Grover Norquist knows just as well as you or I do that taxes are going up soon whether he likes it or not. And, evidently, he really does not like it.
NORQUIST: We got lots of things Obama claims to be for, and we will make — we, the Republicans in the House and Senate — will make him actually make those spending restraints, in order to get the continuing resolution out [for] a week, two weeks, a month. Obama will be on a very short leash, fiscally speaking, over the next four years. He’s not gonna have any fun at all. He may decide to go blow up small countries he can’t pronounce because it won’t be any fun to be here, because he won’t be able to spend the kind of cash he was hoping to.
First of all, what does he mean by "we, the Republicans in the House and Senate?" Did Norquist become an elected member of congress while I wasn't watching? Has he been appointed by Nikki Haley?
And secondly, will someone please fetch Grover his binky?
Setting aside the childish implication that the president is going to "blow up" nameless countries for fun, I take it as more than just a little racist to claim you're going to place the black president on a leash because he's an uncontrollable spender when we all know he's nothing of the sort.
The deficit is down. The national debt is at a multi-year low. Spending is about to be cut automatically. And following the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts, the deficit will almost entirely vanish by 2017.
Claiming you're going to keep someone on a tight leash wouldn't ordinarily evoke a racist connotation, but President Obama is not an ordinary president, and Norquist went on to imply that blowing money is the president's idea of fun.
Getting back to blowing up countries for fun and profit -- where was Norquist when the Bush Administration pissed away $3 trillion doing exactly that in Iraq?
Further evidence that Grover is a manchild can be found here wherein he uses the term "poopy head" in a serious manner.