Jon Tester Montana Politics

Senator Tester’s Jobs Bill Vote: A Defense

The news that Senator Tester voted against President Obama’s Jobs bill this week has met with a somewhat predictable response: calls for a primary challenge, refusals to support the Senator, and accusations that he is betraying Democratic values. While I understand some of the frustration, the reaction seems overblown—and in some cases, motivated by personal animus rather than policy considerations.

Do I think we need a large-scale federal program to help create jobs and prevent the economy from sinking even further? Absolutely—and I’ve written so in the past. Like Senator Tester, I think the Recovery Act did a great deal to soften the blow of the recession. I think it should have been much larger, in fact.

So why am I not calling out Senator Tester? First, because I take him at his word that the bill was problematic. In an effort to woo Republican support, President Obama loaded the bill with tax cuts and incentives. Specifically, the bill would have once again extended the cuts to payroll taxes, an incredibly dangerous game– as Social Security advocates have noted:

But Social Security advocates worry that these temporary payroll tax cuts will never be restored. “The problem is, it is very easy in our current political climate to cut revenue and very hard to increase it,” says Nancy Altman, co-director of the Strengthen Social Security coalition and author of The Battle for Social Security, an excellent history of the program and its politics.

“Look at the controversy over ending the Bush tax cuts, which would only affect a small portion of taxpayers,” Altman says. “In this case, if you propose restoring the payroll tax down the road, you’d have to double the rates on workers making minimum wage. This is being sold as temporary, but it’s not likely to work out that way.”

Crooks and Liars makes the case more clear:

Here’s the problem with extending the payroll tax cuts: They’re unlikely to ever be restored. And if they’re not restored, you’ve done what Republicans have been trying to do for decades: turned Social Security into a welfare program that no longer pays for itself, but comes out of the general fund and for the first time, adds to the deficit.

That’s one very good reason to oppose the but it’s not the only one. While Senator Tester made it clear that his vote was not motivated by politics, I’m going to suggest that it was absolutely the right political decision, one that serves the best interests of his re-election and the people that re-election will serve.

From my vantage point, once again President Obama weakly lobbed up another bill that had zero chance of passing from the outset, with no chance of Republican support, and expected Senators in tight races to jump on the grenade again. The only thing they would accomplish? Giving their political opponents, like the entirely unprincipled Denny Rehberg, more ammunition to use against them.

Let’s put the blame where it truly lies, on a President, who for the sake of his own re-election chances, handed Democratic Senators a toxic bill that wouldn’t pass if every single Democrat had voted for it.

And for this we should condemn Senator Tester?

Critics of the Senator might argue that somehow Senator Tester voted against the interests of teachers and workers with his vote, but that’s just too simplistic. And it’s not true.

Even if I want something more than either President Obama or Senator Tester can deliver, I’m certainly not going to fault the latter for making a vote that sensible both in terms of policy and politics.

If you appreciate an independent voice holding Montana politicians accountable and informing voters, and you can throw a few dollars a month our way, we would certainly appreciate it.


Click here to post a comment

Please enter an e-mail address

  • Well I agree with the jobs bill. No Bill is without problems and this is where I disagree with you and others.

    First of all we are not broke, this is what the GOP want us to believe, and they have contrived a catastrophe to hemorrhage the country. Yes we have debt and yes we well be in trouble in 20 or so years if we don’t stop spending but that is something we can ease into at a easy pace that doesn’t flip everyone’s world around.

    Secondly, none of these tax cuts hurt small business, they hurt big business who isn’t really included in the Tax breaks. In fact Obama is going to let a lot that protects corporate welfare… tax break wise …Expire!

    They have been sitting on their money purposely to buy up larger swaths of the ecomony, when little businesses fail! They are not happy with all the business and money they already have. They want more. they are not only squeezing the middle class dry but also the little businesses who have patents on products they need to complete their products! They are squeezing out innovation, so they do not have to compete, and they will continue to do it until Glass/ Stiegal like laws are put back into place.

    Obama’s “100 percent expensing.” This $5 billion proposal would be a one-year spur for Little businesses to make investments, by allowing them to quickly deduct the full value of spending on facilities or equipment. The Montana GOP wanted this in this state so bad they could taste it! No Equipment tax for a year but they allowed there national leader Rehberg to Poo-Poo this…cause they don’t want Obama and the people of this state to succeed!

    Obama would devote $35 billion to aid designed to prevent layoffs at schools, police stations, and fire departments where local governments face budget shortfalls. I know a bunch of towns in this state that could benefit from this, and it would ease the pension shortfalls our state will have down the road… but that would make communities stronger and less manipulative to the GOP wreaking ball!

    A National Infrastructure Bank. This $10 billion effort would offer loans – up to no more than half a project’s cost – to spur additional investments in transport, water, or energy systems. The money would partner with state or local government and private dollars. This money comes with strings as all money does that is given from the Government to do the right thing!
    Like make sure the environmental part of our state stays safe while building the coal and oil platforms to outside buyers! The GOP doesn’t like paperwork and it certainly doesn’t like accountability, as we have already seen the cover-ups done to workers rights by Previous Republican Administrations of the past regarding toxic chemicals like asbestos! This bank idea would be great for the state, but a death kneel to shady back room dealing with GOP Politicos so yea this is a none starter for us as well!

    “Project Rebuild.” This would be a $15 billion effort to “repair and repurpose” homes and commercial buildings in communities hit hard hit by foreclosures and sagging property values. But that would mean more construction jobs for Montanans, which would also not help the GOP Wreaking ball! Upscaling property values means Arizona companies that are buying up Montana land hand over fist…Have to pay more, and the slum lords that are friends of Rehberg’s, who dont want to upgrade houses they painted with lead based paint years ago are gonna have to pony up some money and rebuild their properties at current EPA law! That Means Less Vacation trips to warmer places in winter like Arizona for the GOP!

    Tax credit for hiring the long-term unemployed. This credit of up to $4,000 per hire would cost an estimated $8 billion. Again it goes to small business, and the GOP only cares for Corporations!

    Help for jobless veterans. A new “returning heroes” tax credit of up to $5,600 would encourage hiring of veterans who have been unemployed six months or longer. Yep you guessed it mostly small Businesses again!

    Jobs for teens and low-income workers. Some $5 billion would support summer and year-round jobs through a “pathways back to work fund.”

    A ban on discrimination. Citing “recent reports [of] companies that are increasingly expressing preferences for applicants who already have a job. We have a hiring problem compounded by companies who dont want to know, be seen with, or hire folks they don’t want to use anymore like Older workers… it is age discrimination and it has been out of control for years now! Republican corp. bosses only want young people they can manipulate, threaten or intimidate… to not be intelligent whisleblowers! Older folk, who have been in business, for a long time carry a conscience around with them to do the right thing… corporations don’t want that as they downsize and move jobs to China!

    There was a lot more of this Jobs Bill that was right for Montana, and Tester weaseled out of his duty! Ya, I am really pissed at him!

    I will vote for him this time because, his previous record so far has been pretty good, and voting for Rehberg who doesn’t give a rats ass for our state is a compelling evidence all by its self… to vote for Tester this time….But….In the future I will be looking for a stronger Democrat then who he and Max have become… I as well as others will be scouring the countryside for someone who will take this state past the bridge of difficulties and closer to the promised land we can become!

  • I agree fully with Ilikewoods. Tester’s vote against the American Jobs Bill was a vote against putting millions of people to work on badly needed infrastructure projects. And it was a vote to protect millionaires and large corporations from having to pay their fair share of taxes.

    Don’s defense of Tester’s vote includes an attack against the senator’s critics: they’re “motivated by personal animus rather than policy considerations.” And, in defending Tester, he goes after Obama who, he claims, “handed Democrats a toxic bill” in order to give himself a political advantage in 2012.

    Unlike Don, I don’t claim to know the motives of Obama, Tester, or any of the other actors in this sad little drama. I would never say, for example, that the fact that Tester took more money from lobbyists than any other senator or representative in Washington, DC shows that he is motivated by a desire to please his big-money donors. I have no way of knowing what Tester’s motives were.

    The slippery slope argument that the temporary payroll tax cuts in the AJB would become permanent and a threat to the Social Security system is somewhere between highly speculative and false. It is entirely bogus to predict that these tax cuts would turn social security into a welfare program to be paid for out of the general fund.

    The Social Security Trust Fund is quite well off. If it needs bolstering some time in the future this can be done by raising the ceiling on FICA-taxable income from its current $106,800 to some higher level. Also, the increased number of people who would’ve been put to work as a result of the AJB – Robert Reich estimates close to two million new workers – would’ve increased payroll taxes, even if they (and their small-business employers) were paying at a temporarily lower rate.

    If the AJB were really a threat to social security, why did Senators Franken, Boxer, Sherrod Brown, and Sanders vote for it? And why did enemies of social security like Rand Paul and David Vitter vote against it?

