95% of Republican Congressionals signed Norquist's pledge never to raise taxes on the wealthy for any reason.

Any congressional putting a lobbyist before the constituents in their districts - and before their Oath of Office to this country - deserves to turn in their badge.

All those GOP congressionals who signed this pledge surely understand that it has undermined their validity. They made the decision to undervalue their position. Their authority no longer has true currency for the American people.

Norquist said he wanted the US goverment: to be the size of his bathtub, so he could flush it down the drain.

Dont_carry_it_all

Thank You Mr. Simpson! Somebody has to tell it like it is. Since when did the public elect Mr. Grover to control Congress?

Might I add Mr. Grover should drown in his own bath tub since he can't go down the drain the way he wants taxes to?

Republicans forget who they are supposed to pledge their allegiance to, and it is not one wealthy, greedy man.

Cain has pledged not to tax the wealthy, but he will have no problem with taxing the stuffing out of the poor and middle class. After all, it is our fault we are not rich.

Hey Dont,

Since when did the public elect Mr. Grover to control Congress?

Good point!

What about the guys like Obama and Reid who are elected and their oaths of office / pledges?

Didn't Obama take an oath to preserve and protect our laws, yet ignores laws he doesn't like DOMA, enforcing the borders, implementing DREAM for all practical purposes by executive fiat, ignoring federal judges' orders and their comtempt orders, selling assault rifles to foreign drug cartels, violating laws by placing billionaire bundlers before tax payers .....

Isn't Reid required, by law to produce a budget sometime before every 900 days?

Why are dems fixated on repubs that aren't even in office?

And BTW - Can anyone explain how raising taxes creates sustainable jobs?

Isn't that what the focus is supposed to be?

Once you take the oath of office, it should automatically void any other oaths or pledges.

The only oath these guys should be about is their oath to the USA.

bob-1805084

And BTW - Can anyone explain how raising taxes creates sustainable jobs?

Isn't that what the focus is supposed to be?

booby trap,

How many jobs did the Bush tax cuts create?

Norquist is a dweeby little coward who does his dirty work in the background and everyone knows it. Thanks for saying it out loud Mr. Simpson, and also in regard to traitor Teapublicans who make pledges to outside lobbyists instead of representing the people per our constitutional democracy.

Hey FR -- Why no stories on Jan Brewer trying to impeach the commission for not gerrymandering in favor of Teapublicans in Arizona?

booby trap,

How many jobs did the Bush tax cuts create?

Over 8 million between 2004 and the collapse in 2008 due to the Fannie/Freddie credit crisis (which had nothing to do with tax rates).

You called me booby ..... doesn't a booby have a sexual reference ...... be careful if you run for president in 15 years .... (that was a reference to my ITM/Feisty joke yesterday)

All joking aside, I am so sorry for your loss Bev.

Prayers are with you and it is good to see you back in the saddle.

Bob -- Once again a lot of stuff there to address. I'll try later to give my opinion on a few. But the quickest one I can address is the fixation. As for myself he first caught my attention when I heard about the pledge, other than that I never really paid attention to him. The pledge is ridiculous in my opinion.

Backhouse/Navy: Any congressional putting a lobbyist before the constituents in their districts.

Many Republicans ran their campaigns promising their constituents they would not raise taxes.

Are you asking them to break that pledge to their constituents?

Don't we have enough politicians that make promises during their campaigns only to break them once in office?

And how many jobs would have been created if the Bush tax cuts never went into effect or extended during last year's hostage negotiations?

The world will never know.

Now Bob, you forgot that little detail about what happened in 2008. Let's not blame this all on Freddie and Fannie. You also blame it on public servants and unions. Let's look at the real cost, the corporations, banks and investment houses playing fast and loose with other people's money? You have also conveniently left out that bit about sending jobs overseas and that other little thing about the wealthy getting enormous tax breaks that this nation couldn't afford. I am glad to be able to help you!

Oops! I forgot the predatory lenders! How could I! Sorry Bob!

Wayne,

Gotta scoot but will respond in the morning.

Yeh Bob, you sleep on that.

Are you asking them to break that pledge to their constituents?

Sniffy,

You're being disingenuous. You know better and have better reading and comprehension skills I'm sure. Right?

DOMA?? Really bobby? You mean that law that breaks the 14th Amendment? Sounds to me like our President is taking his oath seriously.

Better to defend the Constitution than some of the hairbrained laws we have had in the past. Soon DOMA should be in the past too in the same dust bin as prohibition and most of the old suffrage laws.

Dear Senator Simpson:

Do NOT give this guy ideas.

Your pal,

Anna Molly

JoAnna Smith:

Many Republicans ran their campaigns promising their constituents they would not raise taxes.

That's funny because I'm pretty sure they ran on jobs.

