Previous Next Latest

Exclusive Interview: Grover Speaks

5/29/07, 12:49 pm EST

Rolling Stone recently sat down with anti-tax crusader and key Karl Rove ally Grover Norquist — head of Americans for Tax Reform — to handicap the Republican frontrunners from the perspective of an economic conservative. Norquist finds a lot to like among RudyMcRomney, and believes that the supposed veto powers of James Dobson and Pat Robertson in the GOP nominating process have been wildly overstated.

Rolling Stone: Much has been made that the frontrunners may have trouble clearing the bar with religious “values voters.” What’s your assessment?

Grover Norquist: What brings social conservatives to the Republican party is not some list of 20 things that James Dobson would like to see. It’s a much lower threshold. Social conservatives are best understood as a parents-rights movement. They don’t like guys throwing prophylactics at their kids in public schools. They don’t like their faith being made fun of, they want to be able to send their kids to private schools or home school. They are worried about raising their kids in their own faith and being left alone. On the abortion issue, pro-lifers need the same thing the chamber of commerce wants: serious judges. If you promise them that, credibly, you can have their support.

And each of the Republican candidates passes that threshold.

You can make the argument that some candidates would be more enthusiastic about going further on the social conservative agenda, and some may well excite the leadership of the social conservative movement, but I don’t believe that it moves votes. Take a look at how McCain and Giuliani and Romney are polling. Who are the three top guys? Pat Robertson sees two pagans and a Mormon. Everybody’s heard that Giuliani dressed up in drag. If my analysis was wrong, would he be polling as well as he is? Romney is a Mormon, which evangelicals see as theologically flawed, and McCain picked a public fight in 2000 with Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. Those are the three Republicans polling the best!

If 40 percent of the GOP base truly had Dobson’s 20 point test then a candidate such as Huckabee should be one of the frontrunners. He’s not, and that’s why I think my analysis is the correct one. The press is going to want to talk about and solicit quotations from self-appointed leaders about how unacceptable certain of these candidates are. I don’t think that translates. You have to convince people that one of these candidates would work actively against their privacy zone on faith and childrearing. And I’m not sure that anyone of them is going to fail that test.

Rolling Stone: Let’s run through the frontrunners from a small-government perspective.

Norquist: Giuliani has a record of 23 tax cuts as mayor New York and tussled with unions. That is not what weak mayors do, which is roll over and let spending go too high. He’s got a good record in a tough city.

Romney never signed a tax increase in Massachusetts. There were some fees but in general he was pretty good, he showed some spending restraint. Like the mayor of New York, he was in a difficult environment. You’ve gotta grade on a curve a little bit.

Our friend McCain’s challenge is, having been elected as a Reagan Republican and running in 2000 as a Reagan Republican, he — for reasons I don’t understand, but  it looks like pique at Bush — voted against every one of Bush’s tax cuts. Now he says he wants to continue the Bush tax cuts and never would vote for an increase. So that’s the big question mark. He’s not running as a candidate who’s against lower taxes. But in the last 6 years he kind of went AWOL on the fight. But now he wants to run as a guy who won’t raise your taxes and supports the tax cuts.

The good news for economic conservatives is that the candidates are all running to be your friend. Some may say “you can trust me more, I have a better track record I haven’t let you down in the past.”  But they’re all very nice to me, and they’re all making the case that they can most competently be seen as a Reaganite. There isn’t any Republican running saying that ‘being against more spending is so 1990s’ or ‘there may be a good case for a conservative tax increase.’ We have as-good-as-you-get unanimity in the taxes and spending fight.


Previous Next Latest

Comments

Let Them Eat Cake | 5/29/2007, 3:41 pm EST

The real economy is reeling because of the Perpetual Tax Cuts for the Wealthiest of Americans…

How Sweet that you “Snagged an interview” with a Chum of Rove…

We should really be able to Count on his Views…(After all-Rove and the Bush administration are the top examples of “Integrity and Moral Highground”…)

The tax cuts have drained the Infra-Structure and we are giving zip to the military risking their lives where they shouldn’t be- in Iraq.

The Tax Cuts are dipping into medicared, health care, public school funding, hospital services available and the sorry condition and axing of trauma centers in many major hospitals…

The tax cuts are ripping into public school funding, the lack of quality in school supplies and, the children’s school programs that are no longer in place-due to tax cuts in a “war” time economy…

Dickenson had an interview with the devil and I’m sure not impressed-the B.S. of Rove and his “nice little friends”….

It is a platform that is interested only in pacifying the wealthy and focusing on how big business can get even greedier….

McCain before he lost his conscience was against tax cuts-he knew it slashed military benefits-now he has become a Bush lap dog-anything goes.