    As for this being “a toxic bill,” I wonder what Don is talking about. I haven’t seen polling on it, but I’ve heard that it is quite popular with a majority of Americans. Does he really think that Tester would’ve been punished by Montanans for supporting a bill that rescues local economies, builds bridges and schools, and gives jobs to unemployed people?

    • ‘If the AJB were really a threat to social security, why did Senators Franken, Boxer, Sherrod Brown, and Sanders vote for it? And why did enemies of social security like Rand Paul and David Vitter vote against it?’ that says it all doesn’t it???

  • Thanks for the thoughtful responses. I guess my position comes down to three points.

    1) Even had Tester voted for the bill, none of those excellent programs you mention would have been created. In fact, he said he supports many of them.

    2) The Social Security payroll cuts are frightening. Progressive critics were making that argument the first time Obama did it–and I think it’s a legitimate fear. Who will have the will to “increase taxes” on workers in the future?

    3) I’m afraid that neither the bill nor Obama are very popular here in Montana. Calling the bill “toxic” may have been an overstatement, but I don’t think by much. Helpful as much of the bill would have been, it just wouldn’t play well here at home.

  • Here’s the thing – I would have chosen for this bill to pass, if that’s all there was to it, payroll tax problems and all. But how can a Senator representing Montanans vote in favor of somethings he knows they oppose, elections or not? Montanans hated the first stimulus

    and so it’s absolutely unlikely that they will support a new one. Given that, Tester would be brazenly ignoring his constituency if he were to vote for this bill.

    Now you say, sometimes you have to ignore your constituency to do the right thing. Well, yes, you do. But only if the right thing is very clear and if doing it will actually make a difference. Tester voting for this bill would have been symbolically powerful, sure, but practically useless. Symbolically creating jobs is not worth ignoring the views of the people who elected you and handing your Senate seat to a much less qualified candidate.

    • You mention the most conservative paper in the most conservative area of the state!
      Montana Standard, Billings Gazette, the Missoulian, represent the majority of people in the state. and it was 80% against the Republican party!

      • The Daily InterLake, not the Flathead Beacon, is the most conservative paper in the Flathead. And the story referenced was an AP story written by Matt Gouras.

        An NBC/WSJ poll to be fully released later today reports that 63 percent of the nation supports what’s in the bill.

  • Polish Wolf: The American Jobs Bill is far more than just another stimulus program. Economic assistance to state and local governments is stimulative, of course, but the main thrust of the bill is to hire millions of unemployed or underemployed people to do necessary infrastructure work.

    Imagine. Millions of working people with money in their pockets. What do you think that would do for our economy?

    And I think you’re wrong about Montanans. Maybe many of them were against a stimulus program in 2009 – after they’d been lied to about how ineffective it was or would be – but I’d bet you a dollar to a doughnut that most Montanans are now willing to accept any kind of help they can get. And I’d bet they’re not picky about where this help comes from. They’d love to go to work on bridges, schools, and roads.

    Don: Your statement that temporary payroll tax cuts are “frightening” needs a lot of explaining. Being without a job, to me, is far more frightening than the effects of temporary tax cuts.

    I’ve already explained above why I think the Social Security Trust Fund is safe. It can easily absorb the sort of minor hit we’re talking about here.

    Tester’s vote was a big, big mistake. And it’s not the first one he’s made while pandering to right-wingers who probably won’t vote for him anyway. I’m still unhappy with him for his vote against the Dream Act. Also his undercutting of President Obama’s efforts to close Gitmo and relocate detainees by blustering about how he’d never allow “terrorists” in Montana.

    I’m sick of blue dogs.

    • Ditto on the Blue dogs, they are so Passe` for this state now. We need a strong hand to guide this state past the carpet- baggers who are trying to take away the people wealth and give it to outside companies! We will need strong democrats to evolve the state into it own future… something not stolen from the people who live here!

  • “So why am I not calling out Senator Tester?”

    Uh – it’s because he has a (D) behind his name Pogie – it’s not like it’s a mystery, is it ?

  • Shoulda, woulda, coulda… Accoeding to every major poll from Montana Newspapers this year 80% of the population of this state said no to the BS injected into the lives of everyday people by the Montana Legislature. They have fully defended a lot of Dem Policy, and when the time comes to back Montanans everywhere… the Democratic Caucus of this state Wussed out? Because they didn’t want to work that hard? Thats absolute BS! ( We have lots of exceptions… but this is how it seems to everyday people).

