GAME OVER: Grover Norquist! The Most Dangerous Man In America Falls.

Hello again ATS!

Today I come to talk to you after having read an amazingly hopeful article about the potential political marginalization and demise of a man who I feel is one of the most active threats to Democracy and to the well being of the United States of America.

The man I speak of is Grover Norquist.


Grover Norquist (Credit: AP/Haraz N. Ghanbari)

For those who are unfamiliar with Grover Norquist and the reasons why he is worthy of discussion, I touched upon the subject just over a month ago in my thread entitled An Open Letter To All Republican Office Holders And Candidates For Office:. For the sake of ease of reading, I will also include some summary information here:

Grover Glenn Norquist (born October 19, 1956) is an American lobbyist, conservative activist, and founder and president of Americans For Tax Reform. He is a member of the The Council on Foreign Relations. He is known as the promoter of the "Taxpyer Protection Pledge", which prior to the November 2012 election was signed by 95% of all Republican Congressmen and all but one of the candidates running for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, to oppose increases in marginal income tax rates for individuals and businesses, as well as net reductions or eliminations of deductions and credits without a matching reduced tax rate.

His education and early political involvement fit right in with conpiratorial thought. He is Harvard educated and later studied "political technology ( read social engineering ) at the The Leadership Institute. A non profit Institute of which we know the following:

The Institute was founded in 1979 by conservative activist Morton C. Blackwell. Its mission is to "increase the number and effectiveness of conservative activists" and to "identify, train, recruit and place conservatives in politics, government, and media."
The Leadership Institute offers 40 types of training seminars at its Arlington headquarters, around the United States, and occasionally in foreign countries. In 2009, the Institute trained more than 9,500 students. Since its 1979 founding, the Leadership Institute has trained more than 91,475 students. Notable alumni include Grover Norquist, Karl Rove, Ralph Reed, Jeff Gannon, Senator Mitch McConnell, Congressman Mike Pence, James O'Keefe, and seven new members of the 112th Congress.

While the Institute does not provide instruction in philosophical conservatism, it does encourage its graduates to read classic conservative authors like Edmund Burke and "classical liberal" authors like Frederic Bastiat, as well as more modern conservative thinkers including William F. Buckley Jr., Russell Kirk, Barry Goldwater, and libertarian thinkers such as economists Milton Friedman and F. A. Hayek

The Leadership Institutes own website offers this as their Mission Statement:

The Leadership Institute's mission is to increase the number and effectiveness of conservative activists and leaders in the public policy process.

To accomplish this, the Institute identifies, recruits, trains, and places conservatives in government, politics, and the media. Founded in 1979 by its president, Morton C. Blackwell, the Leadership Institute (LI) teaches conservatives the nuts and bolts of how to succeed in the public policy process. The Institute strives to produce a new generation of public policy leaders unwavering in their commitment to free enterprise, limited government, strong national defense, and traditional values. Institute graduates are equipped with practical skills and professional training to implement sound principles through effective public policy.

Institute programs prepare thousands of conservatives each year.

Conservatives learn how to:
· Form independent conservative student groups
· Manage grassroots-oriented campaigns
· Publish independent conservative school newspapers
· Succeed in the competitive field of broadcast media
· Run successfully for elected office
· Communicate a conservative message using the media
· Formulate policy as elected officials or key staff members


LI offers 40 types of training schools, workshops, and seminars and a top-notch intern program. The Institute also provides an Employment Placement Service to help place conservatives in public policy positiions and in the broadcast media, at no cost to employers or job seekers. The Leadership Institute is the center of conservative activist training. No other organization provides more training to conservative activists each year.

If there is a "ground zero" to be found in the Conservative movement to seize control of America - this Institute is surely it.

But back to Grover himself...

Norquist has been involved in more controversy, during his life and career than one can shake a stick at. He was involved in the Iran Contra Affair

Norquist traveled to several war zones to help support anti-Soviet guerrilla armies in the second half of the 1980s. He worked with a support network for Oliver North's efforts with the Nicaraguan Contras and other insurgencies, in addition to promoting U.S. support for groups including Mozambique's RENAMO and Jonas Savimbi's UNITA in Angola and helping to organize anti-Soviet forces in Laos.

Norquist is best known for founding Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) in 1985, which he says was done at the request of then-President Ronald Reagan. Referring to Norquist's activities as head of ATR, Steve Kroft, in a 60 Minutes episode that aired on November 20, 2011, claimed that "Norquist has been responsible, more than anyone else, for rewriting the dogma of the Republican Party."

Norquist was listed as one of the five primary leaders of the post-Goldwater conservative movement by Nina Easton in her 2000 book, Gang of Five. Working with eventual Speaker Newt Gingrich, Norquist was one of the co-authors of the 1994 Contract with America, and helped to rally grassroots efforts, which Norquist later chronicled in his book Rock the House. Norquist also served as a campaign staff member on the 1988, 1992 and 1996 Republican Platform Committees.

Norquist was instrumental in securing early support for the presidential campaign of then-Governor George W. Bush, acting as his unofficial liaison to the conservative movement.

Oh, and you're familiar with the name Jack Abramoff... here's a juicy tidbit:

~Continued

According to a 2011 memoir by former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Norquist was one of Abramoff's first major Republican party contacts. Norquist and Americans for Tax Reform were also mentioned in Senate testimony relating to the Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal which resulted in a 2006 guilty plea by Abramoff to three criminal felony counts of defrauding of American Indian tribes and corrupting public officials. Records released by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee allege that ATR served as a "conduit" for funds that flowed from Abramoff's clients to surreptitiously finance grass-roots lobbying campaigns. Norquist has denied that he did anything wrong, and has not been charged with any crime.

His group affilations (Past and Current) include:

Americans For Tax Reform
Council on Foreign Relations
The Harvard Crimson
The Harvard Chronicle
The Hasty Pudding Theatrical Society
The National Taxpayers Union
National College Republicans
The National Rifle Association
The American Conservative Union
The Hispanic Leadership Fund
The Indian-American Republican Caucus
ParentalRights.org
GOProud

Oh and he also sits on the six person panel that decides who Time Magazines Person of the Year is. Additionally he was a cofounder of the now notorious and defunct lobbying firm Janus-Merritt Strategies

Grover is quite the busy little boy it seems. Forget Rove... Forget George Bush Sr... Forget Cheney. THIS is the ultra conservative monster who lurks under Americas bed. Grover Norquist is that bogeyman.

Now for the GOOD NEWS!!!

From an article from Salon.com dated yesterday ( November 14, 2012 )

Is it game over for Grover Norquist?

There was a time when almost every single elected Republican in Washington and even state capitals would sign Norquist’s anti-tax pledge, which binds elected officials to a promise not to raise taxes under any circumstance. As recently as last year’s negotiations over the debt ceiling, Norquist had fealty from a majority in the House of Representatives, including Speaker John Boehner and the entire GOP leadership. “60 Minutes’” Steve Kroft labeled Norquist “the most powerful man in Washington.” Those who violate his pledge could long expect to face attack ads aimed at unseating them, bankrolled by Norquist’s massive war chest. Americans for Tax Reform spent almost $16 million on independent expenditure ads in 2012. Crossing the group has always increased the likelihood of a primary challenge.

But times are changing. Today’s second interesting meeting is taking place a few blocks away from Norquist’s downtown D.C. headquarters, at the White House, where President Obama is meeting with a dozen CEOs of the country’s biggest corporations. How did Norquist react to news of Obama reaching out to the business community, which he aims to represent in Washington? Not positively. Norquist told the Washington Post the CEOs were “acting like a group of trained seals” for Obama, posing for a “photo op” to give the president cover.

You’d think Norquist would be happy that Obama is giving an audience to the titans of the private sector, but no. That’s because the meeting, which gives the president a chance to win some business support for his agenda without any input from Norquist, represents a threat to his personal power. Is his petulant reaction — he invoked the term “poopy head” on national TV on Monday — a sign that he’s losing his once awesome power over the nation’s capital? Maybe.

Norquist faces an unprecedented rear-guard attack as the congressional GOP fractures on the tax issue. Last year, there were 238 members of the House and 41 members of the Senate who had signed Norquist’s pledge. This year, there are just 217 in the House — one shy from the 218 needed for a majority — and 39 in the Senate, an all-time low. As the Hill’s Russell Berman reports, while Norquist claims his army is 219 strong in the House, two of those members have since disavowed Norquist’s pledge.

~Continued

And back in Washington, where signing the pledge was once de rigueur, Republicans have been increasingly bold in rebuking Norquist. Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn has long been a sharp critic of the pledge’s inflexibility — “Grover, you’re stupid,” is just a sample — but now he’s being joined by a growing roster of colleagues. “Grover Norquist has no credibility, so I don’t respond to him. He doesn’t deserve being responded to,” said Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss. “Simply put, I believe Mr. Norquist is connected with and has profited from a number of unsavory people and groups out of the mainstream,” said longtime Virginia Republican Rep. Frank Wolf on the House floor.

Source

The article is much longer and deserves reading - as does the Wiki page I used for much of this information. Once one gets a feel for the man, his connections, and the people he has influced and been influenced by, the image of a real and geniune elitist agenda begins to form. The fact that many Republicans are now jumping from Grovers sinking ship is a marvelous sign of Democracy in action.

I imagine that a few ATS conservatives will pipe up and say that they agree with the idea of lower taxes and approve of any man willing to fight that battle. To these people I offer the following advice: Just because a man is willing to take up your mantle in battle - it does not automatically infer that he is either honorable or loyal to your cause. Norquist, IMO, is a self-serving oligarch who is using the fear of his followers to destroy this nation for his own profit. He is a disease in the body of Democracy and it is high time that he was purged from power.

When any private citizen is referred to, by an elected official, as the most powerful man in America it is paramount for the good of the people for that man to be removed from that level of influence.

Even the Bush family is renouncing Mr Norquist. The heir apparent to the family political legacy, Jeb, saying "“The rigidity of those pledges is something I don’t like. The circumstances change and you can’t be wedded to some formula by Grover Norquist. It’s — who the hell is Grover Norquist, anyway?” Similarly disempowering quotes can be found in the Salon article from both former Presidents with the Bush name.

One of my personal beliefs is that Grover Norquist was possibly a CIA operative during the course of his life. My conspiratorial side tends to wonder if he might not have been tasked with the mission of destabilizing and polarizing the nation with his rhetoric. These things I can neither prove nor disprove.

What I do know, from something included in his Wiki page is that there is now a growing bipartisan desire to rid America of this type of demogoguery and to begin the process of becoming a productive and healthy nation again.

In November 2011, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) blamed Norquist's influence for the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction's lack of progress, claiming that Congressional Republicans "are being led like puppets by Grover Norquist. They’re giving speeches that we should compromise on our deficit, but never do they compromise on Grover Norquist. He is their leader." Since Norquist's pledge binds signatories to opposing deficit reduction agreements that include any element of increased tax revenue, some Republican deficit hawks now retired from office have stated that Norquist has become an obstacle to deficit reduction. Former Republican Senator Alan Simpson, co-chairman of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, has been particularly critical, describing Norquist's position as "[n]o taxes, under any situation, even if your country goes to hell."

In Closing

Mr Norquist - I have long disliked your agenda, your lack of compassion, your self-serving nature, and your seeming obsession with playing the role of agent provocatuer. What I have to say to you now Sir, is "Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya. Oh, and Na, na, na na, na, na, na na - Hey hey... GOODBYE!.

~Heff

Sources:

Grover Norquist Wikipedia Entry
Leadership Institute Wikipedia Entry
Leadership Institute Website
Source

edit on 11/15/12 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/15/12 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/15/12 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)

I imagine that a few ATS conservatives will pipe up and say that they agree with the idea of lower taxes and approve of any man willing to fight that battle

As a "conservative" I favor the abolition of income and property taxes, and don't really care if people oppose me on that issue.

Sick to death of politicians lying, and manipulating the American people over to win votes..

I agree. I think this guy is responsible for a lot of what's wrong with our country. As stated in previous posts on other threads, I am a stuanch liberal. I don't care that this guy is a GOP power broker that many Republican come to kiss his ring and get his seal of approval. But what scares the hell out of me is how this guy and others like him have pushed Republican policies and dogma so far right, that it has driven the some in the left to drive their dogma more left.

A pratical real world example is stance of taxes, most GOP candidates sign his pledge to not increase taxes and many of the GOP in Congress won't let this stance go because if they raise taxes they lose his support and they need his support (and money) to get reelected. With the looming fiscal cliff, this man's sole issue might cause our country to fall in a depression because we can't have any new taxes on the books. This is silly. Guys like this guy do way more harm then good. The best thing for the GOP to do is to cut him off and say look, we have to work with Democrats and that means increased taxes, but this means a coup against the establishment and we all know that won't happen.

Those are my two cents...

Originally posted by Hefficide

Na, na, na na, na, na, na na - Hey hey... GOODBYE!.

~Heff

I hate to be that guy... but there should be another "hey" there

. Awesome post though and its definately reassuring to hear some progress in capital hill. I look forward to your next post.

Cheers

edit on 15-11-2012 by 1plusXisto7billion because: (no reason given)

reply to post by Hefficide


F&S for the OP Heff, I couldn't agree with you more. This guy needs to go down like a turd in a well, never to be seen or heard from again.

He's one "Poopy-Head" that I'm not going to miss.

Grover Norquist... The rights George Soros... Laughable

Tax revenue even at 100% of income is not relevant neither are tax cuts except it leaves some money in private hands instead of getting sucked into the insatiable black hole which our government has become.

But here's the problem-- the US fiscal situation is so untenable that the government fails to collect enough tax revenue to cover mandatory spending and debt interest. In Fiscal Year 2011, for example, the US government spent $176 billion MORE on debt interest and mandatory spending than they generated in tax revenue.

In Fiscal Year 2012, which just ended 6 weeks ago, that shortfall increased to $251 billion. This means that they could cut the ENTIRE discretionary budget and still be in the hole by $251 billion.

This is why the Fiscal Cliff is irrelevant. The automatic cuts that are going to take place don't even begin to address the actual problem; they're cutting $110 billion from the discretionary budget... yet only $16.9 billion from the mandatory budget.

Given that the entire problem is with mandatory spending, slashing the discretionary budget is pointless. It's as if the US economy is a speeding train heading towards a ravine at 200 mph, and the conductors are arguing about whether they should slow down to 150 or 175.

Conclusion? Increasing taxes won't increase their total tax revenue. Politicians have tried this for decades. It doesn't work. The only way to increase tax revenue is for the economy to grow... and higher tax rates do not pave this path to prosperity.

Zerohedge

Whether its cutting taxes as Grover Norquist would have (really just hold the line) or increase them to the moon as George Soro's would have its really a moot point, neither comes anywhere close to solving the spending problem.

I commend the OP for a well put together post however its just promoting the flip side of the well worn class warfare trap which the OP has fallen hook line and sinker for.

In retrospect it'd be a shame for capitolism but the liberals amongst us would have been far better off promoting and passing corporate profit limits and executive salary limits years back instead of high corporate tax rates and free trade agreements which promoted offshoring of jobs and rampant importation of goods. Corporation naturally beholden to stockholders simply went where the money is. Policy by our very own government led to this and that is where the blame should go.

Egads anytime someone mentions some of the real reasons all the jobs went away liberals fall all over the evil corporate profits and salary issue - remove that issue and a sane conversation could be had about job creation and manufacturing onshore. Keep current or raise taxes only serves to make it worse and worse.

No one that I know thats conservative wants babies unfed, pregnant mothers untreated or for people to go hungry, they do express dismay at the abuses going unchecked throughout the system when money is taken from their families pocket by force of government. I have many many experiences over the years witnessing abuse firsthand.

One final thought, calling Grover Norquist a monster is beyond the pale when his opposite George Soro's can be truly called a monster for financing his education and grubstake from the blood of his own people during WW2. That was evil in all its forms. It seems almost all so called liberal institutions, groups and forums have some kind of Sorro's connection.

I personally believe Soro's the greater danger the Republic (yes Republic not democracy, which we are not, a much abused term IMHO) than a legion of Grover Norquist's combined.

In the best interest of the nation I would like to see a return to service in government office rather than the servitude thats prevalent today, severe term limits, severe campaign spending limits, no lobbying period, all laws passed apply to legislators, no special interest groups at all period, no free media coverage, no corporate donations period, all voting by standardized recordable paper media, ID required. can the liberal agree?

reply to post by Phoenix


I am no fan of Soros either. But, as far as I know, Soros hasn't been so bold as to have public servants sign contracts up uphold his doctrine. Norquist has, and in a very high profile manner.

By way of correcting both of our conversational statements... we are a Democratic Republic - a form of government different from both a true Democracy or a true Republic. It's a hybrid of the two.

In the best interest of the nation I would like to see a return to service in government office rather than the servitude thats prevalent today, severe term limits, severe campaign spending limits, no lobbying period, all laws passed apply to legislators, no special interest groups at all period, no free media coverage, no corporate donations period, all voting by standardized recordable paper media, ID required. can the liberal agree?

I can certainly agree with everything in that paragraph!

~Heff

reply to post by Phoenix

In the best interest of the nation I would like to see a return to service in government office rather than the servitude thats prevalent today, severe term limits, severe campaign spending limits, no lobbying period, all laws passed apply to legislators, no special interest groups at all period, no free media coverage, no corporate donations period, all voting by standardized recordable paper media, ID required. can the liberal agree?

Not liberal or conservative but you sure have my vote

Great post, sir. Very well researched and thought out.
This guy is one of the weeds that needed culling and hopefully we will see this trend continue...unless, of course, he is just the sacrificial lamb for machine to operate just a little longer.

Star and flag for you my friend.

In the best interest of the nation I would like to see a return to service in government office rather than the servitude thats prevalent today, severe term limits, severe campaign spending limits, no lobbying period, all laws passed apply to legislators, no special interest groups at all period, no free media coverage, no corporate donations period, all voting by standardized recordable paper media, ID required. can the liberal agree?

reply to post by Phoenix
Though an independent, yes, I can agree with this statement. We need to not allow anyone to get into these positions of power over our government.

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by Phoenix

 

I am no fan of Soros either. But, as far as I know, Soros hasn't been so bold as to have public servants sign contracts up uphold his doctrine. Norquist has, and in a very high profile manner.

By way of correcting both of our conversational statements... we are a Democratic Republic - a form of government different from both a true Democracy or a true Republic. It's a hybrid of the two.

In the best interest of the nation I would like to see a return to service in government office rather than the servitude thats prevalent today, severe term limits, severe campaign spending limits, no lobbying period, all laws passed apply to legislators, no special interest groups at all period, no free media coverage, no corporate donations period, all voting by standardized recordable paper media, ID required. can the liberal agree?

I can certainly agree with everything in that paragraph!

~Heff

No he just buys their company and and makes them ideological slaves.

Another great thread, Heff!

Now we both know that Norquist was a big player, but why have some of the NeoCons began to distance themselves from him?

Here's an example:

Boykin: 'Grover Norquist is a Muslim Brotherhood Facilitator'

He must be "radioactive" if they are throwing out the Muslim card.

Initial thought: he looks like a guy I once dated, and biased as it is, that is not a good thing!!!

