Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
A Desperate Grover Norquist Claims Fiscal Cliff Deal Not Violation of Pledge
By: Hrafnkell HaraldssonJan. 2nd, 2013more from Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Grover Norquist appeared on Anderson Cooper 360 yesterday to defend the budget deal, trying to paint his pet “congressmen and senators” as innocent of wrongdoing, while simultaneously trying to paint President Obama as an enemy of liberty. Because in Grover Norquist’s universe, Democrats are enemies of liberty and Republicans are champions of liberty. All else must fit into that model. Anything not congenial to it must be discarded. Like facts.
Last night, Norquist seemed to undermine some of Obama’s staunchest opponents on Capitol Hill when he tweeted,
The Bush tax cuts lapsed at midnight last night. Every R voting for Senate bill is cutting taxes and keeping his/her pledge.
— Grover Norquist (@GroverNorquist) January 2, 2013
At least one reader seemed to notice this and tweeted in response,
@GroverNorquist everyone republican who is voting for this measure is punching you square in the mouth. hope your ears bleed.
And another had this to say,
@GroverNorquist Whatever helps you feel in control, buddy!
So you can see what sort of thinking Norquist was up against with the pending deal in the House. He was caught between a rock and a hard place. But as I’ve pointed out before, nobody is better with relativism than conservatives.
So with his broad brush, Norquist used his opportunity with Cooper to paint Democrats as evil spendthrifts while ignoring the long record of Republican spending all the way back to Eisenhower, and growth of government under presidents like Reagan. Reality cannot be allowed to intrude upon his neat division of Republican sainthood and Democratic demonism.
Norquist even managed to redefine compromise as not a settlement of differences between two people who disagree but as an agreement between two people who already agree. Compromise of principles is apparently allowed by dictionaries but not by Grover Norquist. Under Norquist, the word loses all meaning and value. And it must: otherwise, he can’t have his cake and eat it too.
Watch, courtesy of CNN:
Cooper: You said the voting for this deal, which increases the taxes on households earning more than $450,000 annually, would not violate your pledge that lawmakers make to their constituents. Help our viewers understand that, because lawmakers who have signed that pledge promised to oppose any effort to increase income tax rates for individuals, for businesses. So how does the fiscal cliff deal not violate that pledge?
Norquist: It’s technically not a violation of the pledge but I understand why a lot of republicans have said ‘ Look, even though what’s happening is the tax cuts disappear, and we’re restoring them for most people so we’re not raising taxes. We’re actually cutting taxes.’
Cooper: You’re saying because the Bush tax cuts have expired yesterday. So, basically they expired yesterday, so technically these are still tax cuts (in the Senate bill)?
Norquist: Correct. Now, I understand that if you’re a congressman or senator you’ve gotta go out and convince not me, that you’ve technically not violated the pledge; you have to convince your constituents. The promise that congressmen and senators make is to their voters, to their state, not to me, not to Americans for Tax Reform, not to anybody else; to their voters. And they have to be able to say with a straight face they fought to protect those tax cuts for everyone. And all the Republicans in the House have done that more than once. And that they’re fighting to oppose any and all tax increases period. I think you can look your voters in the face and say, we voted to protect them for everybody. The Democrats won the senate and wouldn’t pass that bill. The president’s in the White house, he would veto that bill. Here’s the best we can do right now and we’ll continue to fight for everybody going forward.
Cooper: Is compromise really that dirty a word, though? For this country to move forward, for things to actually work, is this a good system, is it good to constantly have this brinkmanship, these battles that go late into the night? This is just the beginning of it. This isn’t even the end of it. Critics say your pledge limits the flexibility Congress might otherwise have to make compromise.
Norquist: Okay, define compromise, okay? Richard Nixon and Ted Kennedy could compromise very easily. Richard Nixon wanted the government to get bigger and Ted Kennedy wanted the government to get much bigger. And they compromise every year somewhere between bigger and much bigger. And each one said, see, I did the best I could.
Today, however, we have two parties that are no longer regional parties, North vs. South, but actually committed to principles. The Democrats have an expansive view of government; they want higher taxes in order to spend more money. Republicans want lower taxes and spending less money. If somebody wants to go east and somebody wants to go west, what would a compromise be?
