Start A Petition

Lindsey Graham: 'I Will Violate The Pledge' To Not Increase Taxes

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: Bush tax cuts, government, ethics, congress, republicans )

- 2002 days ago -
Several congressional Republicans said Sunday that they would be open to increasing the amount of money the government collects in taxes, with a senior Republican member of the U.S. Senate going so far as to say he is willing to break his earlier...

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Roseann d (178)
Monday November 26, 2012, 9:42 am
Graham's foremost pledge should be to his constituents, not some shady lobbyist for the 1%.

Chris C (152)
Monday November 26, 2012, 11:59 am
It seems that Grover Norquist's "Taxpayer Protection Pledge," which bothMcCain and Graham have signed (as have most Republicans in Congress) is on the way out! I read a comment by George H W Bush stating that everyone should pay their fair taxes - then he said "Who IS this guy, Grover Norquist, anyway?" I laughed out loud at that one! Of course Bush IS 88 now but still - funny stuff!

John B (185)
Monday November 26, 2012, 2:52 pm
Thanks Carrie for the link to the article by Arthur Delaney and the video segment. We can only hope the GOP intends to come to the table willing to deal. Should the GOP balk though they know their chances for reelection in 2014 are down the tubes and in a way I hope they do. Read and noted.

Lois Jordan (63)
Monday November 26, 2012, 4:32 pm
Noted. Yeah, I'm not so sure I believe anything they say will actually come to pass. They say these words to the media now, but will they really put their money where their mouth is? Stay tuned.

Robert O (12)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 12:45 am
Thanks Carrie.

Susanne R (235)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 11:53 am
If he and others had turned their back on Norquist's pledge BEFORE the American public's outrage became a force to be reckoned with, I'd have a little more respect this sudden about-face!

Past Member (0)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 1:42 pm
Grover Norquist, Enemy of the State?

By Thom Hartmann, AlterNet

Norquist has connived over the years to get hundreds of members of Congress to violate their own oath of office by pledging to keep billionaires' taxes low. READ MOREĽ

People that took his pledge violated the constitutional oath they swore to, when sworn in.

Great point, Carrie!

James Maynard (84)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 2:38 pm
What the good Senator meant to say was he is going to
STOP violating his oath to uphold and defend the
Constitution of the United States/

Marilyn L (107)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 2:39 pm
So they want to disallow things "like charitable giving and mortgage interest" that will hit middle class families and retirees very hard. BS. Let the Bush tax cust for the wealthly expire period.

Diane O (194)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 4:07 pm
No, Marilyn, that is not the way a "compromise" works. Each side has to give up something. We need to cut spending across the board. We received two credit downgrades under Obama because of the debt to income ratio which translates into we are spending way too much and not enough revenue is coming in to pay the bills. We are in deep trouble financially as a country and we need to cut the entitlements, too. Entitlement spending is the largest expenditure we have in our country. We have morphed into a nanny state. People need to get off their butts and get a job. They would if there were jobs out there. We've had four years of Obama "the job killer." He still doesn't have any ideas to put Americans back to work because he refuses to understand that you have to "stimulate" the economy. Obama came to the White House as a community astute businessman he is not.

Diane O (194)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 4:09 pm
Honestly, after reading the liberal comments, it is apparent that many of you aren't paying attention to what is actually going on in the White House. We have a SPENDING PROBLEM IN OUR COUNTRY. One day we'll run out of "rich" people to pay the lion's share of the taxes. Get a clue, please. Many of you run a household and you would never spend more money than you have coming in and if you did you certainly wouldn't be looking to your neighbors to pay your bills for you.

Diane O (194)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 4:23 pm
Ray, you made an uninformed statement IMO. Bill Clinton, in his second term as president faced a republican congress and he did not lead from behind. He reached across the aisle to do what was best for the country. When a president understands that it isn't about the republicans and the democrats but in fact, about us, the American citizens, he leaves a legacy behind him. It is called compromise for a reason. Both sides have to feel good about moving forward. So far, President Obama has shown us that he isn't willing to compromise on anything. This, too, will be his legacy if he doesn't get a clue that this isn't about him it's about us...the taxpayers who send our money every month to the federal government to spend it wisely and have a balanced budget to hand to the next president.

Obama is like a teenager with a huge ego and a chip on his shoulder. He needs to grow up and do what is right for the country not his political party.

Joanne Dixon (38)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 5:02 pm
You know, not that I care two hoots what someone's religion is, but so many of Grover Norquist's supporters seem to be the same people who believe with horror that the President is a Muslim (he isn't), so I don't understand their slavish adherence to someone whose wife is a practicing Muslim, who will not give a straight denial when asked if he is therefore converting to Islam (, and who has done much to "advance the causes of radical Islamists." (

Incidentally I would agree the Government has a spending problem. The problem is that it's not spending enough. We are ignoring history and evidence at our peril.

