What Grover Norquist has done in 2009:
The one thing you can say about Grover Norquist is this: He is consistent in his endeavors to continue bolstering corporate interests.
When Jane Hamsher defends her opposition to Ben Bernanke and the Senate health care reform initiative on the basis of principle, what she reveals is this: She will win at any cost, even the cost of her principles, if they were there to begin with.
Having a shred of commonality on one single cause does not a principled stand make, particularly when arriving on common ground via opposite directions.
Good luck with that, Jane. Not one more dime from me to you or your causes, no matter how just they may seem. Attacking institutions which enabled many who could not have bought homes to buy them is hardly demonstration of a progressive principle. Moral relativism, yes. But not principles.
Nothing personal, Jane. I just have no patience for those who claim to lead by expedient, morally repugnant means. You should learn to take things less personally, too. Your crusade against the President and Rahm Emanuel appear to be wholly personal, staked in your petulant disbelief that you didn’t get exactly what you wanted when you wanted it. Welcome to the world.
Go read what Jeff Fecke has to say. Here’s a teaser: “Quite honestly, if Grover Norquist approached me and asked me to help him in his quest to save puppies, it would lead me to rethink my feelings about puppies.”