A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Norquist throws down gauntlet while squealing about

Posted: Jan 2, 2013

A few days ago, the anti-tax purist gave his "technical" PERMISSION to GOP pols to allow tax cuts to expire. Now that scores of pubs have taken that ball and run it into the end zone, he is taking this opportunity to step up to the plate and take up where Mitch McConnell left off in 2010....by calling for 4 more years of Congressional "fights" (read obstruction) in his interview with Andrea Mitchell this morning. This language dialed up a notch or two the same sentiments expressed in the link below reporting on a Norquist tweet from a 12/13. He's just replaced the word "leverage" with this slightly more aggressive version. Wonder what 2014 would look like for those Norquist foot soldier reps who decide to follow suit?

While the tantrums continue, Grover seems to be blissfully unaware of the path he's on toward political irrevelance. In fact, I find this first House reps' foray into uncharted territory of post-Norquist pledge chains to be surprisingly stunning in terms of the numbers who took that plunge.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/grover-norquist-cliff-plan-ok-with-pledge-85658.html

;

I suspect he's fighting the slide into irrelevance by - pushing himself into the public eye. Similar

[ In Reply To ..]
to Charles Krauthammer, apologist for a whites-only GOP and many other ideas fast going the way of well, a whites-only GOP. He's been pushing forward with attention-grabbing statements, like his shabby Benghazi-testimony headache comment, and I've never seen him quoted on non-Fox channels a fraction as much as he's been since the election.

Krauthammer is a board certified Psychiatrist who has - no business mocking a head injury

[ In Reply To ..]
in pursuit of some twisted precept of political gain. I've always found his smug mug and condescending attitudes absolutely insufferable. The fall from his high horse cannot come soon enough for me.

Krauthammer is brilliant and most likely a LOT more - qualified than you to comment !! nm

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Yes. His qualifications to make baseless accusations - against a senior stateswoman,

[ In Reply To ..]
of lying and to feed Fox scandal-mongering with his bloody red meat are unparalleled. I can think of NO ONE who treats HIS disability with the same brazen contempt as he has shown toward HC. Sick people, like the disabled, should be OFF LIMITS, and not be subjected to politicized personal attacks, especially when they are laid up in a hospital bed trying to recover, for crying out loud. For all his so-called qualifications, this creep has decided to hang with high-profile shameless sleazeballs. What a waste.

Guess you didn't know that he's paralyzed, did you? - Truthhurts

[ In Reply To ..]
If you watch him on Bret Baier, he's always sitting in the same position, hands in the same position, and he has to take deep breaths before speaking because he's paralyzed from either the neck or the chest down.

Did you read her entire post? She mentioned his disability. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

Muckraking is a standard last-ditch tactic, and obviously - his disability is no impediment to using it. nm

[ In Reply To ..]
x

Yep, but the poster stated: - backwards typist

[ In Reply To ..]
"Sick people, like the disabled, should be OFF LIMITS, and not be subjected to politicized personal attacks...."

HC is a political figure. He is a political writer. He is not the only one who has written about HC [while she has been hospitalized] wondering if it was the real truth or a cover up story.

Then the poster goes on a rant and calls him a "creep" and "hanging with sleazeballs." So, it's okay for this poster to call him names even though he's also disabled, but it's not all right to call HC out (or whatever he did) even though HC is NOT disabled, just has a concussion. Sorry, but I don't agree at all with that poster's nastiness against CK. It's uncalled for.

For all his so-called qualifications, this creep has decided to hang with high-profile shameless sleazeballs. What a waste.

Unlike CK OP did not mock his disability, just called out his - inexcusable behavior for

[ In Reply To ..]
suggesting the concussion and blood count are completely bogus. Krauthammer did not apologize for inferring Clinton lied about her condition even after the blood clot complication led to a 4 day hospital stay. The creep and shameless sleazeballs description is appropriate since all Fox has done is double down on their stupid rhetoric. Fed up with their phony scandals.

Yeah. I read it but had trouble getting past the hate - Truthhurts

[ In Reply To ..]
in her message.

Some people just can't stop their hate against anything that doesn't agree with their opinions or ideas. That's one of the reasons I usually don't post here and, in fact, don't visit this board much anymore.

Whoosh! - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

:) No, he's SO not. If you examine past columns - you'll find he's been mistaken most of t

[ In Reply To ..]
He totally failed to understand the direction this country is going and even after the election is still in denial.

Like others of his ilk, he has an unfortunately narrow-ranging mind but compensates for his lack of understanding by presenting his message with an aura of great conviction and profundity. His particular marketing in a pseudo-intellectual package is to sell to those who don't like to see themselves as "ditto-heads."

I think all that black hair dye seeped into his brain. - KLG

[ In Reply To ..]
He needs to lay off the varnish.

As if any of it matters. We need spending cuts!! - Got it? Obama doesnt get it ! nm

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Actually, he does. Our faltering economy is a short-term danger. - Our 80-year-old debt long term problem, no emergen

[ In Reply To ..]
There are a lot of lies being spread about this, NM.

Our gargantuan debt, which exploded in size during and since the Reagan and Bush 1 and 2 administrations because of outrageous fiscal irresponsibility, is like our ship of state towing an iceberg around after it. It is a handicap, yes, slowing us down, but it doesn't cripple us and we are able to keep chugging on.

On the other hand, we have a grave IMMEDIATE problem to worry about--that our economy doesn't crash all over again like in 2008. Note that if we crash again, the size of the debt will balloon from that alone. The problem with cutting spending is that if we slow it down too much, that's like slowing down the feed of gas to your car too much, and the economic engine will stall--and we'll have a second devastating crash.

As for political games and lies, the GOP leadership knows all this but knows a lot of voters don't. Thus, they're playing a game of pretending they want BIG CUTS TO SPENDING RIGHT NOW, knowing they don't have to worry that the Obama administration would actually do that. (Obama's actually doing some spending cuts with the left foot, while keeping the gas firmly on with his right foot, but how many of us are watching his feet?) This all allows the GOP to pretend it's THE fiscally responsible party and that Obama is outrageously irresponsible and just wants to grow the debt.

See? Now you get it too.

Actually, he may not get it. - backwards typist

[ In Reply To ..]
Budget Deficits by Fiscal Year Since 1960:
President Barack Obama: First Term = $5.073 trillion.
• FY 2013 - $901 billion.
• FY 2012 - $1.327 trillion.
• FY 2011 - $1.299 trillion.
• FY 2010 - $1.546 ($1.293 trillion plus $253 billion from the Obama Stimulus Act that was attached to the FY 2009 budget).

President George W. Bush: First Term = $1.267 trillion. Second Term = $2.027 trillion. Total = $3.294.
• FY 2009 - $1.16 trillion. ($1.416 trillion minus $253 billion from Obama's Stimulus Act)
• FY 2008 - $458 billion.
• FY 2007 - $161 billion.
• FY 2006 - $248 billion.
• FY 2005 - $318 billion.
• FY 2004 - $413 billion.
• FY 2003 - $378 billion.
• FY 2002 - $158 billion.

President Bill Clinton: First Term = $496 billion. Second Term = ($559 billion surplus). Total = ($63 billion surplus).
• FY 2001 - $128 billion surplus.
• FY 2000 - $236 billion surplus.
• FY 1999 - $126 billion surplus.
• FY 1998 - $69 billion surplus.
• FY 1997 - $22 billion.
• FY 1996 - $107 billion.
• FY 1995 - $164 billion.
• FY 1994 - $203 billion.

President George H.W. Bush: First Term = $1.03 trillion.
• FY 1993 - $255 billion.
• FY 1992 - $290 billion.
• FY 1991 - $269 billion.
• FY 1990 - $221 billion.

President Ronald Reagan: First Term = $733 billion. Second Term = $679 billion. Total = $1.412 trillion.
• FY 1989 - $153 billion.
• FY 1988 - $155 billion.
• FY 1987 - $150 billion.
• FY 1986 - $221 billion.
• FY 1985 - $212 billion.
• FY 1984 - $185 billion.
• FY 1983 - $208 billion.
• FY 1982 - $128 billion.

President Jimmy Carter: First Term = $253 billion
• FY 1981 - $79 billion.
• FY 1980 - $74 billion.
• FY 1979 - $41 billion.
• FY 1978 - $59 billion.

President Gerald Ford: Three Years = $181 billion.
• FY 1977 - $54 billion.
• FY 1976 - $74 billion.
• FY 1975 - $53 billion.

President Richard Nixon: First Term = $64 billion. First Year of Second Term = $6 billion. Total = $70 billion.
• FY 1974 - $6 billion.
• FY 1973 - $15 billion.
• FY 1972 - $23 billion.
• FY 1971 - $23 billion.
• FY 1970 - $3 billion.

President Lyndon B. Johnson: Two Years in First Term = $7 billion. Second Term = $35 billion. Total = $42 billion.
• FY 1969 - $3 billion surplus.
• FY 1968 - $25 billion.
• FY 1967 - $9 billion.
• FY 1966 - $4 billion.
• FY 1965 - $1 billion.
• FY 1964 - $6 billion.

President John F. Kennedy: Two Years in First Term = $11 billion.
• FY 1963 - $5 billion.
• FY 1962 - $7 billion.

President Dwight Eisenhower: First Term = $3 billion surplus. Second Term = $19 billion. Total = $16 billion.
• FY 1961 - $3 billion.
• FY 1960 - $0 billion (slight surplus).
• FY 1959 - $13 billion.
• FY 1958 - $3 billion.
• FY 1957 - $3 billion surplus.
• FY 1956 - $4 billion surplus.
• FY 1955 - $3 billion.
• FY 1954 - $1 billion.

President Harry Truman: First Term = $1 billion surplus. Second Term = $4 billion. Total = $3 billion.
• FY 1953 - $6 billion.
• FY 1952 - $1 billion.
• FY 1951 - $6 billion surplus.
• FY 1950 - $3 billion.
• FY 1949 - $1 billion surplus.
• FY 1948 - $12 billion surplus.
• FY 1947 - $4 billion surplus.
• FY 1946 - $16 billion.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt: First Term = $13 billion. Second Term = $11 billion. Third Term = $172 billion. Total = $196 billion.
• FY 1945 - $48 billion.
• FY 1944 - $48 billion.
• FY 1943 - $55 billion.
• FY 1942 - $21 billion.
• FY 1941 - $5 billion.
• FY 1940 - $3 billion.
• FY 1939 - $3 billion.
• FY 1938 - $0 billion (slight deficit).
• FY 1937 - $2 billion.
• FY 1936 - $4 billion.
• FY 1935 - $3 billion.
• FY 1934 - $4 billion.

President Herbert Hoover: First Term = $5 billion.
• FY 1933 - $3 billion.
• FY 1932 - $3 billion.
• FY 1931 - $0 billion (slight deficit).
• FY 1930 - $1 billion surplus.

President Calvin Coolidge: Two Years of First Term = $2 billion surplus. Second Term = $4 billion surplus. Total = $6 billion surplus.
• FY 1929 - $1 billion surplus.
• FY 1928 - $1 billion surplus.
• FY 1927 - $1 billion surplus.
• FY 1926 - $1 billion surplus.
• FY 1925 - $1 billion surplus.
• FY 1924 - $1 billion surplus.

President Warren G. Harding: Two Years of First Term = $2 billion surplus.
• FY 1923 - $1 billion surplus.
• FY 1922 - $1 billion surplus.

President Woodrow Wilson: First Term = $1 billion. Second Term = $21 billion. Total = $22 billion.
• FY 1921 - $1 billion surplus.
• FY 1920 - $0 billion (slight surplus).
• FY 1919 - $13 billion.
• FY 1918 - $9 billion.
• FY 1917 - $1 billion.
• FY 1916 - $0 billion (slight surplus).
• FY 1915 - $0 billion (slight surplus).
• FY 1914 - $0 billion.

U.S. Debt Accumulation By President - link

[ In Reply To ..]
here is one article that references the data you shared: (http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm)

By clicking on a link within that very article, I find the following illuminating graph:

Similar Messages:

Feb 01, 2011
In the name of so-called national security, he says he will redeploy abusive police force to the streets, rely on the loyalty of army which clearly has no intent of firing on its own people, and that he intends to die in Egypt after serving out his term. In the meantime, the Egyptians have set Friday as a deadline for him to leave the country. Hopefully, the army will rally around the population and find a face-saving way to remove him before an assassins bullet finds it target. Otherwise, it ...

Jul 18, 2011
Here is the reason Republicans are being so intransigent in negotiating the debt ceiling: http://www.atr.org/userfiles/Senate%20Pledge(2).pdf Nearly every single Republican in the House and Senate has signed a pledge (authored by Grover Norquist) which forbids them from raising taxes EVER. Furthermore, they cannot even get rid of LOOPHOLES (corporate jets, oil subsidies, etc.) unless they simultaneously lower the tax rate. This is why the Republican (Paul Ryan) budget guts Med ...

Mar 20, 2010
The CBO has now said that the "Medicare Fix", which the Democrats are trying to pass separate from the HCR bill, throws their scheme into the red, eating up all of the claimed $200 billion in deficit reduction and instead adding $56 billion more. For those who don't know, there are programmed reductions in Medicare reimbursements to physicians that are supposed to "kick in" automatically, and every year Congress passes a bill to reverse those cuts for the simple reason that such reductio ...

Feb 07, 2013
Oh, well, there's one anyway. ...

Nov 10, 2010
Guess she IS afraid of losing this January. The party is going on right now behind a curtain at the WH. Wonder who is paying for this? Pelosi to throw reception to celebrate 'accomplishments' of Dem Congress November 8, 2010, 2:57 pm by Christina Wilkie Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will host a reception Wednesday afternoon on Capitol Hill to celebrate "The accomplishments of the 111th Congress," according to an invit ...

May 15, 2015
Well, well, welll, I guess it's not just Dems that whine and throw fits about things being unfair, now is it? :) Because it seems Senator Paul is the one who led the charge against George Stephanopoulos moderating Republican debates , telling Hannity he's avoided his (George's) interviews for a year. So let's see, Randy boy - you run your big mouth in protest all over the country, only to press you think you can manipulate, but cower from journalists you can't ma ...

Nov 26, 2012
" From the Washington Post: "Four big-name Republicans have broken with Grover Norquist in recent days, saying they won’t be bound by their Norquist-sponsored pledges to oppose any and all tax increases. The moves by Sens. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Bob Corker (Tenn.) and Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) and Rep. Peter King (N.Y.) represent the opening steps of a delicate dance for the GOP — and one that could come to define the just-begun talks over the looming “fiscal cliff.” ...