmer) ass rescued in 2012 by dark money, a huge injection of cash from unidentified sources used to encourage Republicans to vote for Cox, the Libertarian. He then had the gall later to announce that he intends to fight against Citizens United, the court decision that rescued him.

    Of course, fighting agaginst CU for him is identical to Obama’s “fight” against it … a few words read aloud, nothing more. The role of Democrats is to prevent the rise of a second party in this country.

  8. Really? Well, right back at you.

  9. djinn&tonic says:

    Assassination of US citizens
    Indefinite detention
    Arbitrary right to justice
    Warrantless searches
    Secret evidence
    [immunity from] War crimes [investigations]
    Secret courts
    Immunity from judicial review
    Continual monitoring of citizens
    Extraordinary renditions (i.e. torture by proxy state)

    Merica!!! Fuck yeah! You are free!

Leave a Reply