DOWNLOADS: (154)

PLAYS: (1670)

Embed

I'm not sure what the producers of MSNBC's UP with Steve Kornacki felt that Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform's Mattie Duppler was going to add to the debate on this Sunday's show, but after watching her on there, apparently it was to keep the rest of the guests busy debunking the endless string of lies she told during her time on the panel.

During a discussion ranging from what percentage of GDP is needs to be taxed, to the size and scope of government, to whether Americans even know what the federal government spends money on, or how many people realize that President Obama has lowered their taxes, the conversation got a bit contentious when Duppler trotted out the old "because of Obama, government spending is out of control" canard.

After the Center for American Progress' Neera Tanden made the point that the central thesis of Republicans' economic strategy has been tax cuts, and that it has been proven that tax cuts don't produce economic growth, here's Duppler's response.

DUPPLER: That's not the central thesis of the Republican party. It is one of the tenets of the Republican party. (crosstalk) But you also have explosive government growth. You've got government spending that's out of control and that...

JOHNSTON: It's not out of control. […] The government is rapidly shrinking under Obama.

DUPPLER: After he exploded it. After he increased spending by eighty-four percent. I mean, seriously, this is laughable that you're telling me that are just (crosstalk).

JOHNSTON: This would put us into a depression. You want to put us into a depression. (crosstalk).

NADLER: This is the central lie...

DUPPLER: I'm challenging your assertion that the deficit and the size of government is shrinking after Obama and congressional Democrats took spending and the size of government to all time highs.

NADLER: This is the central lie... this is the central lie of our political debate right now... what you just said.

JOHNSTON: Absolutely.

NADLER: The fact is, what happened to our deficit is, after it was cut... after it went up because of the Bush tax cuts and the wars and everything, since Obama took office, remember, the CBO before Obama took office said the 2009 deficit was going to be $1.4 trillion and it was. Why? And it was hugely increased. Why? Because when you get a recession, you get a depression such as we were in, two things happen.

One, revenues plummet, taxes plummet. People aren't working. They don't pay taxes, number one. And so taxes plummeted. And number two, automatic spending on unemployment insurance and on food stamps goes up because more people don't have money to eat with...

JOHNSTON: And Jerry, if you don't have part two, that you did, that's when you get the great depression.

After Duppler continued to insist that from a "small government perspective" government spending is still too high, David Cay Johnston reminded her of just what that philosophy is going to cost us.

JOHNSTON: We are going to be poorer in the future because we are cutting spending on basic research. The cell phones that we all have have grown from government spending in the past. The jet airplanes we fly come from government spending, the computers we use, the math in them, all come from government spending. [...] We need to be spending money on government research, development and education and Republicans want to cut all that.

After Duppler said she wanted to know how we were supposed to fund these things, Tanden pointed out the obvious... paying taxes. Duppler pretended that cutting taxes was not "the central tenet" of the Republican party, but thanks to her group, that's exactly what it's been.

DOWNLOADS: (127)

PLAYS: (540)

Embed

Anti-tax lobbyist Grover Norquist on Monday insisted that Republicans in Congress would hold the debt ceiling hostage to ensure that there would be no tax increases on even the wealthiest Americans as part of a deal to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff.

During an interview with the founder of Americans for Tax Reform on CNN, host Ali Velshi noted that many viewers were outraged that the media continued to give Norquist so much airtime to campaign against a balanced fiscal cliff deal.

"All I get from people is tweets about, 'Why do you keep putting Grover Norquist, who is a big part of this problem, on TV?'" Velshi explained. "Because we have to have this conversation because you have great deal of influence over these members of Congress."

"You're right," Norquist agreed. "And some folks on the left are not big on the First Amendment for other people, but we can set that aside right now."

"We should take as many of the tax cuts off the table as possible," he continued. "And then because Republicans have the clout of the debt ceiling increase -- which they effectively used a year and a half ago -- and the continuing resolution where they could dole out money slowly to Obama and the Democrats to spend while reining it in, those are two very powerful tools."

"I'm not sure how effectively they used it," Velshi pointed out. "That was 517 days ago and that's why we're in the mess we are now."

As for any deal that lawmakers may reach on Monday, Norquist said he was "working with all the folks that are trying to defend taxpayers here in Congress."

"The leadership of the House have all made the commitment in writing to their constituents to oppose all efforts to raise taxes."