I’m in favor of compromising in the direction of liberty. We have a compromise in 2011. Republicans wanted to cut spending 6 trillion dollars (the Ryan Plan) and we agreed to 2.5 trillion dollars in spending cuts. That was a compromise. We wanted more spending, we got less because Obama wouldn’t support more spending reduction. So we can have compromise in the direction of liberty, but raising taxes and spending more money which is what Obama wants to do is moving away from liberty. That’s not compromising for the American people. That’s losing.
Cooper: But you’re painting it in extraordinarily stark terms.
Norquist: Well, the two parties are extraordinarily…want to go in two different ways, if you want bigger government vs. smaller government….
Norquist has his routine all figured out. He wants to have his cake and eat it too. His pledgers caved; Obama won. Norquist can’t have that. His employees remained true to his pledge, which he falsely characterizes as a pledge to the American people and not to him personally, and did the best they could in defense of liberty, while the dastardly Obama and the Democrats want to raise taxes and spend, spend, spend.
This is just one of those things Republicans say to feel better about themselves at this point. As Jason Easley wrote here yesterday, President Obama got a big win. He owned the Republicans. As Sarah Jones pointed out, most Republicans seem aware of this and blame Boehner. The one constant is Obama as the enemy of liberty. Yeah, tell us something we haven’t heard before.
Look, Obama is a black man. He is going to remain a black man. We voted for him. Twice. You guys have to get over this.
Let’s face it folks: as long as this sort of thinking prevails in the Republican Party, there is very little hope for America going forward, at least until we can weed the crazies out of the House, and that might take awhile thanks to redistricting. They have redefined American history back to the Revolution and since Bush they have been busily redefining our language. What chance does reality have in the face of this wishful-thinking, against such reckless hate?
But Grover Norquist, no matter how he tries to paint the events of yesterday, lost, and lost big. One tweet last night said it all:
@GroverNorquist you are so full of shit. This tweet is so you. This is laughable twitter.com/GroverNorquis….
Meanwhile, this was Norquist’s parting shot:
gdnight. When Dems wake up they will realize they just made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent and lost their leverage for the next 4 yrs.
— Grover Norquist (@GroverNorquist) January 2, 2013
I have to agree with the person who tweeted back to Norquist that he is an idiot, and he failed. As Ezra Klein observed last night, Norquist fought “like hell then declare[d] victory rather than lamenting concessions.”
We hate to keep going back to Monty Python and the characterization of lopped limbs as “flesh wounds” but sadly, that is all the GOP is leaving us. The alternative is to accept reality and admit defeat, and that they can never, ever, do. All the bankrupt GOP has to offer America and Americans at this point is sleight of hand. Get ready for a steady diet of hot air in 2013.
According to Grover Norquist and his pledge, once taxes are cut they can never be raised, right? Raisin ...
With his power evaporating, Grover Norquist responded to the White House's fiscal cliff hardball by thro ...
Grover Norquist might be on the ropes. It all began on Wednesday when Saxby Chambliss broke publicly with Gr ...
A solemn promise or agreement to do or refrain from doing something that is a formally affirmed statemen ...
The act of singling out any individual, or party, for unmerited negative treatment or blame is scapegoat ...
Karen J (@KaJo503)
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 1:14 pm
At this very moment Grover Norquist is trying this same argument out on Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC. She said, “wait a minute, we’re not in an Alice in Wonderland fantasy…”
djchefron
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 2:11 pm
When Ms.Greenspan calls you out then you know your spin is in deep doo-doo.
M.R.M
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 1:19 pm
they just still dont get it, life in general. RE; monty python comment, and they still would love to stop us, from crossing that bridge, with all those “so called” flesh wounds! SAD they are so out of touch with “real” life, and so spitefull in there “so called” life!
savageDOG
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 1:24 pm
the key words here from Grover was, ” they need to be able to say this with a straight face..”
ldelde
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 1:26 pm
Norquist needs a bed next to Secty Clinton because he IS suffering from lack of oxygen to the brain and a full neurological collapse. Epic Fail!!
ibwilliamsi
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 10:22 pm
The poor woman’s been sick for a month! Norquist can linger at home in his own bed, if you please.
UncaJoe
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 1:34 pm
I’ve already heard the claim from Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) that the GOP DID NOT vote to raise any taxes. The Bush Tax Cuts had already expired when either chamber officially voted. Using this logic they voted for one of the largest tax cuts in history.