Second thought: that was a huge amount of effort heff, S&F for taking the time to put all that together

Third thought: I have heard this name for years now, echoing from the 80's Iran contra affair I believe, but I never bothered to take the time to look into this guy.

Fourth thought: now that this material has been presented to me, I will be going back over it in much more detail because based off a cursory reading of the OP, that seems like a pretty large amount of dirty laundry for one man to be carrying in his political baggage!

reply to post by sheepslayer247


This was an inevitable result. Even in my hatred of the man, I never stooped to try and grab the low hanging fruit. Norquists wife is Palestinian born Muslim and was formerly a director of the Islamic Free Market Institute

Her nationality nor religion should not have any bearing or merit in the argument, IMO. Shame on the GOP for going down that road in this case.

I've yet to investigate the IFMI - nor the other organization Mrs Norquist is involved with - the United States Agency For International Development. But my initial thought is that the latter seems like a textbook CIA front organization. This falls in line with my thoughts about Norquist himself.

The more I learn about the powers behind the throne, the more I want to create a slogan for them:

Order through destabilization...

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


Heff, Again kudo's for nicely constructed thread! one that promote devisive thoughts that only serve to seperate us, as I was quoted, we may not be as far apart as most would have us believe.

The causes, creation and blame are really all moot at this point we are in a way all passengers on the Titanic.

I believe anything that promotes private sector jobs is much of the way out of the mess we are in as that is the only way of productive increases in taxes the government can derive. You belive I think in punishing those that make money via tax policy which has the effect of removing money from the private sector which is in exact opposition to my belief.

Grover Norquist supporting a no new tax pledge is fine by me simply because it slowed the juggennaut towards catastrophy of utter collapse by forcing an otherwise vote buying legislature to hesitate in spending, the utterly stupid sequestration deal was a basterdized attempt by both parties to kick the ball down the road until after the election, well they did do that - to what good and much harm I may ask. Republicans did not want blame for government shutdown and Dems wanted budget issue off the table. Well its time to pay the piper and play the blame game once more and I'm sure Grover and George Jr. having a time machine cooked all this up with Cheney along with Roves input to discredit Obama who faithfully lays all blame in the past.

Truth to tell I think Dems would have actually been smarter to throw this election and once agian blame all the inherent structural problems on the Republican party and Romney - thats the golden nugget! and it will ultimately be as a noose around the democratic party as time goes by. Old axiom careful what you wish for, you might actually get it! applies here!

By your own words Grover Norquist is not the all powerful influence you claim in the OP nor is he omnipotent like I believe Soro's is to the progressive movement - you want conspiracy? go there and dig deeply.

In the end the only real question for me has to with "how much hot air can the FED reserve keep breathing on this economy until its implodes" that day is coming and IMHO was moved closer recently. I am begining to accept that no recovery is possible and many will suffer needlessly because of it. The worst will be those the OP believes tax increases will help - ain't gonna happen. Until then the middle class will be bled dry by policy that seems aimed at high earners but invariably will trickle down, I will now and going forward refer to it as trickle-down collapse politics.

reply to post by Hefficide


CIA, USAID and Norquist?

Now that is interesting. A quick search produced this article. You may have seen it, but it adds some insight into a CIA connection.

USAID and CIA

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Thank you for that!!!!

From the source you've brought to us:

President Kennedy’s stated objective behind the creation of the USAID was to separate military aid from development aid. According to Eva Golinger, the author of ‘The Chavez code’, over the years USAID “merely became an additional fund for the CIA to dip into for covert interventions.” William Blum, a former employee of the US Department of State, maintains that there exists “a close working relationship with the CIA, and that Agency officers often operated abroad under USAID cover (Killing hope: US military and CIA interventions since WWII).” More recently, a former editor of the Japan Times asserted that the “CIA, through USAID, is running a disinformation campaign on Japan’s earthquake crippled nuclear facilities.”

P.S. There are reports that, “The growing influence of the CIA and Pentagon in shaping relations with Pakistan was a key reason behind Ambassador Munter’s decision to quit his post.”

Source

~Heff