• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who are Norquist pledge-signers loyal to - the American People or someone else?

Is signing Norquist's anti-tax pledge un-American?

  • Signing Norquist's pledge is anti-American

    Votes: 8 44.4%
  • Signing Norquist's pledge is pro-American

    Votes: 2 11.1%
  • Other (please comment)

    Votes: 8 44.4%

  • Total voters
    18

leftofabbie

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
723
Reaction score
86
Location
North Woods Wisconsin
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Progressive
The Pledge: Grover Norquist's hold on the GOP - CBS News

Pledging ourselves out of democracy | The Great Debate

If anyone were to suggest that members of the House and Senate should abandon their own judgment and instead follow a strict dogma laid down by an outside body, we would be appalled. And if it were proposed that the president should be little more than a rubber stamp to sign any and all legislation presented to him by Congress, we would throw up our hands in horror.


So, is signing Norquist's "no tax" pledge disloyal to Americans?
 
I would think that the Norquist pledge is BS and changes representatives loyalty. If their constituents demand a tax raise, say to cover a deficit, will the congressperson reflect the wishes of the people or one specific private individual's piece of paper?
 
It's not a matter of being a loyal American or not. It's a matter of PRINCIPLES; which are something this nation's political system lost contact with a long time ago.
 
Speaking your beliefs and signing petitions/pledges isn't anti-American inasmuch as OWS and their "demands."
 
As politicians, signers of the pledge must believe that signing the pledge is a net positive for their political status. Right now, the biggest worry most politicians have isn't winning elections (especially if you look at house and senate elections), but winning primaries. This tax pledge is a "great" way for Republicans to affirm their "right"eousness.

I don't think the pledge is inherently un-American or pro-American. It ultimately, however, handicaps a politician, because breaking any kind of pledge will damage them in the eyes of the voters.
 
It's not a matter of being a loyal American or not. It's a matter of PRINCIPLES; which are something this nation's political system lost contact with a long time ago.

Yeah, it's too bad we don't have any principled anti-segregation congressmen anymore. Principals are great, it's why gays are still a targeted minority by the federal government. It's why we had a Civil War. Yeah, unmovable ideological principles are something we are desperately missing these days. :roll:
 
The Pledge: Grover Norquist's hold on the GOP - CBS News

Pledging ourselves out of democracy | The Great Debate

If anyone were to suggest that members of the House and Senate should abandon their own judgment and instead follow a strict dogma laid down by an outside body, we would be appalled. And if it were proposed that the president should be little more than a rubber stamp to sign any and all legislation presented to him by Congress, we would throw up our hands in horror.


So, is signing Norquist's "no tax" pledge disloyal to Americans?
Its a anti-tax increase pledge. Funny how you left the Increase part out in order to make it seem as though republicans want to abolish taxes altogether.


It could argued that not signing Norquits no tax increase pledge is disloyal to America. These clowns in office already spend more then what they receive. So why on God's green earth do you think its a smart idea to give these clowns more money? Do you honestly think these clowns in office are going to magically stop increasing the amount of money they spend just because you give them more money? If these people were actually serious about reducing the debt they would start cutting programs left and right and get back to the basic. Make the cuts first and then talk increases.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it's too bad we don't have any principled anti-segregation congressmen anymore. Principals are great, it's why gays are still a targeted minority by the federal government. It's why we had a Civil War. Yeah, unmovable ideological principles are something we are desperately missing these days. :roll:

It was also principled people who ended reconstruction, prevented the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, pushed forward women's suffrage and civil rights, and ended a war in Vietnam. Principle swings both ways.
 
Seeing as it's a pledge to America taxpayers, only enforceable with possible electoral consequences following overtly lying to the folks you're supposed to represent, this criticism has never made sense.
 
The Pledge: Grover Norquist's hold on the GOP - CBS News

Pledging ourselves out of democracy | The Great Debate
If anyone were to suggest that members of the House and Senate should abandon their own judgment and instead follow a strict dogma laid down by an outside body, we would be appalled. And if it were proposed that the president should be little more than a rubber stamp to sign any and all legislation presented to him by Congress, we would throw up our hands in horror.


So, is signing Norquist's "no tax" pledge disloyal to Americans?

"American"-Of, relating to, or characteristic of the United States or its inhabitants.

By definition it is perfectly American since signing petitions and pledges has been done for the entire history of our country. If you want to make a point that signing this pledge was a bad thing, arguments could be made for that, but this is not one of them. This is just plain old hyper-partisan stupidity.
 
