Keeping A Pledge To Our Children

Posted: December 4, 2012 at 1:48 a.m.

Some congressional Republicans are beginning to back off that “Taxpayer Protection Pledge” they signed. That’s a hopeful sign, because they never should have signed such a pledge at all, and if they were determined to do so, they signed the wrong one.

This story is only available from our archives.

Opinion, Pages 5 on 12/04/2012

Brawner says "The Democrats have their own pledge - not to touch Social Security."
"More than 200 Democrats have signed onto a pledge to protect Social Security from any interference, amid some Republican calls for partial privatization of the entitlement program....
Seventy five Democratic House candidates, 11 Senate candidates, and 133 congressional incumbents signed the pledge."
In contrast, almost all Republican representatives and senators in the outgoing Congress signed the no tax pledge initiated and ENFORCED by Grover Norquist, a private citizen and lobbyist.
Do you see some essential differences between these two pledges?

Posted by: Coralie

December 4, 2012 at 2 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

The second point is that Social Security is NOT part of the nation's deficit problems.
Any tinkering with it should be separate from the drive to cut deficits.

Posted by: Coralie

December 4, 2012 at 2:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

If you look at a graph of our whole history, the national debt has risen after every war (and cold war).
Also look at this graph:

Posted by: Coralie

December 4, 2012 at 2:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Coralie: "Social Security is NOT part of the nation's deficit problems.">>

Here's Ronald Reagan making your exact point, Coralie:

"Pres. Reagan Says Hands Off Social Security And Raise Taxes On Rich"

Posted by: fayfreethinker

December 4, 2012 at 3:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Click on any link from someone you don't totally trust and you just might catch something your computer might not get along with very well and your virus protection has not heard of. I don't know anybody that trusts FreeDrinker because he doesn't trust in anything bigger than he himself, unless it's the Democrat Party.

Posted by: JailBird

December 4, 2012 at 6:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

MoneyM: "Click on any link from someone you don't totally trust... might catch something...">>

When a person makes a charge that someone could be passing along harmful links, they shouldn't make such a charge unless they can back it up with substance. For instance, when I say that Moneymyst is a person who dishonestly posts plagiarized comments that he stole from other writers, I only do it because I can show the claim is true:

This is the third time (not on this site) that a person, finding themselves unable to find anything of substance to throw have made up the claim, entirely without basis, that one should be afraid to follow the links I provide backing up my claims. I guess it's an insult of last resort. Boring.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

December 4, 2012 at 11:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I find it intersting how people can defund things like Social Security and blame another group of people. I also find it intersting how people can mock President Reagan then cite him to back their sorry excuse for an argument. Wat to spins a clip from 1984. MSNBC would be proud. Rachel Maddow would be gleaming with flaming rainbow gilded excitement.

Posted by: Tankersley101

December 5, 2012 at 3 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I find it interesting how Tank likes to make claims but almost never back them up. At least he dragged Dr Maddow in for another baseless insult.

Tank: "Wat to spins a clip from 1984.">>

What was "spun"? Be specific. What part of Reagan's comment did you disagree with? Reagan said SS doesn't add to the debt, and he was right. Conservatives have become so looney we have to go back a couple decades to find a sane one.

There's just no pleasing Tank. If you cite a non conservative source he dismisses it with his favorite genetic fallacy (and insults Dr Maddow). If you quote Reagan he still whines (and then insults Dr Maddow).

I listened to Maddow a bit the other day and I see why Tank is so grumpy about her. She's really good at unpacking conservative nonsense.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

December 5, 2012 at 8:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Rachel Maddow is a liar just like the rest of MSNBC's pack of Leftists.

Posted by: Tankersley101

December 5, 2012 at 10:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Steve , that was an interesting article meant to start the thinkers motors.
you have a valid point that we are making the wrong vow, and explained that well.

it would be fair tho if only those who voted for the 2 wars would be responsible to pay for them. those military contracts and companies that benefited from the iraq and Afganistan wars should be the main payees now not the middle class and medicare patients. the republicans mostly via GWB need to come up with a financial plan to pay back the american people for their excesses in the wars and the drug program. maybe drug companies can help pay back also? it is fitting to have consequences for these actions. maybe the military needs to have the most cuts now, so that they will think harder and longer NEXT time they want to invade and start a new war.

Posted by: ladyLiberty

December 5, 2012 at 10:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Maybe we could get an amendment to the Constitution that no new wars can be started until the last on is paid for. Mmmm

Posted by: JailBird

December 5, 2012 at 4:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )


"maybe the military needs to have the most cuts now, so that they will think harder and longer NEXT time they want to invade and start a new war."

Have you ever been in war or the military for that matter? Do you even know how our government works? I highly doubt it. What an ignorant statement.

Posted by: Tankersley101

December 6, 2012 at 10:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Keep in mind Grover Norquist's pledge represents the thinking of a 12 yr old boy.

Where did he get the idea? Likely at home.

"Norquist claims he got the idea to brand the Republican Party as the party that would never raise your taxes, when he was just 12 years old and volunteering for the Nixon campaign. He says it came to him one day while he was riding home on the school bus."
--CBS 60 Minutes, Nov 20, 2011

Thoughts of a 12 year old boy are determining economic policy of a major political party. Tell me this nation is not in trouble.

Posted by: cdawg

December 6, 2012 at 11:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kind of like the golden plates came to Joseph Smith when was riding home on a stolen horse.

Posted by: JailBird

December 6, 2012 at 6:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal )