Skip to main content

With anti-tax absolutist Grover Norquist announcing on CBS This Morning that he supports John Boehner's position on increased tax revenue, it seems that there's two options: Either Norquist doesn't understand Boehner's position or the media has misinterpreted Boehner's conciliatory tone as an actual substantive shift.

We probably won't have the answer to that question until the results are in, but so far, I'd say the signs point to Norquist being right. Here's what he said this morning (video above):

What Speaker Boehner said before the election was that we're not raising marginal tax rates. What he said in his presentation [last week] was we're not raising marginal tax rates. He is in favor of more revenue from economic growth. I certainly agree with him on that.
Charlie Rose pressed Norquist, saying that Boehner had actually put real tax increases on the table through tax reform, but Norquist said Rose had misinterpreted Boehner's position. "In his presentation, he's always referred to revenues from coming from growth that tax reform can give you," Norquist said.

So we have a situation where Norquist says John Boehner is merely taking the supply side position that lower tax rates combined with tax reform will generate economic growth which will in turn increase revenue while others (such as Charlie Rose) are saying Boehner has actually indicated a willingness to raise the effective tax rate, albeit in combination with tax reform.

As I said, we won't know which position is right until the final deal is done, but based on what Boehner has said so far, we've got some pretty strong clues. On Wednesday, he said:

For purposes of forging a bipartisan agreement that begins to solve the problem, we're willing to accept new revenue, under the right conditions.

What matters is where the increased revenue comes from, and what type of reform comes with it.

Does the increased revenue come from government taking a larger share of what the American people earn through higher tax rates?

Or does it come as the byproduct of a growing economy, energized by a simpler, cleaner, fairer tax code, with fewer loopholes, and lower rates for all?

That's a pretty clear endorsement of the Norquist position: that new revenue would come from economic growth unleashed by tax reform. But let's say you believe Boehner was just asking an honest question. In that case, here's what he said on Thursday:
Raising taxes on small businesses will kill jobs in America. It is as simple as that.
Once again, Boehner doesn't seem to be straying from the Norquist position on taxes.

But the clearest indication of where Boehner actually stands is that on Friday, he refused to say whether he would support extending the Obama tax cuts (by which I mean current tax rates on income below $250,000) without also extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. In fact, he made it clear that his top priority is extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy when they expire at the end of this year.

Given that tax reform would be nearly impossible to enact by the end of the year, the real question is whether or not House Republicans will hold the Obama tax cuts hostage in order to continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. The president has made it clear he will veto an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, but has also called on Boehner to pass the Senate legislation extending current tax rates on middle-class Americans.

Boehner may ultimately agree to let that happen, but he's given no indication so far that he's going to do anything but hold middle-class tax cuts hostage. And as long as he's holding them hostage, there's no daylight between his position and Grover Norquist's position.

Let's not forget that if that's what ends up happening—that Boehner holds middle-class tax cuts hostage—he won't just be repudiating President Obama's judgment, he'll be repudiating the decision made by Americans last Tuesday. From the very start of this campaign, President Obama made it clear that his plan was to let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire at the end of this year and then begin tax reform next year. On Tuesday, a majority of voters chose the president's vision. Moreover, they expanded the Democratic majority in the Senate and gave them more seats in the House. To claim that Republicans somehow won this election too is absurd. And if Boehner holds these middle-class cuts hostage, that's exactly what he'll be doing.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Can someone please remind Nordquist (42+ / 0-)

    that he FUCKING LOST THE ELECTION. That is all.

    To me progress is not so much a goal as it is a process and I believe it will not follow a straight course. Remember, the drops of water that form the river may not take the shortest path but they will still reach the ocean.

    by ontheleftcoast on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:16:17 AM PST

  •  The American people repudiated Norquist. (21+ / 0-)

    Romney and the Republican party ran, in terms of taxes, on Norquist's vision. They lost. Period.

  •  Norquist is right (20+ / 0-)

    Unless there's a piece of video I haven't seen, Boehner has been very careful to refer to revenue and not to increasing rates.

    Of course if you believe in his twisted logic, we should reduce the rates to 0% for everyone and the government will take in infinite revenue.

    We get what we want - or what we fail to refuse. - Muhammad Yunus

    by nightsweat on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:19:43 AM PST

  •  Boehner is only saying "revenue" to get people to (10+ / 0-)

    think that he is going to compromise.  Before this is over Boehner will make it very clear that any taxes (whether from increased rates or from closed loopholes) are a deal breaker and will hold us hostage until Christmas (or even past that like last year).

    Boehner's biggest concern now is not Norquist, it is the daggers that are raised (by Cantor, Ryan and others) to stab him in the back and depose him as Speaker.  Boehner will have a shorter tenure than Jim Wright (who had to leave because of ethics investigations).

    Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

    by DefendOurConstitution on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:19:47 AM PST

    •  He's in a lose-lose position (6+ / 0-)

      PBO won't have to veto any extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy because no such bill is ever going to make it to his desk -- and Boehner knows it.

      The Senate bill he [i]will[/i] sign, which extends the tax cuts only for the middle class, is sitting out there waiting for the House to approve it.

      So Boehner either gets enough of his troops in line to support it, risking the rather of the dagger holders, or he does nothing (either figuratively by passing the extension for the wealthy or literally), risking the wrath of the undeniable majority of the American people who voted for PBO's position on all of this.

      What's it gonna be, boy? Party or country?

      Please, oh please, wingnuts, do run someone really, really conservative in 2016 -- and pen for us the opening chapter of "The Way of the Whigs"

      by Yankee Patriot on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:38:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  We on the streets may be back (11+ / 0-)

    in a sort of campaign mode to make clear to the lunkheads in Washingtonia that we meant it when we voted for the Democratic approach and against the Republican.

    The GOP can't win on ideas. They can only win by lying, cheating, and stealing. So they do.

    by psnyder on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:20:14 AM PST

  •  Norquist shmorquist. eom!!!! (3+ / 0-)

    "So, am I right or what?"

    by itzik shpitzik on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:20:33 AM PST

  •  So let's imagine they go to the polls in 2014 (5+ / 0-)

    ... with the fully sequester package.  Tax hikes for all, big defense and other cuts.   Who takes the blame for the resulting recession?    Well, Obama won't be on the ballot, but the House majority will be.

