NJ
“I will violate the pledge … for the good of the country”
Although Graham will not give way to raising tax rates, he said Republicans need to be open to increasing government revenues.
“I think Grover is wrong,” Graham said on ABC’s This Week. “I will violate the pledge … for the good of the country.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
What good are you talking about? Lower productivity, lower GDP, lower taxes on higher rates? What are you, a Malthusian who also wants to spike the drinking water with birth control?
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 12:12 PM
Nutty commentor True King was right. The GOP will betraeus.
tommy71 on November 25, 2012 at 12:14 PM
Primary’s acoming!
thebrokenrattle on November 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM
I have a suggestion for you graham, ‘for the good of the country’ how about you and all r’s like you resign, STAT? We have to deal with bho/team/d’s/and now r’s in dc? We are sol big time with having no one to help our nation, or very few elected in dc!
L
letget on November 25, 2012 at 12:21 PM
Like Bush listened to his Goldman Sachs SecTreas and destroyed the free market system to save it. That worked out well.
Wethal on November 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM
He’s right. Give the Democraps everything they want so they can create their socialist utopia, and then sit back and watch it burn.
UltimateBob on November 25, 2012 at 12:27 PM
And the GOP will get nothing out of this, as the Dems and MSMS will claim the GOP “gave in” to the Dems’ “reasonableness” or something like that.
Wethal on November 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM
theperfecteconomist on November 25, 2012 at 12:31 PM
for the good of the country lets remember to primary his butt in 2014. you won’t sneak under Sarah’s skirts this time sucka.
renalin on November 25, 2012 at 12:31 PM
There is a difference between letting them have what they want and allowing your team to take the responsibility for it.
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 12:32 PM
Norquist’s protection racket is falling apart? Perfect!
lester on November 25, 2012 at 12:33 PM
I agree, Norquist is wrong. One of “conservatism’s” greatest problems is its knee jerk loyalty to every crackpot idea – black/white. No in between. What may have been a good idea on June 16, 19xx can be pure suicide on March 35, 20xx. The circumstances should determine the solution. We have a marxist president and senate today, because of the many litmus test, phariseeical conservatives. Conservatives, as a whole, will never learn that good that never happens is is never better than best
I think many of the repubs are on the right track when they try to remove almost all the special deductions. However, most people know there are too many sacred cows involved to accomplish much. The other problems is that historically, any tax increase has resulted in epic dhimpcrqptic overspending. I am in favor of a national ad valorem tax on all properties over 1 to 5 million dollars, elimination of all loopholes over a modest amount of money (never happen), elimination of special loopholes on dhimocraptic constituencies or raising taxes on those groups, defining a difference between citizen and taxpayer, with only taxpayers and veterans eligible to vote in national elections and property owners eligible to vote in local elections.
In fact, because libruls like to spend other peoples money, lets have a tax on everyone who registers dhimpcrapt or votes librul. Then they can spend their own money.
Old Country Boy on November 25, 2012 at 12:34 PM
The way he phrased it reminded me of an old song from Grease2 (to the youngsters here, its a movie, not a garage documentary). In the movie, the guy is trying to get some from his girlfriend. ‘Lets do it for country, the red, white and the blue, if the President was standin’ here, I’m sure he would approve, I’ll be a mighty soldier, before the night is through, so lets do it for our country, our country wants us to’.
tommy71 on November 25, 2012 at 12:35 PM
Interesting that no one demands democrats give up their socialist tendencies … for the good of the country.
lorien1973 on November 25, 2012 at 12:36 PM
What in the history of congressional perfidy would make anyone believe that new or increased taxes will be used for anything other than justification for more spending?
single stack on November 25, 2012 at 12:37 PM
This should have been done a long time ago… in a time of strength(after 2010) and not in a time of weakness(now).
The GOP would be “winning the future” right now if they had embraced Simpson-Boyles.
ninjapirate on November 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM
Yeah Lindsey….we already knew that.
NeoKong on November 25, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Norquist’s pledge = Screw the children. Now how is that a republican principle. Or even an adult idea.
meci on November 25, 2012 at 12:43 PM
OK, then, violate Norquist’s pledge but it needs to be joined with a commitment to violate Ted Kennedy’s ’60′s communist legislative violations as to “immigration” and all that social spending, err, social usery.
Lourdes on November 25, 2012 at 12:47 PM
I hope Graham knows he is getting primaried next cycle.
LibertarianRepublican on November 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM
The biggest problem with this “pledge” is that it’s keyed into Grover Norquist.
The GOP should draft and deploy a new pledge. Go ahead, do it.
Lourdes on November 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM
Miss Graham, go straight to Hell!
Schadenfreude on November 25, 2012 at 12:50 PM
Graham and EVERY Republican has to start behaving as if they’re intelligent and not as if they are pigeons for scam-operators.
EVERY act extended, every concession or “change” offered or engaged in, REQUIRE one from the opposition or the one maintaining the polar-opposite position.
If one concedes on raising taxes, then require a concession on spending. If one concedes on granting whatevers to demands, require a concession refsuing whatevers to demands.
See how that works?
Lourdes on November 25, 2012 at 12:52 PM
Hey, Lindsey Graham: they’re supposed to take you to dinner first.
Lourdes on November 25, 2012 at 12:52 PM
Graham is a poster child for why we absolutely must return to federalism to rein in the federal government and protect our liberties. We simply don’t have the numbers in DC, and never will, to implement a conservative agenda.
With a return to federalism we can not only strip the statists of power but useless RINOs like Graham as well. I’d rather be governed by the conservative majority of my state legislature than the gang of unaccountable fools in DC.
Click my name for all my writings on federalism.
Charlemagne on November 25, 2012 at 12:54 PM
Norquist is not be trusted either. I hope they both diminish.
thebrokenrattle on November 25, 2012 at 12:54 PM
I also think we should raise taxes on Dem constituencies like Hollywood. Give them what they voted for. Take away the deduction for state and local taxes paid. That will fall much harder on the blue states that voted for higher taxes.
juliesa on November 25, 2012 at 1:00 PM
“Let it burn.”
Looking at the history of the past century, and the many collectivist and totalitarian regimes around the world, what the hell makes people think a burned nation can’t be ruled by tyrants as easily as a prosperous one?
In fact, you can make an excellent case that it’s easier.
tbrosz on November 25, 2012 at 1:13 PM
I think Republicans need a Negotiating:101 class.
You don’t give up something for nothing.
huckleberryfriend on November 25, 2012 at 1:16 PM
May their heads esplode
Schadenfreude on November 25, 2012 at 1:23 PM
It’s one thing to sit back and let the dems have at it so they can own it when the collapse happens. It’s a whole other thing entirely to openly advocate support and betray your own base thereby becoming part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Graham and Chambliss both need to go, yesterday.
bgibbs1000 on November 25, 2012 at 1:59 PM
Say, Lindsay, will it actually BALANCE THE BUDGET?
If not then why think its ‘for the good of the country’?
Why not just cap off the debt and tell Obama & Co. to live within the nearly $2.5 trillion you’ll get with the expiring tax cuts? That was the agreement: one time debt limit raise in exchange for one more year of tax cuts.
Stick to the agreement.
Let the taxes shoot through the roof and keep the debt limit… you don’t even have to vote on it! Its a done deal! Filibuster anything else. Then refuse to vote for any more deficit spending.
ajacksonian on November 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM
Since when is being right nutty? If so, then I’m certifiably insane.
The GOP will betray you
True_King on November 25, 2012 at 2:27 PM
While I like most of what Norquist stands for, I wouldn’t take a pledge. Let your yes be yes, and your no be no.
All that aside, even thinking of raising taxes is stupid. America voted for stupid.
Othniel on November 25, 2012 at 2:34 PM
Here comes the republican party that has allowed us to get into the horrible state we’re in today by constantly capitulating to democrats, bye bye r’s, you’re not getting my vote anymore, i’m going to libertarians. Spare me the tired “your vote will be wasted” line because my vote is obviously wasted on republicans.
And btw, can’t someone at hot air fix the sign in? The hot air logo covers it up so you have to go to the main page, sign in there from a post there and come back. Hard to decide what’s more annoying about coming here these days, the broken sign in or the huge pop up.
clearbluesky on November 25, 2012 at 3:00 PM
Republicans in congress really believe that revenue will solve debt issue? Are they that dumb?
Joseph Russo III on November 25, 2012 at 3:12 PM
They did not have credibility on the issue, so no one trusted their yes, and apparently, even their pledges are worthless.
astonerii on November 25, 2012 at 5:37 PM