"I don't think you're going to see something that actually raises taxes," he added. "We may get some tax cuts now and have to fight for others later. Watch for the leverage the Republicans have on the debt ceiling and the continuing resolution. That allows us to come back and actually fight for spending cuts, but also for further tax reduction."

(h/t: Politico)

DOWNLOADS: (164)

PLAYS: (1233)

Embed

Anti-tax lobbyist Grover Norquist predicts that none of the Republican who are having "impure thoughts" about taxes will actually break their pledge and vote for additional revenue.

Since singing defeats by their party in the November elections, several Republicans who signed the Americans for Tax Reform pledge -- including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Rep. Peter King (R-NY) and Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) -- have said they would compromise with Democrats in return for cuts to earned benefits like Medicare and Social Security.

"No pledge-taker has voted for a tax increase," Norquist explained to CNN's Soledad O'Brien on Monday. "They've had some people discussing impure thoughts on national television."

"However, Lindsey Graham, if you listen to him, he would support higher taxes if it was used to pay down the debt -- of course, it wont be, it will be spent -- if ten-to-one ratios on entitlement reform. I've had long conversations with Lindsey Graham and he says, 'I would raise taxes if...' and then he lists this incredible lists of reforms and entitlements that the Democrats would never give him."

Norquist added: "And as I suggested to him, I said, 'Senator, you're offering to trade a tax increase for a pink unicorn that doesn't exist.'"

DOWNLOADS: (194)

PLAYS: (1990)

Embed

Anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist says that President Barack Obama did not win re-election because of his promise to raise taxes on the wealthy, but it was because attack ads made voters thing that Mitt Romney was a "poopy-head."

During a Monday interview on CBS, Norquist suggested that Republicans had a mandate not to raise taxes, even it meant going off the so-called "fiscal cliff."

"The House of Representatives was elected, committed to keeping taxes low," the Americans for Tax Reform president explained. "The president was elected on the basis that he was not Romney and that Romney was a poopy-head and you should vote against Romney. And he won by two points. But he didn't make the case that we should have higher taxes and higher spending, he kind of sounded like the opposite."

"Well, I'm not sure that's what the president called Mitt Romney," CBS host Norah O'Donnell pointed out. "The debate that was had -- and I listened very closely to it -- he said very clearly throughout the debate that the wealthiest Americans should pay more. And he won eight of the nine battleground states. And Republicans failed to reclaim the White House or the Senate. What about the exit polls that show a broad support on raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans? Are you wrong?"

"Again, you saw those ads that suggested Romney gave people cancer in Ohio for months and months unanswered," Norquist insisted. "You can trash an individual and get them to vote against him. Again where we have an election, there are 30 Republican governors, okay? And they're running campaigns against raising taxes and in favor of, frankly, phasing out the income tax in North Carolina and Kansas and Oklahoma."

O'Donnell pointed out that even House Speaker John Boehner had said that Republicans were willing to accept new revenue as part of a compromise.

"In 2011, Obama said the world would end and we should pass around smelling salts because he wanted to raise the debt ceiling," Norquist opined. "We got a debt ceiling agreement. It was a great compromise. We cut spending. We didn't raise taxes. We didn't cut spending as much as the Republicans wanted. The [Paul] Ryan plan would have reduced Obama's overspending by $6 trillion, we only got two and a half trillion in restraint."

"That's a compromise, it's not as much as the Republicans wanted. The Republicans have already compromised."

In exit polls released on Tuesday, six in ten voters said they supported raising taxes. Almost half wanted to see tax hikes specifically on those making more than $250,000 a year.

“On this particular issue, it wasn’t close,” Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod told CBS News on Sunday.

“You need new revenues, and every objective person who has looked at this agrees on that, so the question is where is that revenue going to come from?” he pointed out. “The president believes it is more equitable to get that from the wealthiest Americans who have done very well and frankly don’t need those tax cuts and who benefited disproportionately from the tax cuts in the last decade. Most Americans agree with that.”

DOWNLOADS: (203)

PLAYS: (1765)

Embed

Anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist on Wednesday blasted a "very nice left-wing twit" who thanked him for contributing to the destruction of the middle class in the U.S.

During an interview on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, a prankster calling in on the Republican line said that he made "seven figures" and he appreciated Norquist's efforts because "I'm paying virtually nothing in taxes."

"I just find this hysterical because I don't pay any Social Security, I don't pay any Medicaid or Medicare because I exceed that limit," the man explained. "And I get capital gains so I'm only paying 15 percent."

