Grover Norquist needs to go missing .....

[Amelia]

Threatening how? Something illegal going on? I don't think that's the case.

Sorry but I agree with his position and I guarantee you that it is not the case that the "majority of their constituents want them...(to raise taxes)" in every Congressional district. Raising tax rates is a bad idea. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. I'm all for eliminating loopholes and flattening the tax rates but I basically agree with Norquist.

Will you answer the question I originally posed?

Probably not. Or probably not in a way you would appreciate. I've rarely found it profitable to try to discuss things with people who say things like, "Since you object to a person who is against A, I assume you are for B" ... as if there are not infinitely many other possibilities. You really had way too little to go on to make an assumption like that and yet you jumped right in with it.

Okay, fine, do you want to see tax rates raised or not?

I want the option to be on the table.

For example, I want people to be free and willing to close loopholes without having to hold out for a reduction in the marginal rate to offset the effect of patching that hole.

I especially don't want Republicans to appear narrow-minded and heartless and seem to care more about keeping an oath to an eccentric then they do about keeping promises to old people who have paid into the system for decades. Their arguments about fixing a broken and unsustainable system are lost because they lost the PR war when they allowed themselves to look like Norquist's reactionary pawns.

 

[eflatminor]

Probably not. Or probably not in a way you would appreciate. I've rarely found it profitable to try to discuss things with people who say things like, "Since you object to a person who is against A, I assume you are for B" ... as if there are not infinitely many other possibilities. You really had way too little to go on to make an assumption like that and yet you jumped right in with it.

Okay, fine, do you want to see tax rates raised or not?

I want the option to be on the table.

For example, I want people to be free and willing to close loopholes without having to hold out for a reduction in the marginal rate to offset the effect of patching that hole.

I especially don't want Republicans to appear narrow-minded and heartless and seem to care more about keeping an oath to an eccentric then they do about keeping promises to old people who have paid into the system for decades. Their arguments about fixing a broken and unsustainable system are lost because they lost the PR war when they allowed themselves to look like Norquist's reactionary pawns.

Okay, fair enough.

 

[Stephanie]

Please tell us what effect Norquist is having on this country?

He's as relevant as James Carville... just another gas bag.

You are suggesting that the GOP signs oathes to irrellevant gassbags? How telling!

stop being dishonest, it's not a oath and you all know it

 

[Stephanie]

Probably not. Or probably not in a way you would appreciate. I've rarely found it profitable to try to discuss things with people who say things like, "Since you object to a person who is against A, I assume you are for B" ... as if there are not infinitely many other possibilities. You really had way too little to go on to make an assumption like that and yet you jumped right in with it.

Okay, fine, do you want to see tax rates raised or not?

I want the option to be on the table.

For example, I want people to be free and willing to close loopholes without having to hold out for a reduction in the marginal rate to offset the effect of patching that hole.

I especially don't want Republicans to appear narrow-minded and heartless and seem to care more about keeping an oath to an eccentric then they do about keeping promises to old people who have paid into the system for decades. Their arguments about fixing a broken and unsustainable system are lost because they lost the PR war when they allowed themselves to look like Norquist's reactionary pawns.

well that is what you want, a lot of other people want NO NEW taxes until they cut this damn government and get their SPENDING under control..I don't know what's so hard for you all to grasp

 

[Amelia]

Okay, fine, do you want to see tax rates raised or not?

I want the option to be on the table.

For example, I want people to be free and willing to close loopholes without having to hold out for a reduction in the marginal rate to offset the effect of patching that hole.

I especially don't want Republicans to appear narrow-minded and heartless and seem to care more about keeping an oath to an eccentric then they do about keeping promises to old people who have paid into the system for decades. Their arguments about fixing a broken and unsustainable system are lost because they lost the PR war when they allowed themselves to look like Norquist's reactionary pawns.

well that is what you want, a lot of other people want NO NEW taxes until they cut this damn government and get their SPENDING under control..I don't know what's so hard for you all to grasp

Welllll ... if candidates keep swearing fealty to Norquist a lot of those people are going to lose their elected positions and the remaining ones may not have a strong enough voice to influence the solution.

