Romney or Super Grover
 

Who is the real leader of the GOP?:confused:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...6uV_story.html

It would indeed be hard to argue that what we have here isn't a puppet (Mitt) and a puppet master (Norquist).

Another rhetorical question I see Rob.

Yep, sad but true. And he has all the financial wisdom of "I guess I was wrong, oh well" Greenspan.
Sure makes it easy to vote my conscious.


Carl

I simply wonder how all those sheep who voted in those repubs feel about having their elected representative representing Super Grover and not them.:p

Based on the thread title I thought you might be making fun of Obama's ears. I guess I should have known better.

Nope, just poking a little fun at you GOP sheep who let 'your' elected representatives represent that anarchist Grover and not the folks who elected them.:D

Childish much?

Also not apropos.

Grover, the Muppet that is, doesn't actually have ears. I do't know whether the same is true of Norquist.

John

If he does he seldom uses them.:p

Wow. I thought Limbaugh was the leader of the Republican party. Now its Norquiist? I'm so confused.

Question 1: with all the money that flows through Washington, and you've all stated that politicians in DC are bought and paid for (particularly those dastardly Republicans), what does Norquist use as leverage to maintain politician's fidelity to "The Pledge"? Americans for Tax Reform has contributed only about $232K in campaign donations over the last 10 years, and very few of those $$ have gone to specific candidates. That kind of money doesn't even buy you a cup of coffee in DC. Norquist personally has donated only about $3K over that same time frame.

Oh, and just so we have our facts straight, here's the language from "The Pledge":

"ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses; and

TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates."

So, its not necessarily an opposition to all taxes. It is a pledge not to increase the tax burden on individuals or businesses.

Question 2: is this to say that the Republicans have been corrupted not by money, nor by a person, but by an idea (no new taxes unless paid for)?