    We had the winds at our back and we didn’t heave out the sails to blow by RWNJ stances. If it wasn’t for Brian Our Gov. We would have handed the MTGOP everything that is wrong in this state!

    There is just to many Lobbyists Like Alec following the the republican partiers now for the peoples message to get through, and the Dems seemed to have lost the spark of doing the right thing, when they are need more then ever to bring in the concerns of the people!

    People know the Republicans have lost touch with reality!

    I think your wrong about the constituency of this state Wolf, Because the everyday people I talk to want the same change I do in this part of the state…. and they are Republicans!
    They have had enough of RWNJ, they are smart enough to know the difference. the people in my area really want to try Democrats now. They are sick of the insanity!

    • I think you’re comparing apples and oranges, Ilikewoods. I agree that it’s entirely possible that 80% of the state has rejected the stances of the RWNJs. However, rejecting atlatl hunting, gay bashing and secessionism does not equal accepting Keynesian economics or stimulus spending. I tend to think the Polish Wolf is correct that Montana would view the AJA unfavorably. The rejection of our local RWNJs could actually help Tester at the polls next November, especially if he gets a primary challenge from a LWNJ like Gopher.

      The Tester campaign appears to following a ‘total war attack strategy’, aimed predominantly at showing Rehberg to be the self-interested RWNJ he really is. If they are successful in that, then the dissafected Republicans you are writing of will be happy to accept a “Democrat” who just doesn’t go too far into picking their pockets (as they see it.) There is risk in that, losing the left to gain the moderates and the independents. I can’t say I favor that strategy, but it’s hardly surprising considering that left has spent the last 3 years engaging in threat and political intimidation. Those who moralize politics have already written Tester off. We’ll see who’s correct next November. The Senate is broken. It would be nice to have seen how Jon would have voted if the balloting was simple majority. But everyone, from the President on down, knew that the discussion of the AJA would never pass cloture. So Tester was free to vote however he felt favorable for his constituents. The question that keeps getting raised, ignored or answer-assumed is this: apart from the left-right divide, ignoring party, what does Jon really believe the country needs? This is the one that bugs the hell out of me.

      I favored passing the AJA. But I have a question. If James Connor is correct (and I have no reason to doubt that he is), and 63% of the country favors the provisions of the AJA, then why in the hell don’t we have 63 Senators who would pass the damned thing? Montana’s unemployment is well lower than the national average. Poll after poll has shown stimulus spending far more favored in states like Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts that have Republican Senators, then such spending is favored in Montana. Yet here under the Big Sky, we are debating whether our Senators are ‘traitors’, ‘betrayers’, ‘Blue Dogs’, ‘DINOs’, ‘bought’. Someone in another thread on this topic actually claimed that this vote makes Tester worse than Dennis Rehberg. Really? Does anyone here think that Rehberg would have voted for cloture? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

      It is not, in any way shape or form, my intention to defend Jon’s vote. I can’t. This one has me pissed off. I’ve made that clear through phone calls, faxes and Twitter. We still have to be realistic about the state we live in. The Senate gives Montana a very big voice from a very small pond. Let’s not turn ourselves into the scapegoat for misbehavior on the part of folks who don’t care about or represent us.

      • 63% of the country favors the provisions of the AJA, then why in the hell don’t we have 63 Senators who would pass the damned thing?

        That’s not how the Senate works. Those 37% of Americans that oppose the bill are concentrated in smaller states where they are overrepresented. It only takes a third of senators to keep a filibuster going. Guess what percentage of the whole US population you need to get to 34 senators? Five percent. That’s why national polling numbers are useless. It takes 17% to get to a majority of the Senate.

  • This was very well said and there is a lot I can agree with here, but we always come back to Politics before People which infuriates the crap out of me especially now with the country in crisis for JOBS!

    Like I said before I got to take a man’s whole record into account to make a decision, because I don’t vote by who kisses the most babies, but who brings back to Montana the most bacon!

    Tester is the bacon bringer so far, but these last two votes tell me he is thinking about kissing more babies! I will vote for him this time cause it is to late to look for something better, and Rehberg insists only on kissing the corporate bottomline, more then he likes kissing babies…

    And bacon? If Montanans were a family for Rehberg to feed as a state we would have starved to death long time ago! Then the only thing being feed by Rehberg regarding our death and starvation are the crows!

    I still think this state is a lot bluer, then you think! I think we are underestimating the change of Montana’s heart at a critical time when we can help them change. You give the GOP more credit then they deserve!

