Tester goes peacenik on us … eesh!

This is the sort of thing that drives me absolutely batty. Here are the opening lines from the linked story:

Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) has joined Montana Congressman Steve Daines (R-MT) in saying that will oppose proposed military action against Syria.

Tester released a statement on Thursday afternoon explaining his decision to vote against President Obama’s proposal to use force in the light of the recent use of chemical weapons in the Middle Eastern country’s civil war.

“The use of chemical weapons is deplorable. After weighing the facts and listening to Montanans, I’m convinced a military strike at this time will only make the situation worse. The best solution here is to keep putting international pressure on Syria to give up its chemical weapons.”

Note that embedded therein is the notion that it was the Syrian government that used the weapons, a lie, but offically true. But there’s more – he says he’s been “listening to Montanans,” and that this is part of his decision-making process. Of course that’s not true, but the thing that drives me batty is …, well, Montanans … please. A resounding “Pop!” would be nice to hear as the collective heads are pulled.

This is pedantic, I know, but some basic politics is in order: First, the nature of power. There are three ways to change or control the minds of a politician, to gain his obedience:

• Force. You can hold a gun at his head. While this seems outlandish, there doesn’t have to be an actual physical threat. A demonstration of force is usually all that is needed. For instance, every succeeding president who saw JFK murdered in broad daylight with no investigation or blow-back for the perpetrators knows about force. So do most senators, including those who saw Senator Paul Wellstone’s or Governor Mel Carnahan’s* planes crash. Force, whether implied or directly applied, is a fog that hangs over Washington.
• Economic: The bribe is omnipresent in American politics, and we see but the tip of the iceberg in legal contributions and black money. Tester is a perfect example. When it was apparent he was going to lose his last election, something like $500K to $1 million came swooping down from heaven. It was exactingly applied to clueless libertarians to cause them to vote for the candidate Cox, thereby giving Tester the needed margin to survive with a minority of the total vote. That was a PSYOP, and immensely clever at that. Never say that advertising does not work.

  But there’s so much more bribery to boot, jobs in industry and lobbying, jobs for family members, sweet deals in real estate and stock. People tend to be pollyannish about politics, thinking their vote helps put people in office. Not hardly. Money buys TV ads buys votes. The most money wins almost every time.

• Persuasion: We need hardly touch on this one, as it is rarely used or evident. Tester was not “persuaded” to vote against the illegal attack on Syria. He was relieved of the obligation to vote for it. He waited, waited, waited, and when it became a non-issue, was right there for us.

Persuasion, in fact, is the least powerful tool there is in politics. It’s not that people are stupid or cannot think, but by the time force and money are done, persuasion does not matter.

Secondly, the actual vote on the floor: Tester is telling us he would have voted against the Syrian attack. What a relief it doesn’t matter and he can finally speak up! Votes on the floor of the House or Senate are usually foregone conclusions.

• Prior to the vote, it is known that there are enough to pass or defeat an issue. If it’s an important issue and the votes are not present to pass it, the vote is often postponed or canceled.
• When it is known that a bill is going to pass or fail with enough wiggle on either end to allow inconsequential votes, those votes are meted out to those in need, usually people who are in tight election campaigns. There is much ado made about voting records at election time, with groups like Montana Conversation voters and the like passing out pamphlets. It’s nonsense. Men like Baucus and Tester are given freebies by those groups. Their records are tallied on issues where their votes were of no consequence. It’s a perception device.
• There are groups who keep tabs on votes who have real power over people in office. They are AIPAC and the NRA, for example. Officeholders indeed pay attention to those groups. AIPAC swings dirty, ugly tactics under the table, while the public tends to follow NRA’s advice.

In short, the only way to judge the true intent of an office holder via voting record is how he voted when his vote was a determinant factor in the outcome. Since that rarely happens, we know nothing about how these people stand on issues of importance.

The president and the Democrats have, since 2006 at least, blamed the filibuster for their limp-wristed performances in office. “The votes aren’t there,” they tell us. It helps us understand them better if we realize that the filibuster in its present form is by their choice. But beyond that, they can actually fight to change minds on important issues, and they do not.**

JFK, our last real executive of importance, wanted to enter into a nuclear test-ban treaty with the Soviet Union. He was missing two critical elements – public support and votes in congress. He went on the offensive, making a strong case before the public, and twisting arms in the Congress. He got his way. Compare that to our current invertebrate President and jellyfish Democratic party.

But I will say this: ACA, or Obamacare, was a very bad bill. Obama put some lipstick on it and then descended down into the House to assure passage. He twisted arms, bribed where bribes were needed, and probably threatened a few people, notably Dennis Kucinich. I doubt he persuaded anyone to vote for the crappy bill, but he did force those votes.

He knows how it is done. He doesn’t act in favor of progressive causes because he’s not a progressive. Or a liberal. Judging by his actions I think it safe to say … he’s a NeoCon.
_________________
*Mere speculation, of course, but Carnahan’s death caused a sympathy vote for his widow, who defeated John Ashcroft in the 2000 Missouri senatorial election. When Wellstone died, his wife was on the plane, so that there was no one to step into his shoes. Minnesota Democrats put up Walter Mondale. Apparently Kirby Puckett was not available.
**The 2006 House was notable for passage of progressive legislation, and for a simple reason: The Senate was a bottleneck, and Nancy Pelosi knew that the legislation would be DOA. She therefore knew that they were merely going through the motions.