Giuliani is mixed with Mob ties, put the command center for New York in the wrong place against good advice to place it somewhere in Brooklyn, he lauded the firemen and health care rescuers after 9/11 and promplty agreed to Cut their ranks, cut their benefits and pensions to “Thank em”…

Yea, Tim, great examples of creeps who have attained great personal wealth at the expense of America’s Precious Infra-Structure…

What Kool-Aid did you drink? It reeks…

RS rolls in the slime….

icing on the cake | 5/29/2007, 4:26 pm EST

I think the federal reserve act woodrow wilson help pass in 1913 is a bigger problem. These back and forth tax changes are just vibrations of a much larger issue. The day we allowed banks to create money from nothing we lost a significant amount of power to private interests.

chris | 5/29/2007, 4:27 pm EST

Word

lester | 5/29/2007, 5:27 pm EST

this guy is supposed to be a republican and he doesn’t even mention ron paul. and romney certainly did have fees in massachusetts. to the tune of 700 million dollars. He only became governor here because he would have been too mormon for the presidency as governor of utah.

thou shalt not speak his name | 5/29/2007, 8:25 pm EST

of course he wont mention Dr paul. That man is everything the powers that control this country fears. His ideals (liberty for the people) completely oppose the majority of politicians in the US government.

Ron Paul astonished me by making it this far. I cannot believe he was allowed to rise so far from obscurity. I doubt he will win, but I will vote for him all the same. Heres hoping that he does well in new hampshire to allow him more exposure. Internet exposure is good, but television exposure is lacking.

Rorshach | 5/29/2007, 11:11 pm EST

ditto on ron paul…to paraphrase the old SNL skit, “this country has a fever, and the only prescription is more ron paul”

ron paul is a true libertarian at heart, and perhaps third party leadership is what this country really needs, judging by the corpulence and corruption on capital hill, from BOTH sides

Jab | 5/29/2007, 11:18 pm EST

I fear for the Republic if Ron Paul isn’t elected to the nation’s highest office.

qwerty | 5/30/2007, 10:19 am EST

well, get a head start on your fear. ’cause ron paul won’t be elected. the overlords of this ‘republic’ won’t allow it.

your mom | 5/30/2007, 12:31 pm EST

The tax reform movement is based, partially, in Anti-Semitism. See “The Terrorist Next Door: The Militia Movement and the Radical Right.”

The other part is acutally based in liberalism.

oddjob | 5/30/2007, 5:15 pm EST

“It is a platform that is interested only in pacifying the wealthy and focusing on how big business can get even greedier….”

Indeed. For all the talk about small government, what they are really about is restoring the America of the Guilded Age. There was a reason we walked away from that America, but these fools want to return us to it.

Unfortunately the last time around the votes of the fundamentalists helped counter balance this unhealthy way to arrange our society. They knew then that what conservatives wanted to do was destroy any real chance the bulk of the rest of the people had for bettering their lives.

This time around they don’t care about that. They’d rather eat poisoned, uninspected, imported food because they’re too worried about who sleeps with whom.

ECON 101 | 5/30/2007, 7:06 pm EST

“They knew then that what conservatives wanted to do was destroy any real chance the bulk of the rest of the people had for bettering their lives.”

Guess you’ll believe ANY stereotype the sainted other side wants you to. Question ALL Authority!

Do you have some kind of proof of this crazy allegation? Conservatives AND libertarians believe big government is immaterial to people building better lives. You may be unwilling to improve yourself without government assistance, the majority of us did it with as little as possible. Private charity can help the few who are unable to due to so.

Again, look at places with rampant poverty that government was going to help? Does Newark, the South Bronx, Oakland and similar cities look “helped” to you? I once believed that Big Government 100% GOOD, Conservatives/Libertarians 100% EVIL dogma. There are shades of gray all around. Christ, don’t be so gullible. Tell me you’re only 16 and I’ll understand.

Smedly Dooright | 5/30/2007, 8:06 pm EST

What happened to Matt Taibbi? He’s the best writer at RS.

Eric | 5/31/2007, 10:04 am EST

Ronald Reagan took the exact same approach that Norquist is espousing. He promised the evangelicals that the government would not actively undermine their efforts to raise their kids. He did not allow them to use it to promote their own agenda. This was one of the key reasons he had so much support among young voters. Culturally, he was a libertarian.

Norquist’s campaigns against anti-Islamic bigotry and the “Patriot Act” give him a certain amount of credibility where principles are concerned.

DF | 6/1/2007, 1:29 pm EST

Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have overseen the biggest federal spending sprees in American history, driving up the budget deficit and putting our country deeper and deeper into debt. That Grover and his allies continue to talk about Republicans as spending conservatives is absolutely and unquestionably false.

DF | 6/1/2007, 1:30 pm EST

Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have overseen the biggest federal spending sprees in American history, driving up the budget deficit and putting our country deeper and deeper into debt. That Grover and his allies continue to talk about Republicans as spending conservatives is absolutely and unquestionably delusional.

Let Them Eat Cake | 6/3/2007, 12:21 pm EST

Who Speaks?
Nerdquist…
Karl Rove’s buddy?

What a thrill/what an article

Wow, we have certainly seen the Real Economy through Grover’s eyes…

Ask him to explain his Repubes handling of Katrina, Iraq, hundreds of billions of tax payers dollars that have disappeared on their way to New Orleans and Iraq and our military budget for troops(their equipment/helmets/medical care when wounded(Walter Reed) and, the blood money that the Bush-Republican businesses have profitted from since both botched catastrophes…

Where are good jobs going and why are the outsourcing, tax cutting welfare program for wealthy still robbing our country blind?

My respect for RS just sunk miles, along with the respect level for the Democrats….

Maybe Fascism has finally Won….

Who Knew.

Post A Comment

Caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted

Name:

Comments:



Advertisement

Advertisement