In my opinion that was the entire reason for all the faux last minute drama.
Reynardine
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 1:35 pm
An authoritarian walks into the bathroom, drops his pants, points his sidearm at himself, and orders: “#1!” or “#2!” A totalitarian walks into a confessional, points his sidearm at himself, and orders: “Confess all your bad thoughts about me!” I’d like to be a fly on the wall following Grover Norquist today. With an itty bitty camera, of course. (My thanks to Ernest Hemingway)
RMuse
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 1:49 pm
Old Grover just has to seem relevant and in charge of something, even though he is in charge of nothing. They have anti-psychotic drugs for people like him.
mjh
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 2:11 pm
Grover who?
.
MDoyle
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 2:18 pm
Here’s an idea. Stop asking that dude for his opinion on anything. He’s history, he’s ridiculous and any GOP candidate that still follows his lead if facing the end of their political career.
Beaglemom
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 3:01 pm
I agree. Here’s someone who has never held elected office, who most people have never heard of and who controls virtually all members of the GOP. How did he ever get so powerful? We know the Koch Brothers got powerful and influential with the GOP because of their money, but Grover?
Whenever I write to my Congressman I beg him to renounce his allegiance to Grover Norquist and inform him that he works for the American people, not for ALEC, not for Grover and not for the Koch Brothers. Amazingly this time Dave Camp voted the right way. Perhaps for the first time since he was elected years back. I think he must have been inundated with constituents telling him to remember who employs him.
And Grover, I’m a lifelong Democrat and I believe in “liberty” as in the freedoms espoused in the Constitution. And I have enormous respect for President Obama who is so much better a person than you, poor grumpy, cowardly Grover Norquist. In fact Grover Norquist does a great disservice to that kind and gentle Grover, the blue furry critter who is a once-in-a-while superhero on Sesame Street.
mjh
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 5:04 pm
“Whenever I write to my Congressman I beg him to renounce his allegiance to Grover Norquist and inform him that he works for the American people, not for ALEC, not for Grover and not for the Koch Brothers.”
You shouldn’t have to beg him — you should remind him that he works for you, and ORDER him to do so.
.
truamrcan
Jan. 4th, 2013 at 6:00 pm
Norquist is laughing. Here’s why: letting tax cuts expire is NOTHING compared to what the richest should have been paying all along. THINK ABOUT IT.
For over 30 years, he has influenced our politicians and it’s time greed and power lust had the spotlight.
He and Bush, sitting side by side, created the “tax cuts” that SEEMED like a good idea. BUT, when is the last time the US went to war and cut taxes? NEVER. Nice diversion, though. And at the time, it worked.
The tax pledge is a violation of our Constitution. Those who signed it took an oath to uphold an protect that Constitution. People are not understanding this is treason and sedition. Norquist’s claims the pledge is meant to be for the good of the people is a lie. This pledge isn’t a piece of legislature.
Norquist, from the time of Reagan, has been part and parcel of our nation’s current poverty. In college, along with Abramoff and Reed, he stated clearly that compromising with the Democrats would never happen because the plan was to remove Democrats PERMANENTLY. He also laundered money for Abramoff and “supported” Reed financially.
More than one has said he holds a large part in changing the GOP into what we see and hear today. He believes in privatizing our entire infrastructure. Health, education, airports to buses..all privatized. Pay attention: it’s already happening.
Free trade agreements, outsourcing, removing Wall Street regulations-all supported by Norquist and company.
When the NRA made the outrageous suggestion of armed guards in every school, Norquist backed it. NOT because he gives a damn about our children, but because he’s on the NRA board and gun manufacturers mean more to him than any citizen.
Norquist has kept himself hidden and done so very successfully. He’s not harmless. He is Hitler in baby fat. I had a professional criminologist point this out to me and thank God he did.
Emily
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 3:22 pm
If he is a example of what is in congress then we the people need to clean house on the house of congress come 2014 . I can’t wait as a matter of fact lets start a recall petition on the house of congress then maybe they will understand . Better yet let’s drop their pay and make them pay for their own insurance and travel expense!
Frank
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 3:32 pm
Norquist looked like a fool on CNN. However, he is right about the tax cut for $450k household now being permanent. Obama caved in way too much on many aspects.