    But I'm not sure how that will play out.

    •  And they know that. (0+ / 0-)

      Obama holds all the cards now, and they know that also.

    •  Except that, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      By 2014, the sequester will be a faint memory, the working class will be enjoying the "Obama tax cuts" crucial programs that had been cut will have been rather quickly restored and the economy will be on the way up, big time.
      And the deficit will be shrinking.
      And if this not how it works out, it will be because the GOP has continued to obstruct.

      If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

      by CwV on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:40:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't know what you mean by that (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        If the GOP won't do a deal, middle class and upper class taxes will go up, government spending will contract, and a recession begins on top of the current weak economy.   It could easily wreck things through 2014... and the politics of it depend on whether the Dems can pin on it the GOP.

        •  If we actually go off the fiscal bluff (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ColoTim, Miles, Calamity Jean

          nothing will happen immediately.
          Except that the GOP's leverage will evaporate.
          Obama and the Dems will immediately work to make tax cuts (retroactive to Jan1) for working class people the law, now freed of the baggage of the top bracket tax cuts. And the GOP will either pass the Obama tax cuts or show, once and for all, that they are all only about tax cuts for the rich.
          But the tax cuts for the rich are not just income taxes. Most of the upper bracket income is Cap Gains and Interest/dividends. Those rates have been kept VERY low, that's why Rmoney and his strata pay so much less than wage earners, percentagewise. When those rates revert to Clinton Era, it will mean a much better revenue picture.
          Meanwhile the "across the board" spending cuts will be picked apart. Sequestration cuts the Pentagon Budget by 10%. Obama and the Pentagon brass identified cuts they were comfortable with that totaled 5%, before the sequestration became a thing. They can bargain away half of the sequestration cuts without the Pentagon squeeking.
          SocSec and the Medis were exempted from the sequestration, so they are safe as is and Obama, Biden, Reid, Murray and Pelosi have all dug in their positions on this.
          The rest of the cuts will be fodder for fight after fight, restoring essential programs, weeding out non-essential ones, finding efficiencies where possible. All of these fights must be framed as "This program helps__(some part of the 99%). This cut hurts__(some other part of the 99%). If the GOP obstructs, they can be blasted for hurting one or another of their non-constituencies.
          Given that the increase in revenue and decrease in spending (just the Pentagon alone, at 5% is better than $50billion/year, half a trillion in 10 years), by 2014 we should be well on our way to a much better economy.

          If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

          by CwV on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:30:33 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Does Norquist have pics of Congress (6+ / 0-)

    Members with ......... Unsavory contents

    he should have gone to jail when he and Ralph Reed helped Jack Abramson fleece Native Americans

    Yeah Baby!

    It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

    by War on Error on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:21:35 AM PST

  •  If I didn't know any better I'd say both of (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DefendOurConstitution, CwV, TomP

    these guys have had their heads completely and firmly up their asses for the past 30 or more years.

    'cuz seriously, this strains the bounds of even the "intentionally obtuse" strategy of going through life.

  •  Why would anyone believe what Norquist says about (3+ / 0-)

    what Boehner says?

    Not a paradox.  A pair of liars.  

  •  Someone should ask the R's (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, llywrch, Calamity Jean

    Would they take a deal where the tax cuts for the wealthy remain, but those for the middle class expire.

    If they say "yes", run that tape on every TV station in the country 24/7.

    We get what we want - or what we fail to refuse. - Muhammad Yunus

    by nightsweat on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:22:27 AM PST

  •  Norquist needs to bend over . . . (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and take what Elmo's givin'.

  •  Middle class tax relief NOW (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Randomfactor, indie17, ColoTim

    That's the message we need to repeat over and over again - drill it into the skulls of larger media.  Force the GOP to stick up for the middle class or betray the middle class in favor of the rich.

    So when Boehner and the House GOP drive us off their "fiscal cliff", it will be clear that they are on a suicide mission for the rich.  Voters will know that the GOP refuses to stand with the middle class.  But we have to be clear about where we stand to voters.  We want middle class tax relief now, rinse, repeat.

  •  Still on the leash. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    US Blues, Nicci August, Calamity Jean

    Bonehead isn't going to go against Norquist. None of them are. This is going to get ugly.

    It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness - Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Fish in Illinois on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:22:57 AM PST

  •  That rising tide that would float all boats (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Calamity Jean

    has mysteriously declined to rise in response to tax cuts for the wealthy.  Government stimulus money, on the other hand, seems to do the trick rather nicely.  

    But that would require accepting actual DATA on growth rates in relation to tax rates.  They don't do that.  Which is perienally baffling, considering that they purport to be the party of fiscal reality.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:23:26 AM PST

  •  Memo to self (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rosebuddear, wader, ColoTim, Calamity Jean

    When visiting Hell, be sure to bring a parka.

    I am progressive. I am liberal. I make no apologies. - Kos

    My political compass: - 8.38,-6.97

    by pucklady on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:23:56 AM PST

  •  We can cut marginal rates (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wader, ColoTim, Calamity Jean

    And help small businesses just like Boehner says while still raising revenues. It's called treating cap gains/dividends as ordinary income. This would both raise revenue, while also lowering the top rate for small business. We just cannot let the R's dictate that all the gains from raising investment taxes be used for rate reduction.

  •  Why not just (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, RainyDay, Calamity Jean

    zero taxes.  That would surely result in a windfall of revenue!  The laffer curve, was a curve.  It had an equilibrium point, below which, revenues quickly tailed off.  There is ample evidence (The National Debt), that we are below the equilibrium point and have been since 2000.

  •  Norquist clearly does not understand that (5+ / 0-)

    rich people keep money in their bank accounts. The more, the better.

    Raise taxes on outsourcers. Reduce them for people/corps who keep/bring manufacturing back to the USA.

    2 parts tax raise, 1 part tax reduction.