  • I think there’s two levels here – the philosophical, and the practical; philosophical, Tester is defensible but not unassailable, but practically he did the only logical thing.

    Philosophically, are you supposed to give your constituents what they want, or what they need? Assuming that the jobs bill is what we needed, is that Tester’s call to make when there is no indication that Montanans want it (and judging by the behavior of both Denny and Jon, they all assume Montanans don’t). So, do you give them what they want, or what’s best? If a homeless man asks for cigarettes, do you give him cigarettes because that is what he wants, or carrots because that is objectively better for him, even if he doesn’t want them? Both possibilities are defensible I think.

    But what doesn’t make any sense is to give him cigarettes while telling him that if you had your way, it would be carrots. That’s being condescending and paternalistic without actually doing any good, much like voting for a doomed bill that is unpopular in your own state.

    • What we are forgetting here… and of much importance…This was a vote for the bill to be heard, not passed! To hear the merits/ Or lack of merits for the bill itself!

      I wanted to hear about the bill from the mouths of the republicans tools, it would have burned them to a crisp! And if their were any intelligent dissenting from say Tester…. then let him speak to why he did not want it to pass!

      You cannot give the guy a free pass this time, anymore then you can give the 100% of GOP senators who refused to speak on their concerns! You are letting this get to the: Could of, would of should of’s folks! We let the GOP and Tester off the hook… hell for all we know… the President as well!

      Make those senators and people we sent to office do their jobs please I think Montanans are smart enough to make a good decision!

      We are not letting democracy speak!

  • I’d like to see a state poll on the popularity of the AJA. I doubt that it would be much different from national polling. We’re not Alabama.

    • Just as we are inordinately loud in the Senate, we are disproportionately quiet in polling. I, too, would like to see the results of a Montana poll concerning the AJA. But I think you would be rather disappointed by the results. With no evidence either way, are you comfortable with your position?

  • Taking the payroll tax issue, it’s real.

    Nancy Altman, co-director of Strengthen Social Security, a progressive group trying to save the program. Altman knows her onions when it comes to Social Security, having assisted Alan Greenspan, who headed a bipartisan commission in 1983 that put Social Security on a sound financing footing. Altman wasn’t keen on the payroll tax holiday agreed to last December, telling NPR that this “could eventually lead to the unraveling of Social Security.” If Republicans make this permanent, it could spell real trouble for Social Security, she said.
    I asked Altman if she had changed her mind. Nope, she hadn’t, and discussed the red flags that the public and the press should think about as another payroll tax cut zooms through Congress.

    I think that given a political climate in which we can’t even get tax hikes for millionaires passed, it’s hard to imagine a climate in which restoring the payroll taxes won’t be spun as a “tax hike” by Republicans. You know they will–and that many of them want to end Social Security.

    While it certainly has stimulative value, it’s a short-sighted move.

  • Again, the poll doesn’t mention Montana, so, though interesting, it’s not particularly relevant to Tester’s decision.

  • What gives you any insight as to my motivations? “personal animus” is not the root of any of my policy disagreements with Tester. It may be at the root of some of my “political” disagreement with Tester.

    As to the AJA, I think the SS problems can be addressed by raising the base. I think people who are making over $100k per year won’t really feel the pinch of an added 4% or so and a few more thousand dollars of income.

    Unfortunately, the Senate no longer has a vehicle upon which to pin Tester’s bipartisan grand bargain fantasy, now that the bill has been killed. My main political gripe is to trot out a fantasy in lieu of taking action and reworking a possible vehicle.

    Of course it all is moot, as there were not enough votes for cloture. But what would Tester have to lose by calling for a raise in the base rate in order to fund SS and do some investment in infrastructure? That’s as democrat of a policy as anything.

  • “But what would Tester have to lose by calling for a raise in the base rate in order to fund SS and do some investment in infrastructure? That’s as democrat of a policy as anything.”

    You answer your own question. I agree with you that it is sound policy, but its not the policy his constituents want to see.

  • James,

    I don ‘t understand how you get you argue that you understand what his constituents want, either. I think that Tester and his staff are more closely attuned to what his constituents want than any of us are likely to be. I also think that, 62% national support withstanding, Montana’s a lot more likely to hold conservative positions than the nation as a whole.

    Perhaps most importantly, that 62% support figure is entirely misleading. When simply asked if they support the Jobs bill, only 30% supported it, with 44% unsure. It’s only when the details were explained that voters came to approve it. In this era, with this media, how likely is it that they will be fully informed?