Shiva (Moderator)
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 3:58 pm
I had no problem with the 450, in places like NY and the east coast 250 is not that rich. So what if he gave up on the 250?
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 4:27 pm
I agree, Shiva. Not big deal on the $450K. Particularly in the DC area, $450 is not a fortune. Even in the ‘burbs we had to pay steep rent and the cost of living as far as groceries, etc, is correspondingly steep.
Frank
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 4:39 pm
You completely missed my point. It’s not about the numbers. It’s about them being permanent. Obama restored the majority of the Bush tax cuts and made them permanent. Obama originally asked for $1.6 trillion in revenue. Boehner first offered $800 billion. Final deal is for $600 billion. Obama is a lousy negotiator.
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 6:52 pm
I really don’t think he gave up too much, permanent or otherwise. Considering who and what he was dealing with, I think he did rather well.
fredaruthproject
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 7:07 pm
President Obama did what we elected him to do – he negotiated the best deal he could make with people who do not have the best interest of our country at heart. Unfortunately, these Republican representatives have been given the power to wreak havoc on our lives, including the lives of their owm constituency!
majii
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 9:02 pm
A major goal of PBO is to restore the middle class, which has declined the most over the past 10+ years due to trickle down economic policy. That was the driving force behind making the middle class tax cuts permanent. I don’t think they’ll remain permanent forever, but I do hope they’ll remain in place long enough to strengthen the middle class-the backbone of the U.S. economy.
Frank Boudreault
Jan. 3rd, 2013 at 10:14 am
Restore the middle class?
That’s why the fiscal cliff “deal” has a bunch of loopholes in favor of Wall Street.
Also, they let a payroll tax cut expired, which will increase the average worker’s tax burden by about $1,000.
What about the NASCAR loophole, which will cost taxpayers $46 million this year and plus $95 million through 2017.
What is your definition of middle class again? $450k in revenue?
Shiva (Moderator)
Jan. 3rd, 2013 at 10:33 am
Could you post a link to the payroll tax please. I have read several “details” of the deal and have not seen that
Never mind I found it. Big deal
djchefron
Jan. 3rd, 2013 at 11:20 pm
When they enacted the payroll tax cut it was supposed to be the death of Social Security.Now when it is cut OH NOES WHAT ABOUT THE WORKERS.SHEESH I wish the left would make up their minds.And people wonder why we cant win elections.
A few days ago in another thread I brought up entitlements that helps people.I found out it was 4.5% of the GDP.Then a question was posed how much are the other entitlement were?I didn’t have an answer then but as I was looking I came across something called non defence discretionary spending.It was at 19% of GDP.That’s where your nascar exemption,sugar subsidies,payoff to the oil companies etc are at.You want to stop this mad rush to ruin the safety net that the powers that be has determined is our fiscal downfall,write your congressman ,organize and demand that those get cut first ,second and last.
djchefron
Jan. 3rd, 2013 at 11:02 pm
Lets put this notion of President Obama caving on 250.000.Thanks to Lawrence McDonnell for breaking it down.When Clinton raise the top rate to 39% for incomes of 250.000 that was in 1994 dollars.Guess what?Adjusting for inflation the top rate at 39% is for incomes of”drum roll please”397.000 dollars.A difference of 3000 dollars.So if people are freaking out over 3000 dollars for doing something no Democratic has done in our lifetimes in getting republicans to raise taxes then you are the loony left.
That is all.
labman57
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 6:55 pm
In an effort to feign political relevancy, Norquist has been spinning non-stop to the point of self-induced vertigo.
lm945
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 8:30 pm
Voting in the bill at 11:59pm on 12/31/12 would have required Republicans to sacrific their first born sons to appease the angry God Grover for violating their pledge to obey him above all others.
Voting in the bill at 12:01am on 1/1/13, thereby making it a vote to lower taxes instead of raising them, the Great God Grover is pleased, and Republicans will continue to enjoy GGGs blessings and beneficence.
bess moore
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 8:51 pm
Such bastards! Omg!
ibwilliamsi
Jan. 2nd, 2013 at 10:20 pm
If this isn’t a violation of the pledge, he shouldn’t have objected to the original $250k proposal. For that matter, why did he ever object at all?