    Why hello there reality, how are you doing?

    by Future Gazer on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:24:36 AM PST

  •  Norquist believes that America's economy (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, tarminian

    is on a different section of the Laffer Curve than it is in reality.  Lowering taxes DOES NOT increase tax revenue.  Sorry, Grover.

    -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

    by sunbro on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:24:41 AM PST

  •  No matter what, both the Administration (0+ / 0-)

    ...and the Senate should make a pact never to stroke Boehner again, lest he harden in his position.

    "Why is it that the truly brilliant are doomed to a life of obscurity, surrounded by a sea of mediocrity, only to wind up covered in sores in a pool of their own filth?"

    by kabalabonga on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:25:58 AM PST

  •  Remind me ... (5+ / 0-)

    When did Grover Norquist get elected to public office? I don't remember him ever being on the ballot. In a democracy people elect representatives to write our laws. No single private citizen should ever have this much influence.

  •  I whole heartedly support (8+ / 0-)

    Boehner's and Norquist's interpretation of Boehner.  I truly want them to focus on tax law reform -- loophole closings -- dollar sign fandangos.  I pray they put their focus there.

    Why?  Because they have only 16 working days before the Bush tax cuts expire.  I want them in disarray within their party and tangled up in the complexities of the T-Rex sized tax code and then run out the clock.


    " My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total." Barbara Jordan, 1974

    by gchaucer2 on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:26:59 AM PST

  •  These guys never learn (5+ / 0-)


    "It strikes me as gruesome and comical that in our culture we have an expectation that a man can always solve his problems" - Kurt Vonnegut

    by jazzence on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:27:35 AM PST

  •  Let me guess (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, wader, Calamity Jean

    Norquist has been trying to lose weight by eating more.

    I'm no philosopher, I am no poet, I'm just trying to help you out - Gomez (from the song Hamoa Beach)

    by jhecht on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:27:39 AM PST

  •  i hope the voters (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, wader, Calamity Jean

    are listening to this nonsense and will give the dems control of the house in 2014, that is the only way to definitely get the country back on the right track to deficit reduction and economic stability.

  •  Norquist/Boehner claim mandate for Romney Tax Plan (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, wader

    It's as simple as that.

  •  its posturing (5+ / 0-)

    you'll drive yourself nuts trying to parse the rhetoric at this point. its too soon for it to mean anything.

    Boehner saying the he wants to avoid the fights of the past is big news. that means he doesn't want to be seen grabbing hostages, at least for now. and apparantly he's getting cover for that from his caucaus and from guys like Norquits. again, very big. its only 6 days out from the election and he's already got more room to move than he ever had in the last two years.

    what nobody has added to the mix yet is the "current law" vs "projections" twist of the tongue. remember, the tax rates go up on Jan 1st automatically. so, Boehner could start to say that he opposes raising rates above "current law", which still allows the bush rates to expire and go back to what they were for the above 250k crowd, dividends, and cap gains.  

    and Obama could let the Bush rates expire and still "agree" with Boehner that rates will stay the same "under current" law, while still getting the revenue he wants from the right sources.

    I detect a shift. the Beltway knows that Obama has the cards this time.  

  •  The Fiscal Cliff Builders: (4+ / 0-)

    Taxpayer Protection Pledge
    I, __, pledge to the taxpayers of the (_
    district of the) state of __ and to the American
    people that I will: ONE, oppose any and all efforts
    to increase the marginal income tax rate for
    individuals and business; and TWO, oppose any
    net reduction or elimination of deductions and
    credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further
    reducing tax rates.

