Skip to main content

View Diary: Submission for Op-Ed on Norquist: seeking your suggestions, criticisms, tweaks? (14 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This is an interesting take, (0+ / 0-)

    but I beg to differ on your first point: the legislators sign their promise directly to the ATR. Of course it's not binding, but Republicans have been acting like it is, to the point that the budget talks are stalled. To act like it is more than a campaign carrot indicates how highly they value this particular promise.

    As to Medicare, it would depend on who they were making their pledge to, and whether it was obstructionist to the point that it actually hurt the constituents.

    And I totally disagree that it hasn't changed their behavior, in that so many Republicans have been clinging to it like scripture. Many were elected specifically because they swore they'd keep their pledge.

    It's not just a zip code, it's an attitude.

    by sboucher on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 08:41:30 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  If you read the "Norquist" pledge (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sboucher

      the promise is to the voters. It does not mention the ATR. It doesn't violate any oath because it's non-binding. The GOP use it as a fig leaf.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 08:44:20 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site