I voted other...its neither pro or anti american its partisan...
 
It's not a matter of being a loyal American or not. It's a matter of PRINCIPLES; which are something this nation's political system lost contact with a long time ago.
principles my arse....these 'representatives' sold out their constituents...they were elected to represent their districts/states, not the will of norquist.
 
principles my arse....these 'representatives' sold out their constituents...they were elected to represent their districts/states, not the will of norquist.

Exactly. These people who pledge their ass to Grover should be run out of Congress.
 
Its a anti-tax increase pledge. Funny how you left the Increase part out in order to make it seem as though republicans want to abolish taxes altogether.


It could argued that not signing Norquits no tax increase pledge is disloyal to America. These clowns in office already spend more then what they receive. So why on God's green earth do you think its a smart idea to give these clowns more money? Do you honestly think these clowns in office are going to magically stop increasing the amount of money they spend just because you give them more money? If these people were actually serious about reducing the debt they would start cutting programs left and right and get back to the basic. Make the cuts first and then talk increases.


You're right, it's a pro-tax pledge.
 
I'd never vote for anyone who signed it. The way I see it, signing it will have one of two outcomes, neither of which I think is good.

1. They sign the pledge and vote for a raise in taxes anyway. Which would mean that they're dishonest and only signed it to get votes. And although that isn't exactly rare in US politics, it's still a bad thing.

2. They sign it and hold to it, meaning they've limited their options for dealing with problems that come up which might require tax increases. As distasteful as the idea of raising taxes is, I think reducing our debt is more important. I think cutting spending should be the first tool in reducing debt, but I really can't see us cutting spending fast enough to reduce the debt by any meaningful amount in any reasonable time frame. I think a tax increase is going to be necessary if we really want to do something about our debt.
 
Yeah, it's too bad we don't have any principled anti-segregation congressmen anymore. Principals are great, it's why gays are still a targeted minority by the federal government. It's why we had a Civil War. Yeah, unmovable ideological principles are something we are desperately missing these days. :roll:

LOL. You're a Moderate. You wouldn't know what Principles were if someone engraved them on the insides of your eyelids.

principles my arse....these 'representatives' sold out their constituents...they were elected to represent their districts/states, not the will of norquist.

When what their constituents want violated the document they swore to uphold and protect, damn straight the will of the people goes out the window.
 
"American"-Of, relating to, or characteristic of the United States or its inhabitants.

By definition it is perfectly American since signing petitions and pledges has been done for the entire history of our country. If you want to make a point that signing this pledge was a bad thing, arguments could be made for that, but this is not one of them. This is just plain old hyper-partisan stupidity.

I disagree, some of those who sign the pledge are coerced into signing. I think there is an implied "sign it if you want to keep your job."
 
The idea that refusing to raise taxes is some kind of ideological principle is moronic. Its about as stupid as mechanic who claims his moral prevent him from ever adjusting a carburetor to run a leaner mixture. Taxation level need to adjusted as circumstances change, that means both raising and lowering taxes in different situations.

In 1990 George H Bush cut a deal with double democratic majority, in which he conceded a slight tax increase for many times its number in spending cuts, in addition to the PAYGO requirements. He was politically crucified for breaking Norquists pledge, but the policy played a significant part in lowering the deficit.

The real question is do you want someone who talks about "fiscal conservatism" while running up record debts or somehow who actually gets it done in reality?
 
You're right, it's a pro-tax pledge.


The pledge doesn't call for the elimination of taxes so yes it could be considered a pro-tax pledge. Are any republicans calling for the elimination of all taxes? Again the pledge is a anti-tax increase pledge not a anti-tax pledge. Why are you so blatantly dishonest?
 
Last edited:
I disagree, some of those who sign the pledge are coerced into signing. I think there is an implied "sign it if you want to keep your job."

How would those asking republicans to sign a no tax-increase pledge be able to fire those that don't? Firing a politcian is something that can only be done by the voters.
 
principles my arse....these 'representatives' sold out their constituents...they were elected to represent their districts/states, not the will of norquist.


They were elected to represent the interest of their voters.No tax-increases or lower taxes is generally one of those things republicans run on. So how can signing a document that reinforces that idea of no tax-increase or lower taxes be selling out their constituents? It would be no different than Nanci Pelosi, or some other liberal democrat signing a pro-abortion pledge or a pro-gay marriage pledge when liberal democrats generally run on those issues.
 
Back
Top Bottom