    AL-Sen Jeff Sessions (R)
    AL-Sen Richard Shelby (R)
    AL-01 Jo Bonner (R)
    AL-02 Martha Roby (R)
    AL-03 Mike Rogers (R)
    AL-04 Robert Aderholt (R)
    AL-05 Mo Brooks (R)
    AL-06 Spencer Bachus (R)
    AK-Sen Lisa Murkowski (R)
    AK-AL Don Young (R)
    AZ-Sen Jon Kyl (R)
    AZ-Sen John McCain (R)
    AZ-01 Paul Gosar (R)
    AZ-02 Trent Franks (R)
    AZ-03 Ben Quayle (R)
    AZ-05 David Schweikert (R)
    AZ-06 Jeff Flake (R)
    AR-Sen John Boozman (R)
    AR-01 Rick Crawford (R)
    AR-02 Tim Griffin (R)
    AR-03 Steve Womack (R)
    CA-02 Wally Herger (R)
    CA-03 Dan Lungren (R)
    CA-04 Tom McClintock (R)
    CA-19 Jeff Denham (R)
    CA-21 Devin Nunes (R)
    CA-22 Kevin McCarthy (R)
    CA-24 Elton Gallegly (R)
    CA-25 Buck McKeon (R)
    CA-26 David Dreier (R)
    CA-40 Ed Royce (R)
    CA-41 Jerry Lewis (R)
    CA-42 Gary Miller (R)
    CA-44 Ken Calvert (R)
    CA-45 Mary Bono Mack (R)
    CA-46 Dana Rohrabacher (R)
    CA-48 John Campbell (R)
    CA-49 Darrell Issa (R)
    CA-50 Brian Bilbray (R)
    CA-52 Duncan D. Hunter (R)
    CO-03 Scott Tipton (R)
    CO-04 Corey Gardner (R)
    CO-05 Doug Lamborn (R)
    CO-06 Mike Coffman (R)
    FL-Sen Marco Rubio (R)
    FL-01 Jeff Miller (R)
    FL-02 Steve Southerland (R)
    FL-04 Ander Crenshaw (R)
    FL-05 Richard Nugent (R)
    FL-06 Cliff Stearns (R)
    FL-07 John Mica (R)
    FL-08 Daniel Webster (R)
    FL-09 Gus Bilirakis (R)
    FL-10 Bill Young (R)
    FL-12 Dennis Ross (R)
    FL-13 Vern Buchanan (R)
    FL-14 Connie Mack (R)
    FL-15 Bill Posey (R)
    FL-16 Tom Rooney (R)
    FL-18 Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R)
    FL-21 Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R)
    FL-22 Allen West (R)
    FL-24 Sandy Adams (R)
    FL-25 David Rivera (R)
    GA-Sen Johnny Isakson (R)
    GA-Sen Saxby Chambliss (R)
    GA-01 Jack Kingston (R)
    GA-03 Lynn Westmoreland (R)
    GA-06 Tom Price (R)
    GA-08 Austin Scott (R)
    GA-09 Tom Graves (R)
    GA-10 Paul Broun (R)
    GA-11 Phil Gingrey (R)
    ID-Sen Mike Crapo (R)
    ID-Sen James Risch (R)
    ID-01 Raul Labrador (R)
    ID-02 Michael Simpson (R)
    IL-Sen Mark Kirk (R)
    IL-06 Peter Roskam (R)
    IL-08 Joe Walsh (R)
    IL-10 Robert Dold (R)
    IL-11 Adam Kinzinger (R)
    IL-13 Judy Biggert (R)
    IL-14 Randy Hultgren (R)
    IL-15 Tim Johnson (R)
    IL-16 Don Manzullo (R)
    IL-17 Bobby Schilling (R)
    IL-18 Aaron Schock (R)
    IL-19 John Shimkus (R)
    IN-Sen Dan Coats (R)
    IN-03 Marlin Stutzman (R)
    IN-04 Todd Rokita (R)
    IN-05 Dan Burton (R)
    IN-06 Mike Pence (R)
    IN-08 Larry Buschon (R)
    IN-09 Todd Young (R)
    IA-04 Tom Latham (R)
    IA-05 Steve King (R)
    KS-Sen Jerry Moran (R)
    KS-Sen Pat Roberts (R)
    KS-01 Tim Huelskamp (R)
    KS-02 Lynn Jenkins (R)
    KS-04 Michael Pompeo (R)
    KY-Sen Mitch McConnell (R)
    KY-Sen Rand Paul (R)
    KY-01 Ed Whitfield (R)
    KY-02 Brett Guthrie (R)
    KY-04 Geoff Davis (R)
    KY-05 Hal Rogers (R)
    KY-06 Ben Chandler (D)*
    LA-Sen David Vitter (R)
    LA-01 Steve Scalise (R)
    LA-03 Jeffery Landry (R)
    LA-04 John Fleming (R)
    LA-05 Rodney Alexander (R)
    LA-06 Bill Cassidy (R)
    LA-07 Charles Boustany (R)
    MD-01 Andy Harris (R)
    MD-06 Roscoe Bartlett (R)
    MA-Sen Scott Brown (R)
    MI-01 Dan Benishek (R)
    MI-02 Bill Huizenga (R)
    MI-03 Justin Amash (R)
    MI-04 Dave Camp (R)
    MI-06 Fred Upton (R)
    MI-07 Tim Walberg (R)
    MI-08 Mike Rogers (R)
    MI-10 Candice Miller (R)
    MI-11 Thad McCotter (R)
    MN-02 John Kline (R)
    MN-03 Erik Paulsen (R)
    MN-06 Michele Bachmann (R)
    MN-08 Chip Cravaack (R)
    MS-Sen Roger Wicker (R)
    MS-01 Alan Nunnelee (R)
    MS-03 Gregg Harper (R)
    MS-04 Steven Palazzo (R)
    MO-Sen Roy Blunt (R)
    MO-02 Todd Akin (R)
    MO-04 Vicky Hartzler (R)
    MO-06 Sam Graves (R)
    MO-07 Billy Long (R)
    MO-08 Jo Ann Emerson (R)
    MO-09 Blaine Luetkemeyer (R)
    MT-AL Dennis Rehberg (R)
    NE-Sen Mike Johanns (R)
    NE-Sen Ben Nelson (D)
    NE-01 Jeff Fortenberry (R)
    NE-02 Lee Terry (R)
    NE-03 Adrian Smith (R)
    NV-Sen Dean Heller (R)
    NV-03 Joe Heck (R)
    NH-Sen Kelly Ayotte (R)
    NH-01 Frank Guinta (R)
    NH-02 Charlie Bass (R)
    NJ-01 Robert Andrews (D)
    NJ-02 Frank LoBiondo (R)
    NJ-03 Jon Runyan (R)
    NJ-04 Chris Smith (R)
    NJ-05 Scott Garrett (R)
    NJ-07 Leonard Lance (R)
    NJ-11 Rodney Frelinghuysen (R)
    NM-02 Steve Pearce (R)
    NY-03 Peter King (R)
    NY-13 Michael Grimm (R)
    NY-19 Nan Hayworth (R)
    NY-20 Chris Gibson (R)
    NY-25 Ann Marie Buerkle (R)
    NY-29 Tom Reed (R)
    NC-Sen Richard Burr (R)
    NC-02 Renee Ellmers (R)
    NC-03 Walter Jones Jr. (R)
    NC-05 Virginia Foxx (R)
    NC-06 Howard Coble (R)
    NC-09 Sue Myrick (R)
    NC-10 Patrick McHenry (R)
    ND-AL Rick Berg (R)
    OH-Sen Rob Portman (R)
    OH-01 Steve Chabot (R)
    OH-02 Jean Schmidt (R)
    OH-03 Mike Turner (R)
    OH-04 Jim Jordan (R)
    OH-05 Bob Latta (R)
    OH-06 Bill Johnson (R)
    OH-07 Steve Austria (R)
    OH-08 John Boehner (R)
    OH-12 Pat Tiberi (R)
    OH-14 Steve LaTourette (R)
    OH-15 Steve Stivers (R)
    OH-16 James Renacci (R)
    OH-18 Bob Gibbs (R)
    OK-Sen Tom Coburn (R)
    OK-Sen Jim Inhofe (R)
    OK-01 John Sullivan (R)
    OK-03 Frank Lucas (R)
    OK-04 Tom Cole (R)
    OK-05 James Lankford (R)
    OR-02 Greg Walden (R)
    PA-Sen Pat Toomey (R)
    PA-03 Mike Kelly (R)
    PA-05 Glenn Thompson (R)
    PA-06 Jim Gerlach (R)
    PA-07 Pat Meehan (R)
    PA-08 Michael Fitzpatrick (R)
    PA-09 Bill Shuster (R)
    PA-10 Thomas Marino (R)
    PA-11 Lou Barletta (R)
    PA-15 Charlie Dent (R)
    PA-16 Joseph Pitts (R)
    PA-18 Tim Murphy (R)
    SC-Sen Jim DeMint (R)
    SC-Sen Lindsey Graham (R)
    SC-01 Tim Scott (R)
    SC-02 Joe Wilson (R)
    SC-03 Jeff Duncan (R)
    SC-04 Trey Gowdy (R)
    SC-05 Mick Mulvaney (R)
    SD-Sen John Thune (R)
    SD-AL Kristi Noem (R)
    TN-Sen Bob Corker (R)
    TN-Sen Lamar Alexander (R)
    TN-01 Phil Roe (R)
    TN-02 John Duncan (R)
    TN-03 Chuck Fleischman (R)
    TN-04 Scott DesJarlais (R)
    TN-06 Diane Black (R)
    TN-07 Marsha Blackburn (R)
    TN-08 Stephen Fincher (R)
    TX-Sen John Cornyn (R)
    TX-Sen Kay Bailey Hutchison (R)
    TX-01 Louie Gohmert (R)
    TX-02 Ted Poe (R)
    TX-03 Sam Johnson (R)
    TX-04 Ralph Hall (R)
    TX-05 Jeb Hensarling (R)
    TX-06 Joe Barton (R)
    TX-07 John Culberson (R)
    TX-08 Kevin Brady (R)
    TX-10 Michael McCaul (R)
    TX-11 Mike Conaway (R)
    TX-12 Kay Granger (R)
    TX-13 Mac Thornberry (R)
    TX-14 Ron Paul (R)
    TX-17 Bill Flores (R)
    TX-19 Randy Neugebauer (R)
    TX-21 Lamar Smith (R)
    TX-22 Pete Olson (R)
    TX-23 Francisco Canseco (R)
    TX-24 Kenny Marchant (R)
    TX-26 Michael Burgess (R)
    TX-27 Blake Farenthold (R)
    TX-31 John Carter (R)
    TX-32 Pete Sessions (R)
    UT-Sen Michael Lee (R)
    UT-Sen Orrin Hatch (R)
    UT-01 Rob Bishop (R)
    UT-03 Jason Chaffetz (R)
    VA-02 Scott Rigell (R)
    VA-04 Randy Forbes (R)
    VA-05 Robert Hurt (R)
    VA-06 Bob Goodlatte (R)
    VA-07 Eric Cantor (R)
    VA-09 H. Morgan Griffith (R)
    WA-03 Jaime Herrera (R)
    WA-04 Doc Hastings (R)
    WA-05 Cathy McMorris (R)
    WA-08 Dave Reichert (R)
    WV-01 David McKinley (R)
    WV-02 Shelley Moore Capito (R)
    WI-Sen Ron Johnson (R)
    WI-01 Paul Ryan (R)
    WI-05 Jim Sensenbrenner (R)
    WI-06 Tom Petri (R)
    WI-07 Sean Duffy (R)
    WI-08 Reid Ribble (R)
    WY-Sen Mike Enzi (R)
    WY-AL Cynthia Lummis (R)
    6 GOP U.S. House Non-Pledge Signers:
    NY-24 Richard Hanna
    GA-07 Rob Woodall
    PA-19 Todd Russell Platts
    VA-01 Rob Wittman
    VA-10 Frank Wolf
    KS-03 Kevin Yoder
    7 GOP U.S. Senate Pledge Non-Signers:
    IN-Sen Richard Lugar
    IA-Sen Charles Grassley
    ME- Sen Olympia Snowe
    ME- Sen Susan Collins
    MS-Sen Thad Cochran
    WY- Sen John Barrasso
    ND-Sen John Hoeven
    * One vacancy by Pledge signer in 112th Congress as of May 26, 2011.