B, Bush did not create 8 million jobs.

"The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton's administration".

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/

President Reagan borrowed, spent and put $3Trillion on the deficit & with that SPENDING, he created a lot of jobs.

booby has to "scoot"...my dog "scoots"...booby, you might want to see a vet...your anal glands might need a good squeezing.

The republican/tea bagger party pledge. I pledge allegiance to Grover. With the only thought in mind. That is for today he doesn't squeeze my balls real tight.

Hey Anna, can you see the ads now, GROVER for President, lol, and many will think Sesame Street right off the bat! How bout "Who's your moppet"! LOL

Hey Bob -- Although I prefer to clean up the tax code to gain more revenue, I would not mind the capital gains tax being raised if nothing else can get done. In my opinion it will not hurt job creation.

As for DOMA - Some are pushing to repeal this act, including a republican that signed on today. Looks like Nov. 3 it will be taken up for debate in the SJC.

As for the rest of the stuff, I believe some of it is being investigated and as such I usually don't comment on something until I have all the facts.

Reid and the law for budget I'm not to clear on if it's illegal or not.

Correction to above post to Anna -- should say muppet but moppet could apply to I guess. ; )

JC -

Read my post #4, below. Norquist is one of the prime movers that brought the Tea Party into existence, using backdoor maneuvers, specifically to attempt to take over the GOP and push through a regressive, destructive ultra-right agenda.

The point being made is that Norquist is not an elected official, thus the "fixation" on his power over Teapublicans.

So by the same token, can I assume that Barrak Obamma creates policies based on the pledge he has made to Bill Ayers and that all of Obamma's failed policies should be credited to Ayers?

Republican politicians can think for themselves. I think the Democrats can too. I think your belief that Norquist has a "Political hold" on the conservative politicians is a fabrication. For the record, I don't think Rev Wright controlls what Obamma does either. They have both lobbied and shaped the views of their subjects, but if that is all it takes to control the government, we have all already lost the battle. The country belongs to Ayers, Wright, Norquist and the Koches. Why bother even talking about what elected officials do?

JC, I find it hilarious that you drum up some made up fictitious "pledge" that Obama allegedly made to Bill Ayers while totally overlooking Norquist's ties to radical extemists. From

Just six weeks after 9/11, The New Republic ran an exposé explaining how Norquist arranged for George W. Bush to meet with fifteen Islamic supremacists at the White House on September 26, 2001 -- to show how Muslims rejected terrorism. Wrote TNR author Franklin Foer:

On the afternoon of September 26, George W. Bush gathered 15 prominent Muslim- and Arab-Americans at the White House. With cameras rolling, the president proclaimed that "the teachings of Islam are teachings of peace and good." It was a critically important moment, a statement to the world that America's Muslim leaders unambiguously reject the terror committed in Islam's name.

Unfortunately, many of the leaders present hadn't unambiguously rejected it. To the president's left sat Dr. Yahya Basha, president of the American Muslim Council, an organization whose leaders have repeatedly called Hamas "freedom fighters." Also in attendance was Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, who on the afternoon of September 11 told a Los Angeles public radio audience that "we should put the State of Israel on the suspect list." And sitting right next to President Bush was Muzammil Siddiqi, president of the Islamic Society of North America, who last fall told a Washington crowd chanting pro-Hezbollah slogans that "America has to learn if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come."

It was Norquist who ushered these silver-tongued jihadists into the Oval Office of an incurious president after the worst attack ever on American soil. Instead of Hamas, Hezb'allah, and the Muslim Brotherhood, Ibn Warraq, Bat Ye'or, and Wafa Sultan should have been advising the president.

You can assume that, but you would be totally making it up. You could find no evidence of any pledge Obama made to Bill Ayers because there is none. That is the difference. There actually IS a pledge that Norquist has Republicans sign. From Politifact:

"The pledge says that the signer will "oppose and vote against any and all efforts to raise taxes" and it was signed by those running from all kinds of offices from local races right on up to gubernatorial races across America."

As most of the people who follow these threads seem to sneer at the idea of God at all, what difference does it make what the Islamic extremists said about the Wrath of God? Why should it bother you at all what they do or don't think, what they do or don't say, and to whom?

And who in the >>>>>> is politifact? And why do we believe them? And why should Norquist be able to get anyone to sign his silly pledge? Geez, does this guy have pictures of every illicit affair entered into by any political candidate?

Norquist does not appoint candidates to their office. Last time I checked presidents, senators, and congressmen are elected.

If a Norquist-signer makes it to office it means the people who voted for said candidate knew and approved of his/ her Norquistism, or didn't know and elected that person anyway. Either way, the responsibility for who holds office lies with the electorate.

There are fringe radical donkeys and elephants. If the electorate is easily influenced by extremes, doesn't that say more about the voters than the extremists themselves?

