As more Republicans continue to come out and proclaim that their word isn't worth the air it took to breathe it out, especially when it comes to the pledge they made via Grover Norquist's document, Mr. Norquist saw fit to champion what the pledge was for and to chastise certain Republicans for attempts to "weasel" out of the pledge.
Norquist appeared on CNN's "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Monday to set the record straight. He took on Representative Peter "I think Obama's Kill List is Constitutional" King's comments about signing the pledge and it only being for "that congress."
Norquist slammed the congressman saying “The pledge is not for life, but everybody who signed the pledge including Peter King, and tried to weasel out of it, shame on him. I hope his wife understands that commitments last a little longer than two years or something.”
King had tried to explain "“A pledge you signed 20 years ago, 18 years ago, is for that Congress. For instance, if I were in Congress in 1941, I would have supported a declaration of war against Japan. I’m not going to attack Japan today.”
Apparently King thought the pledge was valid for all these years, but instead has not brought up "weaseling" out of it until now. Now, he along with men like John Boehner, Lindsey Graham, Saxby Chambliss and John McCain seem perfectly fine to toss their word to the wind with the cover of the veneer of "it's for the good of the country."
Well Norquist hit on exactly what I said yesterday. He said, “Hey, if you think a commitment is not for as long as you make it for, the commitment for the pledge, as Peter King well knows when he signed it, is that as long as you’re in Congress, you will [rein in] spending and reform government and not raise taxes. It’s not for 500 years or two generations. It’s only as long as you’re in the House or Senate. If he stayed too long, that’s his problem. But you don’t tell the bank, ‘Oh, the mortgage, wasn’t that a long time ago?
“If you make a commitment, you keep it,” Norquist said.
The problem here is not raising taxes. The issue is there are no real spending cuts on either side of the aisle. This has always been the case. It was the case in the presidential race. Neither side had any idea of what real cuts were or how to balance the budget. That continues to be the case now. Neither side will touch entitlements. Neither side is truly concerned with actual spending cuts that would significantly reduce debt and they could do that and still not raise taxes, but they won't and they don't feel intimidated by voters, because all voters seem to do is just get upset but there seems to never be any accountability to the likes of Rep. Peter King or Sens. Graham, Chambliss or McCain for these cowardly acts.
I applaud Norquist for standing up and putting the issue in perspective. More Republicans need a spine like that to stand against the opposition and be representatives that the people can trust their word that when they say they will do something, they will do it, not make excuses. Congress has the authority to tax and spend. They need to rein in both. Instead America has been treated to trillion dollar plus deficit spending for five years in a row!
Watch Norquists comments below: