Posted on 11/10/2007 9:28:39 PM PST by ilja
Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, has launched an attack on GOP presidential candidate Fred Thompson for Thompson's refusal to sign Norquist's pledge against raising taxes. Team Fred spokeswoman Karen Hanretty explained her candidate's position in an e-mail:
Fred Thompson’s record of cutting taxes and pushing for reform speaks for itself. This is the approach he will take as president. He is bound by that principle and does not make a practice of signing pledges.
That answer was not good enough for Grover the Security Pushover (more on that further down the column), who told Ronald Kessler of Newsmax:
The fact that he refuses to say he won’t raise taxes and in fact all but shouts he wants to walk into a room and raise taxes to fix entitlements means that on taxes, he is the worst Republican running.
The worst Republican running, on taxes? Norquist should have at least checked out Thompson's record on taxes before making a total fool out of himself. Had he bothered to read the tax-minimalist Club for Growth's white paper on Fred Thompson, for example, he would have learned that:
Over his eight years in the Senate, Fred Thompson generally supported broad-based tax cuts while opposing tax increases. These include:Voted for the 2001 Bush tax cuts Voted for repeal of the Death Tax Voted for capital gains tax cuts Voted to require a supermajority to pass tax hikes Voted to reduce the amount of Social Security benefits subject to taxation Voted against waiving the Budget Act to allow for a cigarette tax hike
Thompson was a forceful proponent of tax reform, lambasting the IRS as “mismanaged” and “wasteful,” and a strong supporter of the flat tax.
(Excerpt) Read more at rightnation.us ...
These groups are angry that Fred isn’t kissing their rings (or that other more famous body part) like Rudy/Romney are.
Its one of the things I like about Fred, he won’t bow to anyone, and is consistent about that. He wont to the media, saying this election is between him and the people. He has his message and won’t allow anyone to strong arm him to bend it.
Its about time we have someone in politics not willing to pander.
I’m not a fan of these tax pledges, although I understand why they do it — every candidate who refuses to sign a pledge seems to end up raising taxes. The pledge doesn’t usually help though, a lot who DO sign the pledge end up raising taxes as well.
Still, I NEVER hold it against a candidate that they stand up for principle and refuse to sign a tax pledge.
As to the rest, I’m bothered they had to attack Grover simply to try to make their point about Fred.
I agree. Though I must admit I like being pandered to. lol
Fred Thompson is emerging as the sort of personality I like. He is pleasant and nice, but he really doesn’t make his decisions based on other people’s opinions. I think that is the mark of a born leader.
I’m bothered they had to attack Grover simply to try to make their point about Fred.
I'm bothered that Grover had to attack Fred just to make a point about his "Tax Pledge". Aren't you?
I consider that Norquist, under the guise of being for lowering taxes, is really for weakening America.
And yes I, too, would like lower taxes. Who, in their right minds, wouldn’t? And if there’s another 9/11, or other attack on America??
Grover Norquist is a shill for the Islamists and has been for at least fifteen years.
As you can see from my post 9 I agree. Don’t know why people don’t see it.
I believe that it was Rudy that stated the only pledge he would take was the one given on inauguration day.
Fred is hardly the only "maverick" on this issue.
No. That’s what Grover does, he represents a group that thinks the tax pledge is a good thing, and calls out candidates that don’t sign it.
To respond with personal attacks on Grover suggests there’s no logical response to his point. What does Grover’s other activities have to do with Fred not signing the tax pledge? Defend the candidate for doing the right thing, not by attacking the messenger.
Has nothing to do with Americans for Tax Reform, or the pledge. Defend the candidate for not signing the pledge — attacking the messenger, especially with irrelevant information, suggests you can’t answer the charge. Fred says he can, why not trust his answer?
So somebody who cozies up to Islamists, has written articles saying how Muslims will help us to a new Republican majority and is married to a muzzy has crediblity with you? And further more you think Fred owes this punk an answer. Shame on you.
Let’s say the country slides into a depression from Bank collapses, bad loans, the war and poison Chinese imports?
Why would any potential future President wish to restrict his options or be forced into breaking a promise he may not be able to keep?
What if the option taken to fix SS is to have a vote of the people to raise the federal deduction for SS and he ends of raising taxes with the blessing of the people?
Signing such a pledge is ridiculous IMO.
PS I hate taxes, but in war, I can see temporary taxes being raise if things go lots longer or get a lot tougher IMO.
Didn't work for James Dobson...ain't gonna work for Grover.
I'm growing a bit weary of some people wanting to place themselves in the position of claiming credit for the actions of others, who would have probably done the same thing regardless of signing their little piece of paper, or appearing to kowtow to them publicly.
How about a spending cut pledge......!?
I’m far more interested in that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.