Extremism is why Harry Reid is still the leader of the Senate. Democrats would probably still have had control of the Senate after November 2010 no matter what, but Reid would have been out if it hadn't been for the kind of extremism which gave Sharron Angle the primary victory that year. Just think how different the attitude in the Senate would be if we could have shaken it up by getting rid of Reid.

 

[MeBelle]

Grover Norquist losing influence over GOP policy | Washington Times Communities


If the events of the last week are any indication, fewer lawmakers may be inclined to unconditionally obey Norquist’s pledge in the months to come. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has openly expressed opposition to the pledge as an impediment to reform. 16 Republican lawmakers have also indicated their support for the “Bowles-Simpson Deficit Reduction Plan” that includes revenue increases through taxing “capital gains and dividends as ordinary income” and phasing in “an increase in the excise tax on gasoline.

Bowles-Simpson Plan Commendably Puts Everything on the Table But Has Major Deficiencies Because It Lacks an Appropriate Balance Between Program Cuts and Revenue Increases — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

 

[Amelia]

Welcome news!

 

[ClosedCaption]

Okay, fine, do you want to see tax rates raised or not?

I want the option to be on the table.

For example, I want people to be free and willing to close loopholes without having to hold out for a reduction in the marginal rate to offset the effect of patching that hole.

I especially don't want Republicans to appear narrow-minded and heartless and seem to care more about keeping an oath to an eccentric then they do about keeping promises to old people who have paid into the system for decades. Their arguments about fixing a broken and unsustainable system are lost because they lost the PR war when they allowed themselves to look like Norquist's reactionary pawns.

well that is what you want, a lot of other people want NO NEW taxes until they cut this damn government and get their SPENDING under control..I don't know what's so hard for you all to grasp

The funniest part or maybe the worse part if you already know is that they want to cut govt first...Including the safety net. Then the plan is once its under control then we can raise taxes? Hows that for a shell game!

You probably still dont understand so heres a question you should ask yourself: Self, how much spending cuts will Grover see as being enough to get Govt under control?

Then once you cant answer that question ask yourself: Self, Whats the likelyhood that govt spending will ever be under control in the eyes of Grover?

Then once you cant answer that question, ask yourself: Self, Will Grover, after all the cuts ever ever say ok, now we can raise taxes?

You know the answer to the last question....So the answer to the first question is unknown. No amount of cuts will ever be enough for the Grover types. But we should play this game of "you first" and hope he's satisfied. Grovers plan isnt to cut spending it's to make govt small enough to easily kill it or "drown it" like a good patriot.

 

[LoneLaugher]

THEY DO NOT REALLY WANT TO CUT ANYTHING.

Hartmann: Has #OWS "blown up" the Republican Santa Claus theory? | Thom Hartmann - News & info from the #1 progressive radio show

 

[Dot Com]

Grover Norquist losing influence over GOP policy | Washington Times Communities


If the events of the last week are any indication, fewer lawmakers may be inclined to unconditionally obey Norquist’s pledge in the months to come. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has openly expressed opposition to the pledge as an impediment to reform. 16 Republican lawmakers have also indicated their support for the “Bowles-Simpson Deficit Reduction Plan” that includes revenue increases through taxing “capital gains and dividends as ordinary income” and phasing in “an increase in the excise tax on gasoline.

Bowles-Simpson Plan Commendably Puts Everything on the Table But Has Major Deficiencies Because It Lacks an Appropriate Balance Between Program Cuts and Revenue Increases — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Norquist is, no doubt, just like some PACs. They ask for your support and if you don't give it, they fund your next opponent. One little toad like him calling the shots for the entire GOP and the country due to their obstructionism & standing filibsters.