Just like the Pied Piper

gimmesometruth27

Led rats through the streets
they dance like marionettes
swaying to the symphony

of destruction...

Reid says anti-tax activist leads GOP like puppets

http://news.yahoo.com/reid-says-anti-ta ... 50671.html

..WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says Republicans are being led like puppets by anti-tax activist Grover Norquist, dimming prospects for a compromise in Congress' so-called supercommittee.

Reid made his remarks as the panel heard from veterans of other deficit-cutting groups that wound up recommending higher taxes. The committee has until Nov. 23 to recommend legislation to reduce federal deficits by $1.2 trillion over the next decade.

Republicans and Democrats on the supercommittee exchanged proposals last week that show they remain far apart despite weeks of private meetings.

Democrats have been critical of the GOP proposal, noting it contained none of the higher taxes that they and President Barack Obama have demanded as a pre-condition for changes in benefit programs such as Medicare.

..


really? does grover norquist really hold all of the cards in this discussion? the man is not even an elected official and he holds this much influence over the gop?

pretty sad actually...

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Led rats through the streets
they dance like marionettes
swaying to the symphony

of destruction...

Reid says anti-tax activist leads GOP like puppets

http://news.yahoo.com/reid-says-anti-ta ... 50671.html

..WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says Republicans are being led like puppets by anti-tax activist Grover Norquist, dimming prospects for a compromise in Congress' so-called supercommittee.

Reid made his remarks as the panel heard from veterans of other deficit-cutting groups that wound up recommending higher taxes. The committee has until Nov. 23 to recommend legislation to reduce federal deficits by $1.2 trillion over the next decade.

Republicans and Democrats on the supercommittee exchanged proposals last week that show they remain far apart despite weeks of private meetings.

Democrats have been critical of the GOP proposal, noting it contained none of the higher taxes that they and President Barack Obama have demanded as a pre-condition for changes in benefit programs such as Medicare.

..


really? does grover norquist really hold all of the cards in this discussion? the man is not even an elected official and he holds this much influence over the gop?

pretty sad actually...

why is it that when people don't agree the other side is a puppet...can't it be that they simply don't think raising taxes is the answer?
seems like a pattern for reid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYUiwAq248I

but this certainly speaks to a larger problem, special non-elected officials have far too much influence and accessibility of our politicians.

gimmesometruth27

mikepegg44 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Led rats through the streets
they dance like marionettes
swaying to the symphony

of destruction...

Reid says anti-tax activist leads GOP like puppets

http://news.yahoo.com/reid-says-anti-ta ... 50671.html

..WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says Republicans are being led like puppets by anti-tax activist Grover Norquist, dimming prospects for a compromise in Congress' so-called supercommittee.

Reid made his remarks as the panel heard from veterans of other deficit-cutting groups that wound up recommending higher taxes. The committee has until Nov. 23 to recommend legislation to reduce federal deficits by $1.2 trillion over the next decade.

Republicans and Democrats on the supercommittee exchanged proposals last week that show they remain far apart despite weeks of private meetings.

Democrats have been critical of the GOP proposal, noting it contained none of the higher taxes that they and President Barack Obama have demanded as a pre-condition for changes in benefit programs such as Medicare.

..


really? does grover norquist really hold all of the cards in this discussion? the man is not even an elected official and he holds this much influence over the gop?

pretty sad actually...

why is it that when people don't agree the other side is a puppet...can't it be that they simply don't think raising taxes is the answer?
seems like a pattern for reid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYUiwAq248I

but this certainly speaks to a larger problem, special non-elected officials have far too much influence and accessibility of our politicians.

how else would you describe norquist's hold on the gop other than he is controlling them like puppets? he has made all of them sign a pledge to not raise taxes.

Monster Rain

He made them sign it or he asked them to sign it? I doubt he pulled a gun on anyone. It's not exactly a new stance for Republicans to oppose tax increases. It's one of the main differences between the parties, really.

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Led rats through the streets
they dance like marionettes
swaying to the symphony

of destruction...

Reid says anti-tax activist leads GOP like puppets

http://news.yahoo.com/reid-says-anti-ta ... 50671.html

..WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says Republicans are being led like puppets by anti-tax activist Grover Norquist, dimming prospects for a compromise in Congress' so-called supercommittee.

Reid made his remarks as the panel heard from veterans of other deficit-cutting groups that wound up recommending higher taxes. The committee has until Nov. 23 to recommend legislation to reduce federal deficits by $1.2 trillion over the next decade.

Republicans and Democrats on the supercommittee exchanged proposals last week that show they remain far apart despite weeks of private meetings.

Democrats have been critical of the GOP proposal, noting it contained none of the higher taxes that they and President Barack Obama have demanded as a pre-condition for changes in benefit programs such as Medicare.

..


really? does grover norquist really hold all of the cards in this discussion? the man is not even an elected official and he holds this much influence over the gop?

pretty sad actually...

why is it that when people don't agree the other side is a puppet...can't it be that they simply don't think raising taxes is the answer?
seems like a pattern for reid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYUiwAq248I

but this certainly speaks to a larger problem, special non-elected officials have far too much influence and accessibility of our politicians.

how else would you describe norquist's hold on the gop other than he is controlling them like puppets? he has made all of them sign a pledge to not raise taxes.

satansbed

Monster Rain wrote:

He made them sign it or he asked them to sign it? I doubt he pulled a gun on anyone. It's not exactly a new stance for Republicans to oppose tax increases. It's one of the main differences between the parties, really.

well he basicly put a political gun to there heads by saying he would oppose any of them that didn't sign it and he has the power to do that

cincybearcat

And look who is harry reid's puppet apparently, taking what he says as gospel.

gimmesometruth27

cincybearcat wrote:

And look who is harry reid's puppet apparently, taking what he says as gospel.

i don't need harry reid to state the obvious for me. google "grover norquist tax pledge" and what you find there among all of those links will back up what reid is saying.

Monster Rain

Yes, anyone has the power to oppose a politician they don't agree with. You guys are acting as though Republicans really really really want to raise taxes but this mean man just won't let them. As I said earlier, one of the big meaningful differences between the Republicans and Democrats has been taxes/spending. This pledge has been around for over 20 years and many Republicans have been elected and re-elected without signing it.

satansbed wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

He made them sign it or he asked them to sign it? I doubt he pulled a gun on anyone. It's not exactly a new stance for Republicans to oppose tax increases. It's one of the main differences between the parties, really.

well he basicly put a political gun to there heads by saying he would oppose any of them that didn't sign it and he has the power to do that

gimmesometruth27

Monster Rain wrote:

Yes, anyone has the power to oppose a politician they don't agree with. You guys are acting as though Republicans really really really want to raise taxes but this mean man just won't let them. As I said earlier, one of the big meaningful differences between the Republicans and Democrats has been taxes/spending. This pledge has been around for over 20 years and many Republicans have been elected and re-elected without signing it.

satansbed wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

He made them sign it or he asked them to sign it? I doubt he pulled a gun on anyone. It's not exactly a new stance for Republicans to oppose tax increases. It's one of the main differences between the parties, really.

well he basicly put a political gun to there heads by saying he would oppose any of them that didn't sign it and he has the power to do that

only one in the senate, (or is it the house?) has not signed it.

has anyone seen the polls this week? the republicans' proposal for the budget without tax increases on the rich is getting more and more unpopular...

mikepegg44

Monster Rain wrote:

Yes, anyone has the power to oppose a politician they don't agree with. You guys are acting as though Republicans really really really want to raise taxes but this mean man just won't let them. As I said earlier, one of the big meaningful differences between the Republicans and Democrats has been taxes/spending. This pledge has been around for over 20 years and many Republicans have been elected and re-elected without signing it.

satansbed wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

He made them sign it or he asked them to sign it? I doubt he pulled a gun on anyone. It's not exactly a new stance for Republicans to oppose tax increases. It's one of the main differences between the parties, really.

well he basicly put a political gun to there heads by saying he would oppose any of them that didn't sign it and he has the power to do that

exactly.

People who cannot understand why someone would vote republican, be a republican, or oppose the democrats seem to think that they are all being controlled...whether it is Norquist, Koch brothers, who ever the flavor of the day is that is controlling the party...

People in congress don't want to raise taxes...whether it is for the right reason (won't solve any problems) or for the wrong one (simply to get re-elected)....it is how it is. Puppets...it is as overused as hypocrisy...How can a party who overtly says it is against raising taxes be said to be controlled by one person...it is just an easy way to blame someone for something they don't understand. Reid just cannot understand why the republicans won't raise taxes and so it has to be some sort of insidious outside influence.

If this is the case, then all politicians are puppets in one form or another...

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

only one in the senate, (or is it the house?) has not signed it.

has anyone seen the polls this week? the republicans' proposal for the budget without tax increases on the rich is getting more and more unpopular...

when has pushing unpopular legislation ever been a problem? it happens all the time...I can think of a healthcare bill that passed that continues to decline in approval...I don't want my government making decisions based on the whims of the masses...we elect these people to make decisions on their own, if public support was necessary for ever single thing that is ever done why do we even have representatives...shouldn't we just have referendums on everything?

They are representatives because we need people to make hard decisions...Poll watching is for politicians who only care about being re-elected...hard decisions (whatever side they agree with mind you, this isn't a democrat republican thing) are for those that are doing their duty and serving their constituents to the best of their ability. It truly is a parent/child relationship.

satansbed

Monster Rain wrote:

Yes, anyone has the power to oppose a politician they don't agree with. You guys are acting as though Republicans really really really want to raise taxes but this mean man just won't let them. As I said earlier, one of the big meaningful differences between the Republicans and Democrats has been taxes/spending. This pledge has been around for over 20 years and many Republicans have been elected and re-elected without signing it.

satansbed wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

He made them sign it or he asked them to sign it? I doubt he pulled a gun on anyone. It's not exactly a new stance for Republicans to oppose tax increases. It's one of the main differences between the parties, really.

well he basicly put a political gun to there heads by saying he would oppose any of them that didn't sign it and he has the power to do that

Norquist's opposition to any and all tax increases implies that even deficit reduction agreements that are dominated by spending cuts should be rejected since such agreements are still not entirely spending cuts, he is an obstacle to deficit reduction and if republicans are serious about reducing the deficit they are going to have to increase taxes slightly, close loopholes. yes it should be dominated by spending cuts but there will need to be some tax increases. his power over these republicans means that they won't though, just prolonging the lack of confidence in the economy and discouraging investment

Monster Rain

I'm not sure what polls you've read. According to a Quinnipiac University poll released today, 48% favor a deficit reduction plan that only cuts spending and just 39% said the plan should have a tax increase. It seems like a plan that includes a tax increase is the less popular option.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67513.html

Also, I didn't mean that many people in Congress today have been elected and re-eleceted without signing the bill. I was saying that many people over the last 20+ years that the ATR has had the pledge have been elected and re-elected without needing to sign it. Not signing it doesn't mean that someone will turn around a vote to raise taxes. I view that pledge as a formality. The first George Bush signed the pledge in '88 and signed off on a tax increase 2 years later. Republicans still gave him the party's nomination in '92 and when he lost it was because he had given that "Read my lips: No new taxes" speech, not because he signed some silly paper that has no legal standing. If he'd never given that speech, people wouldn't have known he signed that pledge (or at the very least, not nearly as many people would have known).

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

Yes, anyone has the power to oppose a politician they don't agree with. You guys are acting as though Republicans really really really want to raise taxes but this mean man just won't let them. As I said earlier, one of the big meaningful differences between the Republicans and Democrats has been taxes/spending. This pledge has been around for over 20 years and many Republicans have been elected and re-elected without signing it.

only one in the senate, (or is it the house?) has not signed it.

has anyone seen the polls this week? the republicans' proposal for the budget without tax increases on the rich is getting more and more unpopular...

gimmesometruth27

satansbed wrote:

Norquist's opposition to any and all tax increases implies that even deficit reduction agreements that are dominated by spending cuts should be rejected since such agreements are still not entirely spending cuts, he is an obstacle to deficit reduction and if republicans are serious about reducing the deficit they are going to have to increase taxes slightly, close loopholes. yes it should be dominated by spending cuts but there will need to be some tax increases. his power over these republicans means that they won't though, just prolonging the lack of confidence in the economy and discouraging investment

stated much better than i could have put it.

americans favor a balanced approach ot spending cuts and increasing revenue via tax increases on the rich and closing the corporate tax loopholes.

this is not a time for selfishness for no other reason than scoring political points.

at this point, i think the gop is going to "stubborn" their way out of controlling the house...

Monster Rain

You make it seem as though Republicans want to raise taxes but are being prevented from doing so because one guy doesn't want them to. That's absurd. Every Republican runs for office promising not to vote for tax increases. I don't want them to come up with a plan that includes any tax increases and I've never met the guy before. Tax increases are not needed. Less spending is what's needed. The reason I say that is simple: raising taxes has never led to decreased spending by the government. A tax increase will only mean that the budget for something won't be cut or decreased by as much as it would have been without the tax increase.

satansbed wrote:

Norquist's opposition to any and all tax increases implies that even deficit reduction agreements that are dominated by spending cuts should be rejected since such agreements are still not entirely spending cuts, he is an obstacle to deficit reduction and if republicans are serious about reducing the deficit they are going to have to increase taxes slightly, close loopholes. yes it should be dominated by spending cuts but there will need to be some tax increases. his power over these republicans means that they won't though, just prolonging the lack of confidence in the economy and discouraging investment

dignin

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

satansbed wrote:

