The article states that we now have 4 members of the GOP in congress actively moving about to different countries telling them the exact opposite of what official policy is, or in DeMint’s case meeting with a de facto government we’re trying to put pressure on.
4-8 years ago we were hearing cries of “Traitor” from the talking heads because Kerry went to Lebanon, and when Pelosi went to Syria, even though I don’t recall them making any comments that were opposing our policies at the time. The article doesn’t mention Mike Huckabee’s recent trip to Israel where he made the previously treasonous mistake of criticizing the President on foreign soil (see Al Gore in Saudi Arabia).
Hypocritical shit like this and the two-facedness of the Beltway punditry makes me so angry I could kill a yak. With mind bullets!
Yeah, we were talking about this in the Honduras thread. It is pretty infuriating.
It’s dancing dangerously close to actual treason.
Uh, no, it is actual treason, according to the Logan Act.
So… Republican lawmakers undermine US foreign policy, while Republican pundits call for a coup? I… I’m stunned. Why do the Republicans love the terrorists?
Because their leaders are all religious extremists.
Because you are not a terrorist if you have god on your side.
I love how the entire Republican strategy since the election has been to simply use subversion as a political platform. From shouting ridiculous statements at town hall meetings to disparaging their own government while traveling to foriegn countries it all seems to be predicated on a belief that if they throw a big enough tantrum then the disruption will bring government to a halt and they can win back control in 2010 and 2012 by pointing fingers at the Democrats and shouting “see, they’ve accomplished nothing!”.
I don’t know if it’s actual treason, but it’s pretty goddamned hippocritical considering how many of these same people were so quick to apply the “traitor” label when they thought there was any opposition to their policies, and that was organized and civil opposition, not the wailing and teeth gnashing that is going on right now. Sadly, America as a whole seems incapable of distinguishing the difference. Meanwhile these “patriots” stagnate any sort of growth or progress we might have made and work their followers into a dervish-like frenzy with bogus threats of a boogeyman and tales of “what-if” that have no grounding in reality. It’s pathetic, transparent and ridiculous, and Americans should be able to see right through it, but unfortunately many of them don’t seem to want to, even if they can.
Seems like that’s possibly true for Mark Kirk and Jim Inhofe, but the other guys were basically just criticizing the Obama administration publicly, which I don’t think becomes illegal when it’s done overseas.
In a world of instant worldwide telecommunications and convienant global travel I wonder if distinctions in what can be said when physically in different areas makes sense. Should a foreign leader need to worry about where he stands when talking to an American diplomat/politican?
It’s sleazy, but the Logan act/treason stuff is overblown. Inhofe going to the conference is truly, truly strange though.