    That's one hell of a drop!

    I knew she was the gal for me as soon as she laid her eyes on me. Right on me shoulder, she did. Popped the buggers right out her head, and laid em on me shoulder. She's a sweet heart, that gal.

    by glb3 on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:31:17 AM PST

  •  Just implement the Romney tax cuts... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, wader, ColoTim, Calamity Jean

    and we might think about cooperating, Mr. President.

    That's the GOP idea of negotiation.

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

    by richardak on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:31:37 AM PST

  •  I wish Norquist was challenged more by whatever (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, Joe Bob, ColoTim, Calamity Jean

    newsfortainment host he's talking to about the fact that there is no evidence that the Bush tax cuts for the rich increase revenues and that in fact all the evidence points to the opposite being true.

  •  I'll make it simple. (6+ / 0-)

    F** Grover Norquist. F** John Boehner.

    No need for an entire diary with lots of comments.


  •  Since we know climate change is real (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    can't we find an ice floe with Norquists' name on it?

  •  OFA should start getting ads ready (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, llywrch, Calamity Jean

    Republicans hold middle class hostage for 1% tax breaks. And get those Congress critters out by 2014.

  •  Fuck these assholes (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, djMikulec

    Just let all the tax cuts expire. Time to wage war on these fucks. They need to be educated that they fucking lost.

    CNN has called it: Luke Skywalker vs. the Death Star is a tie!

    by GOPGO2H3LL on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:37:52 AM PST

  •  asshat (0+ / 0-)

    Can't somebody take a baseball bat to Norquist's knees??

  •  Will someone please just drown him in a bathtub? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Terre, llywrch, djMikulec

    And let the ret of us get on with the business of running the country?

    This fascist kills machines.

    by drmonkey on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:39:33 AM PST

  •  More than a few House GOP ran away from Grover (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP, Calamity Jean

    during this last election - we need a list of those who went back on the pledge or never signed it.  

    We NEED to both go back to Clinton tax rates AND close the loopholes.  Rich folks have been living high on the hog for a decade - they need to pay more than the Clinton years to start paying down the debt/deficit that the Bush Tax Cuts helped create in the first place.  

    It's like this was all planned - Bush tanks the economy by giving handouts to the rich, and then says the middle class and poor must pay more and see more cuts because of this debt that Bush and the GOP ran up in the first place.  

    They have the billionaires, We have the Big Dog!

    by Jacoby Jonze on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:39:48 AM PST

  •  Poopy-head time is over, gotta make lemonade (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

    by annieli on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:40:09 AM PST

  •  Norquist reminds me Chairman Mao... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    indie17, wader, Calamity Jean

    and his "Great Leap Forward":

    The Great Leap Forward (simplified Chinese: 大跃进; traditional Chinese: 大躍進; pinyin: Dà yuè jìn) of the People's Republic of China (PRC) was an economic and social campaign of the Communist Party of China (CPC), reflected in planning decisions from 1958 to 1961, which aimed to use China's vast population to rapidly transform the country from an agrarian economy into a modern communist society through the process of rapid industrialization and collectivization. Mao Zedong led the campaign based on the Theory of Productive Forces, and intensified it after being informed of the impending disaster from grain shortages...

    The Great Leap ended in catastrophe, resulting in tens of millions of excess deaths.[3] Estimates of the death toll range from 18 million[4] to 45 million,[5] with estimates by demographic specialists ranging from 18 million to 32.5 million.[4] Historian Frank Dikötter asserts that "coercion, terror, and systematic violence were the very foundation of the Great Leap Forward" and it "motivated one of the most deadly mass killings of human history."[6]

    The years of the Great Leap Forward in fact saw economic regression, with 1958 through 1961 being the only years between 1953 and 1983 in which China's economy saw negative growth.

    Ideology trumps reality, and the result is that millions suffer.

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

    by richardak on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:41:24 AM PST

  •  A freebie in negotiations (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    will be small business taxation.

    Give that one away... (with grief).
    Almost every economist agrees it's a regressive tax passed directly to the consumer and like any consumer tax, inhibits economic development.

    Enagaged activism wins elections. 100 million words on liberal/progressive websites gets beat by one new GOP voter casting their vote.

    by Nebraska68847Dem on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:42:01 AM PST

  •  More people voted Democrat than Republican (3+ / 0-)

    in House Congressional races. It's time for Boehner to get the fuck out of the way and pass the President's agenda like the Democrats did for Reagan and Bush.

    "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is." - George W Bush

    by jfern on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:42:39 AM PST

  •  policy pimp (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wader, Calamity Jean

    I've said it before, guys like Norquist and Gafney are policy pimps making a great living pushing this supply side economics and sharia law bullshit. As for holding the tax cut hostage, it's not much of an imprisonment when the hostage can pull a disappearing act on Jan 1st.

  •  It's ridiculous (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Free Jazz at High Noon

    That a major network gives that clown the time of day.

  •  Enact the Dodo Tax! (0+ / 0-)

    Charge each American who believes in one of these GOPylvanian fools an extra 1%.  If they believe in two of these fools, charge them an extra 2%.  Three fools, 3%: four fools, 4%; etc., etc,. etc.

    I count even the single grain of sand to be a higher life-form than the likes of Sarah Palin and her odious ilk.

    by Liberal Panzer on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:43:50 AM PST

  •  The pimping . . . (0+ / 0-)

    . . . the lying, the false premises, the subterfuge, never end in the republican party.

  •  Somebody is in denial (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    Nordquist and the chattering classes who still treat him as though his opinions mattered.

    "The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little. " --Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by jg6544 on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:46:28 AM PST

  •  How about we (0+ / 0-)

    Stop the net give-back of federal funds to the Red State "takers" - we put our government hands on their Medicare, Medicaid, social security, disability, and whatever the hell else is giving them over 100%.  Now THAT would be spending cuts I could get behind.

  •  Any influence this twit tries to exert is in (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    violation of the Constitution and the Democrats need to start getting serious about that.

    "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln

    by leftreborn on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:51:15 AM PST

  •  1994 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    When Clinton passed the 1994 omnibus budget, the GreatestTaxIncreaseInAmericanHistory, without a single Republican vote in the Senate (Al Gore providing the tie-breaker) , the same GOP and business types as today were predicting the end of the world. Surely the United States would plunge into recession, revenues would drop and unemployment would skyrocket. Basically, we heard all the same recycled voodoo economics we're hearing now. Larry Kudlow promised he would eat his hat if the economy grew. Even gadflies like Camille Paglia joined in the conventional "business" wisdom, dissing the Democrats who clearly didn't understand that taxes kill jobs and the economy., yadda yadda

    As it turned out, business types demonstrated once again that while they might know how to run a pizza chain, they have no clue on how a modern economy operates or how to run it. The economy grew gangbusters.

    So take heart--all the noise coming out of the business channels today has been heard before and they will be proven wrong yet again. True, we don't have a majority in the House, be we do have the automatic expiration of the Bush tax cuts in our pockets. That will result in a tax increase at all levels of AGI, but even that is probably a good thing. Why cry too much about someone with an AGI of $50,000 paying $1,000 more in taxes? The extra money will help the fiscal situation in this country.

  •  The leaders of the GOP are an impressive bunch (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    Mr. Poopy Head, The Boner, and Yertle McTurtle.

  •  Best response to this bullshit (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Slightly Wobbly, Calamity Jean

    Every talking head on the Dem side should just say "WTF are you talking about" (in nicer words, of course).

    Elephant:  We should raise revenue by lowering taxes
    Donkey: Sorry, that just doesn't make sense. WTF?
    Elephant:  Laffer curve, blah blah, bullshit, etc.
    Donkey: Excuse me let me show you some basic math, etc.
    Elephant:  We should raise revenue by lowering taxes
    Donkey: Are you still saying that silly stuff?  3-2=5 yeah. that's about all I hear.  I don't think you understand what you're saying.
    These clowns are on a ledge - we just need to let them back up off it.

    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting

    by sacrelicious on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 11:52:46 AM PST

  •  Once more down the rabbit hole, where... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Free Jazz at High Noon, Joe Bob

    tax cuts magically increase Federal revenue, just like they did under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

    Meanwhile, back here in the real world, Planet Earth, we're still dealing with colossal budget deficits due to the bat-shit insanity of anti-tax fundamentalism. And it hasn't 'drowned government in a bathtub', it has just vastly increased the suffering of ordinary working poor Americans and made it vastly harder to recover from the Bush/Cheney depression, because of the equally bat-shit corollary that all government spending is bad, unless it blows shit up and kills people.  

  •  Who the Fuck is this Assclown? (2+ / 0-)

    Poopyhead?  WTF.  Why is this dimwit controlling elected representatives?   No one voted for this guy, so fuck off poopy brain.

  •  Norquist is right Boehner is misleading. We need (0+ / 0-)

    to peel off 40 'reasonable' House GOPers to pass the millionaire's tax hike. Probably vulnerable GOPs in blue states. A massive write-in campaign could scare them loose.

  •  Let's reward Boehner for his brilliance (0+ / 0-)

    since increasing revenue by lowering taxes is clearly a genius plan...

    let's reward him by lowering his salary to increase his income

    PLEASE donate to a global children's PEACE project: Chalk 4 Peace

    by RumsfeldResign on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:05:52 PM PST

  •  The reality is probably that Boehner (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    is doing a Romney: telling different stories to different constituencies. This tactic, of course, tends to collide with reality as each constituency finds out what has been said to others. But Boehner knows that revenues have to be raised; he just doesn't want to do it by raising marginal rates. And, in the end, who on our side cares how it gets done just so long as the rich pay more tax?

    So Boehner isn't exactly telling a straight-up lie at this stage. He likely envisages a deal where nominal rates don't rise for the rich but their total tax bill does. That way, he gets to the compromise he could live with while still claiming marginal tax rates didn't go up. The fight, in that scenario, would then not be about rates but loopholes, deductions and subsidies.

    For if there is a sin against life, it consists perhaps not so much in despairing of life as in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this life. - Albert Camus

    by Anne Elk on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:07:48 PM PST

  •  Repubs ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE UP. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Free Jazz at High Noon

    Nope. Not going tostop.

    not going to back down, cease, desist, curtail, wean themselves off from ANYTHING they do now.

    They aren't going to do ANYTHING one whit different until they ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO. Because they don't have to. Nobody can make them.

    Democrats aren't going to make them do anything. Repubs know the dems as the "we'll cave in even beofre we have to" people.

    They will NOT take dems seriously until we do something that damages them permanently - like having Dems STOP CAVING IN TO ANYTHING. Just don't do it.

    it is important to distinguish against COMPROMISE and WIN.

    Just anwer this question: DId you want A COMPROMISE in the election? Maybe something that addresses the fact Rmoney got ALMOST as many votes and Obama and that indicates somehow they will share the office of president?

    Isn't half a victory better than a whole one, O Pragmatic Compromisers?

    Or is it really better to win hands down and laugh in their face, shocking them? You, the historical weenie, now sanding over them as they realize they are laying on the floor staring up at the lights. Do you apologize?

    No. You don't apologize.

    You try to figure how you beat them and crank that shit up.

    But repubs won't simply be giving up.

    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:07:58 PM PST

  •  the great swooshing sound we (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    have been hearing for over 30 years is a ever growing amount of the national income going to the top 1/10 of one percent. I wonder if the American people will wake up to what the Republicans did when they put 8 trillion dollars on the national debt. They sent it to their benefactors by cutting taxes and putting it on the tab. Imagine if we had spent that 8 trillion on the infrastructure of our country.

    The economy is like owning a truck. There is X amount of income. There is Y amount of money that needs to be spent on maintenance. Romney is a great example of what the problem is. On his last income tax he paid 14% which will be 9% after he amends it. Taxes are the maintenance money we use to keep the infrastructure of the economy going. A minimum wage worker at McDonalds pays a larger percentage of his money to the government than these wealthy people do.

    The wealthy are the real moochers.

    Join the War on Thinking. Watch Fox News- John Lucas

    by Jlukes on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:09:19 PM PST

  •  Why does anyone think Boehner changed his (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    position?  Because he changed his tone of voice?

    Dems made huge mistake last week saying Boehner was conciliatory. They should have said he didn't change his position one iota, and really said nothing that differed from what Mitt Romney proposed. Someone should ask his what compromise he is willing to make beyond what was in the 2011 debt ceiling framework?

    "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

    by justmy2 on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:14:34 PM PST

  •  yep...the way I interpreted boner last week, (0+ / 0-)

    norquist is correct - boner said nothing new under the sun.

    the "manner" in which he said it is moot.

    "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

    by Sybil Liberty on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:21:21 PM PST

  •  society would be better off (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    were we not subjected to the meaningless dribble that comes from Mr. Norquist. He is completely and wholly irrelevant to american society and completely out of touch with the reality of modern life. I have yet to figure out why #1 any politician would sign such a meaningless piece of paper and #2 what sort of hold he thinks he has over them? So they go back on their word - wait here's my shocked face :O - like that's never happened with politicians before. The paper is meaningless, he is meaningless and if were not for FuxNews this discussion would be meaningless. Alas, we do need to prevent this scourge from reeking havoc once again (sigh) and so off I must go to badger him on Twitter - cheers!

  •  But they didn't lose the election in a small sense (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    They control the House. Thus, they hold some cards - though we hold a better set of cards.

    Thus, it's about card-playing now. Both sides know it, but most of the people in their bases don't. Even some of the folks here it seems.

    People all the long complained Obama was too conciliatory, but he got stuff passed (though not a lot I wanted) and he got re-elected (the biggest part of the game).

    I am expecting Obama to play poker well this hand... I am hoping.  I think Krugman has good ideas. But i trust Obama to do well.

  •  When will supply side die? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    The next time someone like Norquist or Boehner goes on television I would like some intrepid journalist to challenge the tax cuts = growth = revenue equation, and actually press the point. Tax cuts reduce revenue, end of story. There is no evidence to the contrary in modern political history. If the GOP insists on pushing supply side ideology let’s at least call it what it is: not an economic theory, but an article of faith.

    The political landscape would be a lot different if we had two parties each with honest differences in ideology and policy. We only have one because the GOP tries to legislate ideological fantasies into reality. Over the past 30 years the GOP would have done a lot less damage to the country if they ever did what they said they were going to do: reduce the size of government.  Cutting taxes, not reducing spending and exploding the deficit has been the worst of both worlds.

    Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx

    by Joe Bob on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:44:30 PM PST

  •  Breaking: Norquist still a moron (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    Time to tune this guy out and move on.

    See you in Heaven if you make the list. R.E.M.

    by Akronborn on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:45:19 PM PST

  •  Grover (0+ / 0-)

    Sobering comment, "Fuck Norquist"!

  •  Then Boehner should refuse to negotiate (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    The GOP leaders believe what they say then they should refuse any compromise that would increase tax rates for the upper 2%.  They should stand firm, even when the President, Vice-President, and ex-President go back on the road to lay it out for America.  Even if Wall Street threatens to downgrade America's credit rating and the plutocrats start calling the politicians they bought to scream about them about driving down the markets.  

    If that is what the Republicans want, then give it to them.  Let them threaten again to destroy the economy rather than raise taxes on the 2%.  I hope they do.  And I hope Obama waits until January, after the deadline, to see if they want to negotiate in good faith.

    A new birth of freedom..

    by docterry on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:51:49 PM PST

  •  Grover Norquist (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    djMikulec, Calamity Jean

    Hey! GOP!
    This guy is a big reason you LOST.
    Maybe you should not listen to him.

    And also, I do not remember Grover Norquist's name being on a ballot. How about you stick to listening to the VOTERS.

  •  By cutting taxes... (0+ / 0-)

    you raise government revenue,
    and this starves the beast.

    Because if we raised taxes,
    that would decrease government revenue,
    and that would feed the beast.

    So the only way to drown government in a bathtub
    is by starving the beast
    which requires raising revenue
    which you do by cutting taxes.

    Cause government gets too big to drown
    if you feed the beast ...
    by cutting revenue,
    which you do by raising taxes.

    ....I beleive.. help thou my unbelief !!!!

  •  I thought the US didn't negotiate with terrorists? (0+ / 0-)

    Because that's what Norquist is, for threatening to sink candidates not complying with his pledge...

    The funny part is Norquist allegedly got his anti tax/small government revelation when he was...12 years of age! Talk about not evolving!!

  •  Look Out!! Boehner & Norquist Are Regurgitating (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    the same old GOP talking points about increasing tax revenues by increased growth in the economy.  Hey Grover, the American public REJECTED that trickle down BS on election day. The American public has been waiting 4 long years for those "job creators" to start hiring people, and it hasn't happened at the low tax rates we have now. We need to raise taxes on the wealthy to start increasing tax revenues NOW.
    "For purposes of forging a bipartisan agreement that begins to solve the problem, we're willing to accept new revenue, under the right conditions. Does the increased revenue come from government taking a larger share of what the American people earn through higher tax rates?
    Or does it come as the byproduct of a growing economy, energized by a simpler, cleaner, fairer tax code, with fewer loopholes, and lower rates for all?"
    Translation: Let's hookwink the American public by lowering taxes on the wealthy and corporations under the guise of "reforming" the tax code, and let the middle class pay for it by getting their tax deductions eliminated.  Democrats in Congress should not fall for this BS - nothing has changed. If the Rethugs won't budge on taxes for the rich, let the Bush tax cuts expire on Dec. 31, then Dems should come back after the 113th Congress is sworn in with retroactive tax reductions for those making under 250K only. Democrats hold the better hand in this card game. Let's play it!!

  •  Lower taxes increase revenue! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    If I hear this one more time MY HEAD WILL EXPLODE.

    We can transmute base metal into gold!
    We can build a perpetual motion machine!
    We can run a combustion engine on water!
    We can create cold fusion!
    We can increase revenue with lower taxes!

    We can get our asses kicked right the fuck out of the legislative system, please, oh pleeeeease.... whimper. I can't stand it; why does this go on?

  •  So the Republican plan... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean deal with the deficit/debt is to just believe in magic? Cut taxes for millionaires and hope that'll cause economic growth against all evidence to the contrary and that'll somehow magically produce increased revenue?

    They are absolutely delusional if they believe it, and they're vile liars if they don't believe it yet keep saying it.

  •  What's this "we" shit Grover?!? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    What Speaker Boehner said before the election was that we're not raising marginal tax rates. What he said in his presentation [last week] was we're not raising marginal tax rates. He is in favor of more revenue from economic growth. I certainly agree with him on that.
    I hate to be the one to inform you Grover, but you're not in charge of anything. You hold no elected office and not a single fucking person on this planet owes you a damn thing.

    Do the world a favor and take a long walk off a short pier.


  •  time to wake up (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    we are peasants, norquist says so..
    go to ~2:45 of this video and listen:

    that the peasants

    norquist is wicked, an evil son-of-a-bitch, he is kinda smart, but not as smart as he thinks himself to be. in this video he lets slip what he really thinks of the american middleclass, and all working class folks when he said, "the problem is not that the peasants aren't sending enough money into washington..."
     PEASANTS, When did america become an aristocracy?
     Who in america believes that this is the way to address
     99% of americans? This should frighten anyone who hears it.
    This is a democracy, the american democracy. This "slip"
     (PEASANTS) ny norquist should inform us about what is the 1%ers agenda. Is this what we want? NO! PEASANTS? REALLY?
     It is time for america to wake up, these bastards with the pay for play corrupt republican party are working to subjugate the rest of us. If they succeed, the resulting "democracy" will be the ultimate fallacy.

    democrats apply reasoning to a problem and its complexities. republicans spurn reasoning and apply "brute" force.

    by longtimelurker on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 06:56:21 PM PST

  •  Grover Norquist Is An Economic Poopyhead (0+ / 0-)

    Taxes are going up. Period. Grover's "pledge" puts elected officials in conflict with their oath to support and defend the Constitution, protect America from her enemies. A bad economy is a worse threat to Americans than most WARS.

    Anti-tax fools like Norquist continue to disregard the fact that idle wealth is a drag on the economy. We need to raise passive income taxes, to get the money back where it does some good, and restore estate taxes, also to discourage idle wealth.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site