Jason S (50)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 5:13 pm
good for him, good posting, thanks

Helen Porter (39)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 1:26 am
So what's new about politicians going back on their word, lying to get into office and then saying "So? I lied."

Do we expect less of these ***

But don't expect the "brotherhood of Cain" to suffer from it.

Diane O (194)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 2:30 am
The government is not spending enough? Wow. So, where does the money come from? We have to borrow 41% of everything we spend today. We have "a spending problem" and over $60 billion a year is spent on fraud and abuse in medicare and medicaid. Think we need to spend more there?

The problem is simple. We need to cut our spending and we need to start doing that today otherwise Obama will receive his third and fourth credit downgrade over his last four years in office.

Elaya Raja (39)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 2:49 am
Thank you

Past Member (0)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 9:58 am
Diane wrong again. As usual...
"We received two credit downgrades under Obama because of the debt to income ratio"

We were down graded because CONGRESS, led by Paul "ayn" Ryan LET it happen. Just as sure as Bush LET 9/11 happen.

Fox has made you SOOOOO ignorant!!! The whole fascist mess is caused by slashing taxes for the super wealthy. A group you will never be a part of and forgotten as soon as they don't need your lies anymore. I call that a sucker.

Clinton is NOW a fascist bastard. Money does that to some people. You should know yourself.

Like the sign says...

Carrie B (306)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 11:31 am
Diane has forgotten that most of our debt is due to two wars Obama inherited, as well as those tax cuts for the wealthy that helped no one except them.

Sharon F (0)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 7:51 pm
Lindsey Graham is 'sheeple' (two legged sheep; animals easily lead) in the US Senate. One would think the US Senate is a place for intelligent adults with a spine. Grover Norquist should go to Rome and shack up with the narrow-minded ignorant Catholic bishops.

Diane O (194)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 2:50 am
Carrie, well, now, what do you say about Obama's drones? Obama has war related expenditures during his four years that need to be explained based on your comments.

Our country was attacked on 9/11 and 3,000 innocent Americans were murdered. He responded. Did he need to go into Iraq? That's still being discussed. GWB took a dictator out who was murdering, gassing, and slaughtering his own people simply because they didn't agree with him or had a slight religious belief. Bush stopped that and attempted to bring some semblance of democracy to Iraq that they wanted for their people. There are many ways to look at the war in Iraq. Because Obama drew the troops down it now seems to have negated all the good that we accomplished. I don't like war. It pains me that our brave men and women have been killed in action. Afghanistan was and is a senseless war, a long and arduous road to nowhere. I believe we should let these people settle their own differences and kill each other. We will never make a difference there.

Jason, your comments are absolutely false. You would benefit greatly from reading more from non biased left wing sources.

What makes you assume that I have what you define as "money?" I am a hard working American who is taking care of herself so that the government doesn't have to. When I take care of myself there's more tax dollars to take care of the poor in our country.

Past Member (0)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 10:03 am
Left wing sources ARE unbiased. Truth has no bias. FOX, on the other hand, is completely biased. We all know this.

Past Member (0)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 11:04 am
What makes you assume that I have what you define as "money?" I am a hard working American

You're here all the time!!! You love to cook. Why is it you people don't even think that we can figure you out? You're like kids lying to their parents.

And what about the 50s, 60s, & 70s? You don't even know them, do you? All of the fox heads are too young to know them. That's why you all were ripe for the brain washing. You're all 48 and under.

Arielle S (313)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 11:13 am
Just in case you think, Diane, that Jason is wrong about the downgrades, there is this:
"S&P didnít base its downgrade on a change in the U.S. fiscal and economic outlook. It based it on the political game of chicken over the debt ceiling, a game that Republicans initiated and pushed to the limit, and on a growing gloom about the partisan deadlock...To be sure, S&P didnít specifically single out Republicans...But itís hard to read the S&P analysis as anything other than a blast at Republicans."
In other words, it's less about the actual money and more about grown people playing games instead of acting like adults.

Carrie B (306)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 11:52 am
No Diane, going into Iraq is not still being discussed. It was wrong, unprovoked, and unnecessary. It was Bush's own personal agenda and we have left the country in shambles. You're right, Sadam Hussein was a murder of his own people and dictator of the worst kind, but we had no reason to go to war with Iraq. Starting wars with every country in the world to overthrow a dictator would leave us where?

Had Bush not started an unprovoked war with Iraq, but instead finished the war in Afghanistan, which yes was a result of 9/11, we would not be in the position we are now in in Afghanistan.

Your rationalization of the Bush presidency which caused all of the financial hardships we have faced, the unnecessary deaths and disabilities of countless brave men and women, and your defense of a know nothing, do nothing congress is disturbing.

Diane O (194)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 3:38 pm
The Bush presidency didn't cause the financial hardship. It was the subprime loans, Carrie. I really want you to research that. You are posturing from a position of no research on this.

Arielle, familiarize yourself with how a downgrade happens. It is debt to income ratio. There is no other formula to determine a downgrade.

And no, Jason, I'm not here all the time. I work eight hours during the day. I am 63 years old and plan to work 7 more years to accomplish what I want to accomplish for my grandchildren. Well, what about the 50's, 60's and 70's? Check out my age. That should tell you that I was around....young for the 50's and young for the 60's but I understand and acknowledge politics during that time because of my research.

Jason, today is today. We can't go back to those decades because the world has changed. America has changed. Jason, honestly, it is very difficult to hold a conversation with you because you simply do not make sense to me. If you believe left wing is unbiased go for it, Jason. i simply don't have time for it. Knock yourself out.

Carrie B (306)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 4:02 pm
Diane, who allowed all of those subprime loans? I really want you to research that Diane.

Lynn Squance (235)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 11:51 pm
"...We don't generate enough revenue. Capping deductions will help generate revenue. Raising tax rates will hurt job creation. ..." --- Lindsey Graham

Capping deductions --- Specifically proposed were charitable donations and mortgage interest. Excuse me, but aren't those two deductions that are widely used by the middle class and working class, in addition to the 1%? This is just another way to shift what should be taxes paid by the 1% onto the middle and working class. Given the numbers of taxpayers in each grouping, that is sure what it looks like to me.

Raising taxes will hurt job creation --- Yea, where have we heard that one before? In the 1990's under Bill Clinton, there were two tax increases, 1992 and 1994 I believe. Job creation was high, the economy robust, and yes, the 1% still made money hand over fist. By reducing taxes, or more specifically by not raising taxes on the 1%, the only job creation will come for the accountants of the 1% who will be in the counting house counting all the gold! Nick Hannauer, a billionaire member of Patriotic Millionaires, has clearly stated that the way he makes more money is when there is more disposable income in the hands of the middle and working classes. When they buy, it creates demand; enough demand creates new jobs. It really is an easy concept to grasp, but which the GOP conveniently fails to grasp. Another one of those inconvenient truths? I think so.

So Lindsey Graham's willingness to "break" his pledge to Grover Norquist not to raise taxes is all smoke and mirrors. It is the emptiest statement I have heard yet and should not be surprising considering who it is coming from.

To paraphrase a well known phrase, "How can the American eagle soar when it is stuck with a bunch of Republican/Teabagger turkeys like the ones in the Congress currently?"


Diane O (194)
Friday November 30, 2012, 1:59 am
Carrie, it started with President Carter. The republicans put a bill before congress in late 2005 called the GSH Reform bill which would've immediately regulated Fannie and Freddie where all the subprime loans were stacking up.....and the all democratic congress wouldn't pass it because they said the economy was fine. There's a great deal of research for you to read. The problem was that the banks, brokerage companies, mortgage lenders all got on the bandwagon and started selling those 110% no doc loans. George W. Bush never had one thing to do with the subprime loans....not one. You can blame GWB for some things but not this.

Diane O (194)
Friday November 30, 2012, 2:10 am
Lynn, I don't know where you are getting your information but many Americans own homes and no matter which class you fit into salary-wise you can deduct the interest you pay on your mortgages. Many middle and upper middle class Americans have large mortgages and can use a large part of the interest they pay as deductions to lower their taxable income. If they are no longer able to take these large deductions that money goes to the federal government. There are many tax loopholes that can be revised and if they are no longer a deduction it is in fact a raise in their taxes because their taxable income would be much higher.

When taxes are raised on the rich, who own large corporations and provide the job opportunities in our country they simply stop hiring new employees, lay off employees or reduce hours to part-time so that they aren't obligated to offer healthcare benefits. It's like a dog chasing its tail.

I don't have a problem with raising the taxes on those over $250,000.00 but what we really need is massive tax reform. I am for the flat tax where every single working American pays their fair share. And that means everyone. The more you make the higher your taxes.

I don't know how all of this is going to work out but my guess is that congress will stretch this discussion out until the eleventh hour and the Bush tax cuts will not be renewed on those earning over $250,000.00 and the republicans will get what they need and that is cutting spending in critical areas. Once spending is cut that adds more revenue. Obama and this administration wants to keep spending and are not willing to cut unnecessary spending.

Think of it like this: You bring in $1,000.00 a month and you spend $2,000.00. Think about that. The solution is to cut your spending otherwise you will be filing for bankruptcy because you don't have enough income coming in to cover the spending.

Carrie B (306)
Friday November 30, 2012, 5:52 am
The rich provide nothing except to themselves!

Diane O (194)
Friday November 30, 2012, 9:12 am
Laugh Out Loud, Carre. Absurd comment....but I'll ARE including Susan Rice because she is worth $33 million and the Obamas, right? The Obama's are now considered rich.

Do you think the rich should give you some of the money they earned? LOL
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.