George W. Bush signed the pledge. That made him beholden to norquist. When he started two wars, his method of payment was a credit card. He kept his pledge, and the nation continues to pay for his #*@!!! pledge every day! The President of the United States needs to keep all of his options open. If he can't use one option because of a pledge to one greedy, wealthy, obstructive man rather than the nation as a whole, what chance do we have as a nation? At least Bush 1 had the gutts to do the right thing when he had to pay for the first Gulf War. His son? Pathetic!

Mark -- I didn't hear about the pledge until recently unfortunately.

Mark -- You are giving too much credit to the vast number of low-information voters, most of whom are FOX Noise viewers. This segment of the population has NO CLUE about our constitutional democracy and that Norquist is a special interest lobbyist, and most of all how damaging radicals like Norquist, Paul Ryan, Herman Cain, well heck pretty much all Teapublicans (McConnell, Boehner, Cantor) are to the nation.

TruePatriot, my post was deliberately non-partisan. I do not believe low-information voters are exclusively the province of the far right. My point is as voters (left, center, or right) we tend give far too much credit to the radicals and take far to little responsibility on ourselves. There will always be radicals of all flavors. How much real influence they have is entirely up to us.

Folks, Simpson is calling it like he sees it and he can speak out because he is not under the thumb of his party. The real truth goes all the way back to the Reagan years:

Bruce Bartlett, Ex-Reagan Economist: Idea That Deregulation Leads To Jobs 'Just Made Up'

"Republicans favor tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, but these had no stimulative effect during the George W. Bush administration, and there is no reason to believe that more of them will have any today," writes Bruce Bartlett. He's an economist who worked for Republican congressmen and in the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

As for the idea that cutting regulations will lead to significant job growth, Bartlett said in an interview, "It's just nonsense. It's just made up."

Government and industry studies support his view.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics, which tracks companies' reasons for large layoffs, found that 1,119 layoffs were attributed to government regulations in the first half of this year, while 144,746 were attributed to poor "business demand."

By CHARLES BABINGTON 10/30/11 01:07 PM ET

Bartlett, whose books on tax policy include "The Benefit and the Burden," recently wrote in the New York Times: "People are increasingly concerned about unemployment, but Republicans have nothing to offer them."

P.S. "JoAnnaSmith" its not too late to continue drinking the GOP delusinal juice. Do we have serious problems yes. The GOP doesn't want to solve them. They just want you to buy the same solutions that brought us to the place we find ourselves now.

Well said, Grimey.

Frank, increasing taxes does not guarantee additional revenues.

Frank: I think most of us would be ok with paying a small amount extra in taxes IF it was 100% pledged to debt reduction.

That doesn't work either Frank. The pols will play the spending games they usually play by moving the money around like it was a game of Three Card Monte. You'll never find the extra tax money that was supposedly going towards deficit reduction, and the deficit/debt will continue to expand.

Frank: The problem is that politicians can't stop spending more money...the more we send to Washington, the more they spend.

And that's why many Republicans reps pledge not to raise taxes. They made that pledge to their constituents that they would not raise taxes, and they are fulfilling their promise. What a concept, pols elected to office that actually do what they promised to do while they campaigned.

What a concept, pols elected to office that actually do what they promised to do while they campaigned.

Like create jobs Sniffy? What about that promise?

It is just politically convenient for them to play this card. Because it is a sentiment shared amongst constituents like Mr. Norquist.

Hi JAS1...

That doesn't work either Frank. The pols will play the spending games they usually play by moving the money around like it was a game of Three Card Monte. You'll never find the extra tax money that was supposedly going towards deficit reduction, and the deficit/debt will continue to expand.

That's exactly my concern, which is why I capitalized (and probably should have bolded) the word IF. I don't know how to keep those game from being played, but there has to be some way to do it. These shell games have to be stopped.

What about a lock box like they have for Social Security? No one can touch that, right?

Scary isn't it?

I remember the old Republican Party......I did not agree with them on much but I occasionally did and voted for one here and there...........NEVER AGAIN......is that loud and clear enough Boehner.

You would think so.,.....oath of office should supercede any stupid lobbiest........and that is just what Norquist is...another shyster lobbiest....of the worst kind.

George Soros is 1000% better than any of the current teatard candidates.

Charlie I said Democratic ticket. Not sure your thoughts of the republican candidates has anything to do with my comment.

Show us a copy of any pledge singed by a Democrat and authored by George Soros and I will agree with you.

Kathryn,

Difference here is they did thier blood oath's in public, Dems hide and are cowards while having thier strings pulled by this puppet master. Look at who spends more, then call me a liar.

Exactly........

Kathryn,

You need to read up on union oath's. Might suprise you.