Norquist's 'REQUIRED' pledge that all Republicans had to sign

[clydefrand]

Every member of the house/senate takes an oath of office to uphold the constitution, against all enemies, foreign and within this country. Since they are NOW sworn to adhere to a LOBBYIST of the worst kind, shouldn't this be considered treasonous on a legal basis? I think the Democrats should file charges of treason against every single Republican who signed the oath, even if later retracted!!!!
And no, I am not advocating the overthrow of the senate/house, just need to get all the treasonous bastards out of there, and let future elected officials know the consequences of not taking their oath of office.

[Berlum]

1. Republicans are loyal to a Fatcat Chickenhawk Homeland

They have turned their asses toward America and the American values that made America great.

[Ilsa]

2. I think we need to let our representatives know how we feel

About them signing pledges of allegiance like this. That they are in Congress to represent Doofus Norquist, but their gerrymandered constituents!

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. Norquist states that he is speaking for the people.

Who the hell gave him that authority? He does not speak for the people. He speaks for the corporations he works for.

Another republican wolf in sheep's clothing.

[BlueCaliDem]

4. That can only be true IF he is elected president. Otherwise,

he's full of it.

On the other hand, he could be referring to "corporations are people, too, my friend" Republican meme that Willard had bandied about so callously. Then it makes sense.

[liberal N proud]

5. Sounds like treason

They are pledging oath to another authority while sitting as officials of the United States government.

At the very least they are not qualified to serve.

[jberryhill]

10. They shouldn't marry or join religions too, also

[MineralMan]

6. You're using a very loose, and not legal, definition of Treason.

It is very specifically defined in the Constitution, so calling for treason charges in this case isn't going to go anywhere.

The Norquist pledge is not binding on anyone. It has no weight in law whatsoever, and carries no legal punishments if it is not kept. It's purely a tea party-like campaign strategy that has failed, and is literally meaningless.

Norquist is a reprehensible, terrible person, and used threats to get people to sign his ridiculous and meaningless pledge. Those threats are and were bogus. The Republicans who signed them are spineless cowards. In 2012, and hereafter, his pledge is null and void, since the threats it is based on cannot be carried out.

It's not treason. It's stupidity. Sadly, there's no law against that.

[clydefrand]

11. Then there sure as hell outa be a law.

[MineralMan]

12. There are lots and lots of laws.

The trick is in understanding them and choosing one that applies. Treason is not it. People make pledges to all sorts of private groups. How binding those pledges are depends on the group and the pledge. The Norquist pledge is not binding at all. It's merely a threat that if it is not followed, the person will be campaigned against in primary elections. There's nothing illegal about it. It's a terrible idea, though, and far too many politicians on the Republican side fell for the thread and signed the pledge.

A bunch of those are now being replaced for their stupidity. Sadly, a bunch still will be in office. But that pledge no longer carries the weight with Republican legislators that it once did.

[oldbanjo]

7. Everyday things change how can someone

elected by the people sign a pledge of any kind, the members in Congress need the flexibility to do whatever they have to do in an emergency. This pledge has already damaged this Country and someone should be charged with a crime.

[MineralMan]

13. There are all kinds of pledges involved with politics.

Even at the lowest levels of party politics. For example, to caucus for Democrats in Minnesota, there's a pledge to support the platform of the Democrat Farmer Labor (DFL) party that everyone verbally agrees to at the caucus, and again at the conventions that do the actual nominating. Republicans have similar pledges in caucus states.

If you want to participate in party politics almost anywhere, you'll find a pledge of some kind is part of that participation.

Norquist's pledge carries with it no actual penalties for violating it, except that an effort will be made to replace you in the next primary if you break the pledge. That's all it can do. Again, for an example of a similar thing in the DFL (Democrat Farmer Labor) Party here in Minnesota, a relatively popular state Senator in my district strayed from the party platform after the 2010 election. His support for labor issues was half-hearted, at best, when legislation came up for votes, and he erred in some other votes. He was very surprised when he failed to get the endorsement of the DFL Party at our Senate District Convention in 2012. Surprised and dismayed. He withdrew from the race, in fact, and another candidate won the Democratic primary because of it.

That's basicially how the Norquist Pledge worked. You either signed it and stuck to it, our you would lose support in the next primary election. Pure party politics at work. No laws were broken by it. The morons who signed it did it out of fear of losing their seats.

[kelliekat44]

8. Marginalize Norquist and make him irrelevant.

No more appearances on network or cable. No more mention of his name. Why his "pledge" carried any weight at all is beyond me. White men in power just make shit up.

[GeorgeGist]

9. What you are suggesting would require a serious government.

[bkkyosemite]

14. It's Blackmail. Why are the Pundits afraid to say it. Norquist is Blackmailing our Congress!

Time for him to go to prison with his backed corporations and superpacs.