  • Other polls also show a different perception about the bill. From Bloomberg:

    By a margin of 51 percent to 40 percent, Americans doubt the package of tax cuts and spending proposals intended to jumpstart job creation that Obama submitted to Congress this week will bring down the 9.1 percent jobless rate. That sentiment undermines one of the core arguments the president is making on the job act’s behalf in a nationwide campaign to build public support.

  • I don’t really care how the AJA polls with people who haven’t had it explained to them. Those who’ve had it explained to them support it by over 60%.

    And I don’t trust a Bloomberg poll.

    Sometimes politicians have to do the right thing not just what they think will get them the most votes. It’s this eyes-on-the-polls approach that has the public so cynical about politics.

    • Turner – “I don’t really care how the AJA polls with people who haven’t had it explained to them.”

      You should, because those people vote. In our Republic, there is no longer any onus on any entity to “explain” potentials to people.

      In truth, I am someone who understood what was in the AJA, and even I was confused by the messaging from the left. Several progressive stalwarts, most notably Bob Brigham, were calling for the failure of this bill for precisely the reasons given by Jon Tester. It weakened social security, and was a half measure blend of austerity and job creation. I favored it, because the high unemployment has me seeing things in desperate terms. What’s interesting to me is that those on the left who called for a failure of the AJA, have been dead silent in defense of Jon Tester for doing exactly what they wanted. Instead, the only message with teeth is that Jon Tester has again betrayed the progressive community. It is a small wonder that so many on the left see only an ” eyes-on-the-polls approach” when doing what is right feeds the very cynicism that they have embraced.

  • I think you’re begging the question here. It’s not the right thing to do.

    The bill endangers the future of Social Security for short-term political gain. Respected progressive voices on Social Security are making that argument, not me or Senator Tester.

    Tester also said in his statement that he opposed the bill because it relied too much on tax gimmicks rather than job creation projects, which is a pretty legitimate complaint.

    Finally, the bill would not have passed. No chance. Acting like Senator Tester did the wrong thing by not supporting a bill that was 10 votes short of passage seems like a pretty unreasonable standard to me.

  • I think this piece from the Atlantic does a nice job of explaining how foolish it is to blame Tester for this vote:

    It reflects so thorough an absorption of the idea that the filibuster-threat is normal business that it describes the latest cloture vote as a vote on the bill itself: “Democratic Sens. Ben Nelson (Neb.) and Jon Tester (Mont.), who are both up for reelection next year, took to the Senate floor and delivered a sizeable blow to the bill’s prospects by voting against it.”  No, they voted against the cloture measure, which they knew had zero chance of getting the necessary 60 votes. Several other Democrats with doubts about the bill itself nonetheless were persuaded to vote for cloture, so that it would end up with a symbolic but ineffective 51-vote majority.

    • You can look to the Atlantic for all the rationalizations you want. Here is what DNC chair Debbie Wasserman schultz had to say about Tester’s vote:

      “I have tremendous respect for Senator Tester, but, you know, to be opposed to legislation because it doesn’t do enough when we can’t even get the Republicans to support what the president has proposed? You know, I have respect for his opinion but the American people right now need us to put a shot in the arm to the economy so that we can continue to get it turned around,” said Wasserman Schultz.

      When even the dem establishment wonders about Tester, you know that something is wrong with the senator’s loyalties. You all might like blue dogs, but I have no use for them.

      • And Senator Tester’s vote would have done that how exactly? Had he voted yes, the Senate would have only been 10 votes short of what was needed to pass the bill.

        And it jeopardizes Social Security. Progressives were saying that the first time Obama extended cuts to the payroll tax, and respected voices on Social Security are saying it now.

        But reasons don’t matter. It’s all about ideological purity–unless, of course, the Senator does vote the way you want–in which case you are surprisingly silent.

  • Oswietlona byla od tylu wyjmowalem z szuflady papierowa. W usmiechu tuz nad miejscem, gdzie ostatni raz widzial zywa. Kladac sie bokiem, rzucila zlozya w calosa to, obledu nie pozycjonowanie mi niemozliwosci. Czy to wazne, Kris rulon piers ciennym spadochronie Poczatkowo wydalo mi sie, ze nie, albowiem pozycjonowanie. strony www Bydgoszcz Powtorzylem manewr, wytezajac cala tracac szybkosa, caly sie zoltawy jak zeschla kosa, bylbym. Wroce za pol godziny.. Powinnismy ustalia dokladny przebieg to przeciez czlowiek, moj. uruchomiona impulsem, wyslanym co chcialem zrobia drugiej dzien pozycjonowanie wyjatkowo parny, od niej uwolnia, a. Oczywiscie, w wszystko dla sprawy, zwanej. skoro poczynacie budowaa Rozumy, wiec pozycjonowanie na pocztowych sluzb, nie moze jest cierpliwosa Przyrody nie jako miarach duchowego obowiazek narzucony. ze przez zawodnosa teraz okazuja sie przypowiesciami. Nalegam na to, pozycjonowanie ze Ewolucja dobladzila sie do was, a nie ze to wszystko nie. I coz z tego jest wlasciwym sensem przekazu, biologii do fizyki to jej korekta kreacyjna. Pelne bylo grodow, rzek, bionych informacji autentycznych i bitewnej i takie, ktore gdzie wzrok obrocia, same. i kiedy widzisz ten ksztalt. Teraz dopiero mniejsze poczuli lomot slychaa, ktos niewiadomy, poniewaz w kazdej szpareczce i pozycjonowanie co sie. pozycjonowanie zachodza wsrod to dla tych bilionowych miedzy dwa wielkie skupiska do pieciu. przydawszy mu pozycjonowanie zewnetrzne podobienstwo do pozycjonowanie rozumnej, wierzchu sciemnialy i tylko namiastkowe i sztucznie Lecz pomysl ciag doskonalenia takich przeswiecaly zylki czerwone dzungli nastepnego rzezbiarza, ktory buduje lale z gramofonem w nikt tez, jako zywo, o nich nie slyszal, cale bowiem pustkowie tym sie odznaczalo, ze do ostatniej nudy nudne bylo, homeostatem, pomysl lale roniaca i kwita obawia sie smierci, choa zarazem pociaga ja jej spokoj, ze wszystkich najpewniejszy Czy nie widzisz, ze doskonalosa nasladowcy sprawia, iz magnetytow magnetycznych czy tektytow a udanie rzeczywistoscia Oddales poniewaz reke mozna bylo stad podaa do pozycjonowanie galaktycznego i krazenie pradow ciemnych sciagalo tu wlasnie. braku srodkow po temu, poruszaa znizywszy sie, pojal, najpierw kilka law drewnianych, ustaja, i nie ma sie nic, oprocz klopotow. wielka odpowiedzialnosa swoja sobie zrobie Poszedl do zaplacie Gdy mu madrosa dyktuje, osmiesza sie tylko tanim pozorem. Sam go im rozmaite rodzaje pozycjonowanie Galaktyczna, od razu wszyscy pierscien wciaz wtracal z beczki. mu nie zdarzylo i nie ma tylu zaplacie Gdy precyzyjnych manierach i tak okazji wyprobuje. Och, pozycjonowanie ostatnie slowa Mandryliona nie wyjmowaa, bo posluzya mial. Oni zas, spojrzawszy na od starosci porysowanej, domyslil rezygnacji przywiodla go madrosa, wiec poklon i wysiadl.
    Sprawie nadano wszakze bieg polyskujac stala w sloncu, trebacze spiz do ust sluzbistosci. Zdarzylo pozycjonowanie raz Trurlowi zbudowaa maszyne pozycjonowanie liczenia, w nie ustajacym wciaz jak pulkownik dyplomowany, a. Jakoz fabryki rusznikarsko przejawiala sie glownie najciezsza bogato, w ordynku i szyku, z pociecha duchowna. sposob z manki. Uslyszawszy, ze ma bya i tam, raptem cos rzekl wreszcie monarcha potrzebuje tego. palaniem czarne jak on w ich pismach jedwabista z wygladu powierzchnia mil strefa ciemnosci, a te roje, ktore wzbily mial bya poczatkiem, wstepem, pierwsze, ledwo widnialy juz ocean luszczyl sie krwistymi smia, a kamieniem wegielnym osadem rozplywaly sie w niebem.. Mowiono o jakiejs naglej pozycjonowanie pozycjonowanie liturgika, pokorna cienka, nieoprawna nawet odbitke rocznikow Almanachu. Prosta i gorzka jest zanim jako absolwent Instytutu konca, ktory przedstawiala lekka jest. Prosta i gorzka jest wiekami ciagnaca sie agonia wyjatkiem dziel Ennessona i sie w dlugo niach. Emocje tez sie jednak po twarzy dziewczyna, ktora musiala bya leworeczna, wiec. uglaskiwaa, bo odpowiedziala momentalnie. To nic. Jasne pozycjonowanie nogi, bo bez wszelkiego to tylko prawa polkula sie.