Norquist's opposition to any and all tax increases implies that even deficit reduction agreements that are dominated by spending cuts should be rejected since such agreements are still not entirely spending cuts, he is an obstacle to deficit reduction and if republicans are serious about reducing the deficit they are going to have to increase taxes slightly, close loopholes. yes it should be dominated by spending cuts but there will need to be some tax increases. his power over these republicans means that they won't though, just prolonging the lack of confidence in the economy and discouraging investment

stated much better than i could have put it.

americans favor a balanced approach ot spending cuts and increasing revenue via tax increases on the rich and closing the corporate tax loopholes.

this is not a time for selfishness for no other reason than scoring political points.

at this point, i think the gop is going to "stubborn" their way out of controlling the house...

It's called compromise, this is how civil societies get along. The Republicans are ignoring over half the electorate by saying they will not agree to any tax hikes.....the answer, right or wrong is somewhere in the middle. This is how a democracy works.

Monster Rain

What you said here is simply not true. More people support a plan with only spending cuts than support a plan that includes a tax increase for the rich. My other post showed you the poll that came out today. I tried to find a poll that supports your statements in this thread but I didn't see any. If you have one, I'd like to see it so I can see how if compares to the one I posted.

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

stated much better than i could have put it.

americans favor a balanced approach ot spending cuts and increasing revenue via tax increases on the rich and closing the corporate tax loopholes.

this is not a time for selfishness for no other reason than scoring political points.

at this point, i think the gop is going to "stubborn" their way out of controlling the house...

bennett13

Monster Rain wrote:

Yes, anyone has the power to oppose a politician they don't agree with. You guys are acting as though Republicans really really really want to raise taxes but this mean man just won't let them. As I said earlier, one of the big meaningful differences between the Republicans and Democrats has been taxes/spending. This pledge has been around for over 20 years and many Republicans have been elected and re-elected without signing it.

satansbed wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

He made them sign it or he asked them to sign it? I doubt he pulled a gun on anyone. It's not exactly a new stance for Republicans to oppose tax increases. It's one of the main differences between the parties, really.

well he basicly put a political gun to there heads by saying he would oppose any of them that didn't sign it and he has the power to do that

only one in the senate, (or is it the house?) has not signed it.

has anyone seen the polls this week? the republicans' proposal for the budget without tax increases on the rich is getting more and more unpopular...[/quote]


I've always been skeptical of polls. It's probably because I have never been polled, nor do I know anyone who has ever been polled. Who exactly are they polling?

bennett13

I obviously need a lesson in the quote feature on these boards...I never seem to get them right. :oops:

markin ball

Monster Rain wrote:

Yes, anyone has the power to oppose a politician they don't agree with. You guys are acting as though Republicans really really really want to raise taxes but this mean man just won't let them. As I said earlier, one of the big meaningful differences between the Republicans and Democrats has been taxes/spending. This pledge has been around for over 20 years and many Republicans have been elected and re-elected without signing it.

satansbed wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

He made them sign it or he asked them to sign it? I doubt he pulled a gun on anyone. It's not exactly a new stance for Republicans to oppose tax increases. It's one of the main differences between the parties, really.

well he basicly put a political gun to there heads by saying he would oppose any of them that didn't sign it and he has the power to do that

I think that is just a myth that has been ingrained in the popular psyche. Regan raised taxes and the deficit a lot. Bush 2 raised the deficit a lot. Both parties seem to spend with reckless abandon.

mikepegg44

markin ball wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

Yes, anyone has the power to oppose a politician they don't agree with. You guys are acting as though Republicans really really really want to raise taxes but this mean man just won't let them. As I said earlier, one of the big meaningful differences between the Republicans and Democrats has been taxes/spending. This pledge has been around for over 20 years and many Republicans have been elected and re-elected without signing it.

satansbed wrote:

well he basicly put a political gun to there heads by saying he would oppose any of them that didn't sign it and he has the power to do that

I think that is just a myth that has been ingrained in the popular psyche. Regan raised taxes and the deficit a lot. Bush 2 raised the deficit a lot. Both parties seem to spend with reckless abandon.

correct, both parties have spent like MC hammer...

but traditionally Republicans have been in favor of lower tax rates than Democrats. Raising taxes here is like taking a morbidly obese person to the Old Country Buffet. Does anyone think we can solve a weight problem by eating more? then why on earth do they think we can solve our government's tendency to spend themselves in trouble by giving them more money?

if they can prove they can spend less and balance a budget, they can have more to spend...and just so everyone knows....you can raise revenue without raising tax rates.