"But I'm getting rich and the middle class is getting screwed and the lower class is getting screwed. But, hey, you know, keep it up, man, because I'm going to be filthy rich and those fuckers are going to be living in slums by the time we get done," the caller laughed.

But Norquist was not amused.

"Ralph, I think you are a very nice left-wing twit, and you're calling on the Republican line and taking up other people's time and that's really a little dishonest," the Americans for Tax Reform founder replied. "You fibbed and claimed to be arguing from a Reagan Republican perspective then made up a story about who you are -- about how you got rich and you don't pay taxes, which would be fascinating. You could make a lot of money selling that secret."

"In point of fact as people know, the top 1 percent of income earners in this country pay 40 percent of the federal income tax, the top 50 percent pay 99 percent of the personal income taxes," Norquist continued. "So we have a steeply progressive tax code, meaning we penalize people who work, save and invest."

"Your caricature of the people who don't pay taxes is silly and it's one of the reasons why people are so offended when [President Barack] Obama gets up and acts like people who have been working all their lives -- paying taxes all their lives -- are somehow not sending enough money in. You know, 'What's a matter with those peasants? Why don't they send more money in? The king wants to build a new castle and Solyndra could use some cash.' It just really irritates real taxpayers, not phony callers pretending to be Republicans."

Earlier this year, Republicans in the Senate blocked the Paying a Fair Share Act, which would have enacted a rule named for billionaire Warren Buffett, who revealed that he paid a lower tax rate than his “secretary.”

According to the Congressional Research Service (PDF), almost 100,000 millionaires in the U.S. pay a lower effective tax rate than millions of families earning less than $100,000.

An April CNN poll found that 72 percent of Americans — including 70 percent of independents — favored the “Buffett Rule.”

DOWNLOADS: (329)

PLAYS: (1101)

Embed

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) on Friday suggested that Republicans were outsourcing their "principles and convictions" by signing Grover Norquist's pledge to never raise taxes.

During a House Budget Committee hearing, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) asked the former governor if he agreed with the Americans for Tax Reform pledge.

"No," Bush said, shaking his head. "OK, so I ran for office three times. The pledge was presented to me three times. I never signed the pledge. I cut taxes every year I was governor."

"I don't believe you outsource your principles and convictions to people," he added. "I respect Grover's political involvement. He has it every right to do it, but I never signed any pledge."

Since introducing the pledge in 1986, Norquist has been remarkably successful at getting signatures from Republicans. Only six of the 242 Republicans serving in the House today have not signed on.

But things could be changing this year as 25 of the candidates promoted by the National Republican Congressional Committee have so far refused to add their names to the list.

"For what it's worth, I don't necessarily see this as evidence of moderation," MSNBC's Steve Benen wrote on Tuesday. "On the contrary, many, if not all, of those who are rejecting Norquist's project appear to be very much in line with his party's anti-tax orthodoxy. They're balking, not because they intend to support tax increases, but because some are open to trading away tax credits, some don't like taking orders from D.C. lobbying groups, and some are just anti-pledge in general."

(h/t: Talking Points Memo)

DOWNLOADS: (667)

PLAYS: (1994)

Embed

Wolf Blitzer asks RedState's Erick Erickson about their latest bit of, as Paul Waldman calls it, Founding Father Fetishism:

Today, a group of movement right muckety-mucks released "The Mount Vernon Statement," meant to be a guiding document for their side. You've got the heavyweights -- Ed Feulner of the Heritage Foundation, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform -- and a few lesser lights, such as professional gay-basher Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness. The document itself is about as vague as it could be. There isn't a single policy issue mentioned; just a lot of repetitions of phrases like "founding principles" and "limited government."

But you'll note that it's presented on yellowed paper, with clip art of quill pens at the top! And the signatures are in ornate, Hancock-esque script! And it's called the Mt. Vernon statement -- like George Washington, get it? Read on...

And for another great breakdown of this nonsense, check out this post over at Lefty's Last Cry, a progressive blog from Notre Dame -- Conservative Constitutional Pornography.

This just looks like more of the same gripes from conservatives that we've been listening to for, I dunno, how many years now? And there's this from Digby -- Over Before It Began:

Wolf Blitzer just wondered if this "Mt Vernon Statement" will launch" a new era of conservative ascendance." I thought, already? Did the era of liberal ascendance come and go when I popped out to Starbucks for a cappuccino?

In case you were wondering what this bold, new conservative manifesto contains, here it is. My God, what ever will we do in the face of this fresh, exciting breakthrough?

Continue reading »