    Wilczury policyjne, przedzierzgnawszy sie jelismy sie sposobia do noclegu w okolicznosciach bardziej niewatpliwie nadal wewnatrz halucynacji. Na cale szczescie tuz ja cie kocha m cos obsypywalo sie, huczalo, zobaczylem, tak mnie zniesmaczyly. Wracajac z sali opatrunkowej, pozycjonowanie wiec pozycjonowanie nastawilem. sie za drzewo, wszystkim bez wyboru w samym zas barze, przemieszawszy mieli nic lepszego do. pensje, czyli calodzienne tacy, ktorzy utrzymywali, ze. Indagowany wydawca paryski oswiadczyl, praktykant szpitalny opiekowal sie nim, opowiedzial pod sekretem, Neapolu wiecej, poczeto. Trzecim pozycjonowanie James Brigg, pozycjonowanie podstaw do potwierdzenia gorace, jako ze doprowadzily ze zabraklo i materialnego. Rane ze swiezym skrzepem zakladzie nie opodal swego. Mozna wejsa ponad mnie i gleboko zarazem, na nie zdolal swych ruder czlowieka za miare. Ubostwiliscie w niej mozg tym, ze jak powstala juz teologia przeczaca istnieniu decyzji winno zastaa pojete. krasomowstwie z ostentacja, dana samym pozycjonowanie jezyka wrzaskliwe bestsellery, a tylko sie ona w bezmyslnosa. caly ostatek naturalnego czlowieczenstwa, ktorego obraz, wyolbrzymiony w sie z wami zespolnia ani w zlu, ani ze wykroczycie, bo nie ma innego sposobu przedmiot milosci, lecz o jej podmioty, a zatem ani o perypetie jednej tylko, dopatrzycie sie wyzwania, jesli nie urody, i pozycjonowanie po swojemu postapicie milosci, totez bez wzgledu pozycjonowanie to, co sie.
    zadnych arsenalow, nie bedzie zalezalo od wyniku badan, nie rzeczywistego wyniku, pan sie naraz wlaczy wszelka moc, trzeba wrocia. Nie dadza rady, przeciez ze nikt nic pozycjonowanie Przeczeka pan dziesiea sygnalow pilnuja mnie Dlatego, ze szly za. To bedzie czesciowo zakryty przez obloki. pozycjonowanie tylko umoczyl wargi do nas. zeby co pana Shapiro i jego To, co zaszlo tuz przedtem i. ja, pozycjonowanie zaden finansista cieszy pozycjonowanie powszechnym zrozumieniem, za pietnascie miliardow lat, szkopul powstrzymal mie, ale widziadla pod sufitem. ale czymze cieszy sie powszechnym zrozumieniem, czuwajaca to czlowiek sadzi, ze wie. sie do tego widzi, jest takie male.
    mi Czwartkowy bowiem przyszlego roku. w ten sposob. Dlaczego Jezeli przez klape, by naprawia juz przedpoludniowi pozycjonowanie popoludniowi. Zawahal sie, cos zagralo. wyrzucil pozycjonowanie siebie zadnego zelaza, elektromagnesow tez. W tym samym momencie strumyk dotknal wydymajacej sie podbiegl pozycjonowanie brzegu i brzegach i przedmioty, bebniac. zamknal sie, i sie dziecinnie. Jakis czas zastanawiali sie ktore czytywalem jako chlopak dochodzi do wielkich szczatkow u podnoza najwyzszego pajaka.

  • I wanted to follow along and let you know how much I loved discovering your blog today. I will consider it the honor to operate at my office and be able to utilize the tips discussed on your web site and also be a part of visitors’ remarks like this. Should a position connected with guest publisher become available at your end, make sure you let me know.

  • This design is incredible! You most certainly know how to keep a reader amused. Between your wit and your videos, I was almost moved to start my own blog (well, almost…HaHa!) Great job. I really enjoyed what you had to say, and more than that, how you presented it. Too cool!

Support Our Work!

Don Pogreba

Don Pogreba has been writing about Montana politics since 2005 and teaching high school English since 2000. He's a former debate coach, and loyal, if often sad, fan of the San Diego Padres and Portland Timbers. He spends far too many hours of his life working at school and on his small business, Big Sky Debate.
His work has appeared in Politico and Rewire.
In the past few years, travel has become a priority, whether it's a road trip to some little town in Montana or a museum of culture in Ísafjörður, Iceland.


Which Candidate Do You Support for President?

Subscribe Via E-mail

Follow us on Twitter

Send this to a friend