A Traitor Several Times over? Of Course Not–Cantor’s a Republican, and IOKIYAR.
Remember when Republicans said that an American, while overseas, speaking against the American president was verging on treason, as we saw with the Dixie Chicks? That for an American politician to do so while abroad was traitorous, like Democratic congressmen did before the Iraq War? Or that even just disagreeing with the president’s policies in the U.S. while the president was on foreign soil was anti-American, as the Republicans accused Murtha of when he suggested a withdrawal from Iraq? Or when Daschle criticized Bush while Bush was in Europe? Or with local California Democrats while Bush was in Central America? Or that even criticizing the president at all while our troops were on the ground was tantamount to giving aid and comfort to our enemies? And let’s not forget the idea of members of Congress making policy promises to foreign leaders which oppose the president’s, something the Republicans have scalded Democrats for even coming close to doing, like they did with Nancy Pelosi while in Syria (where not only Republican lawmakers were also visiting, but where Pelosi did not oppose the president).
Would you be even in the least bit surprised were you to discover the Republicans to be utterly hypocritical in attacking Democrats for these things?
Probably not. If you have been watching the news, then you might be aware of the fact that Eric Cantor, current Minority Whip and likely Majority Leader next year, had a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
In this meeting with a foreign leader, Cantor expressed his opposition to President Obama’s policies regarding the Middle East, promising to side with the foreign leader against the President of the United States. Cantor’s office later publicly announced what he said in the meeting.
Disagreeing with the president’s foreign policy. In a meeting with a foreign leader. While the president is on foreign soil. While there are troops on the ground. The only one Cantor missed was that he was not on foreign soil at the time–this took place in New York–but Cantor managed to breach every other rule that Republicans claimed were unacceptable for any American to violate.
Now, you might say that it was other Republicans who said these things were unacceptable, and Cantor wasn’t being hypocritical. Except that when Nancy Pelosi went to Syria–even though she made no statements about foreign policy and did not criticize Bush while she was there–Cantor himself wrote an article insinuating the opposite and suggesting she was guilty of a federal felony:
Presenting Assad with “a new Democratic alternative” — code for making President Bush look feckless — Mrs. Pelosi usurped the executive branch’s time-honored foreign-policy authority. Her message to Assad was that congressional Democrats will forbid the president from increasing pressure on Damascus to stop its murderous way. Several leading legal authorities have made the case that her recent diplomatic overtures ran afoul of the Logan Act, which makes it a felony for any American “without authority of the United States” to communicate with a foreign government to influence that government’s behavior on any disputes with the United States.
So, no irony there.
But not to worry–Cantor violated the remaining rule a little over a year ago, criticizing Obama from Israel. Just so you know he has covered all the bases. Just not all at one time–Cantor is only human, you know.
It’s a tough call. When your own President is selling out his allies and betraying the country that he pledged to serve, do you try to reassure the allies that the insanity is limited to the Executive branch? Or do you join the asylum and hope that the message is too bizarre to be believed? In this case, there was a definite need to communicate to Israel that, despite Obama’s bias towards the “Palestinians” and other arabs, true, patriotic Americans still support their country. Of course, Cantor’s example was nothing like Pelosi, who, like Obama, was trying to sell out American interests to a brutal, undemocratic dictator, in contravention of years of American foreign policy.
Dealing with foreign governments can be tricky, and it certainly could lead to a charge of treason under the right circumstances. But, when expressing support for one of America’s closest allies is considered possibly treasonous, you have to ask who the patriots are and who are the real traitors.
@ GeoffK–
Wow–I rarely post on Luis’s blog. I sometimes send him emails etc.. but mostly just read his posts. A “lurker” for better words.
But such a statement as
“When your own President is selling out his allies and betraying the country that he pledged to serve,”
I just have to open my hand and digitally slap you in the face. “swack!!”
That you think the president is
quote– BETRAYING THE COUNTRY THAT HE PLEDGED TO SERVE– unquote
proves you are a complete idiot. You are a troll of the highest order and I hope Luis bans you.
SIde note–do you really live in Japan? Do you speak Japanese? Because of all your posts you are unclear. Maybe you knew someone who lived in Japan or maybe you yourself had a ALT/JET job? But I am unconvinced you are a resident.
So bang away until you are banned—hopefully soon.
America’s blind support of Israel is killing the country
and creating more and more enemies for the US.
Hopefully Americans will wake up soon and realize this
blind support and billions of dollars in funding every
year will be the utter destruction of the US, if it
doesn’t stop.
And Cantor is a moron. And yes, he’s a traitor, but that’s
not really any surprise.
And Geoff’s war against reality continues.
technically, treason as defined in the Constitution is selling your country out to an “Enemy”, which while I’m not a lawyer like GK here I think requires an actual state of war and all that jazz to exist, plus I think “aid and comfort” is a term of art.
Even John Walker Lindh’s actions did not rise to the level of treason apparently.
And, fwiw, I think people accusing eg. Jane Fonda of treason have a screw or two loose.
All government powers of prosecution of the laws have to be balanced against our constitutional rights as free citizens.
The Dixie Chicks had an absolute right to say whatever the hell they want at any time.
The Logan Act is probably bad law and deserves to be thrown out at any rate.
But I am unconvinced you are a resident
http://www.google.com/search?q=ジェフリー・クランスドーフ
Geoff, it’s only a tough call when you listen exclusively to FOX “News”, Rush Limbaugh, and Right Wing radio spewing out lies and nonsense all day long. When you actually start to believe the “facts” that come out of Sarah Palin’s mouth, then you are lost beyond the point of no return.
Clearly, you are a bit misinformed; Obama is not “selling out” to anyone. From the start, Obama has made a sincere effort to open a dialog with nations America may not like. It is not selling out–it a part of a president’s job to do so. It is significantly better than insulting a nation’s leadership and hence allowing the silence/bitterness between the two countries to widen. This is not something that Dubya was able to so because he lacked an international view of the world. Dubya can only see the world through Christian/Capitalist glasses which distorts things because it does not represent the rest of the world.
Dubya’s foreign policy (and those like him) does not work because it does not allow for another view of the world. His small view was so distorted that the world soon forgot about the US as a great nation of liberators and changed that image into a nation bent on world domination. Bush reinforced that image by protecting his oil interests in Iraq while the rest of the national treasure went up in smoke. So far, Obama has made great strides in changing that image.
In short, the conciliatory approach to world politics is the best one to “serve” our own national interests. This is what most Americans want him to do. That’s why we voted him into office rather than McCain and Palin. And believe me, the rest of the world is quite happy about that.
On the other hand, if you would prefer to see the American image go back to the days when scorn and bitterness towards the U.S was the norm, just keep listening to Palin and Limbaugh. Other than whining, they have never had anything productive to offer in terms of foreign policy.
@Troy
Ok. Thanks.
You’re kinda misunderstanding the game here.
The public-facing game is to be tough and preemptively violent in our dealings with the mideast.
The actual policy being followed is to disrupt Israel’s enemies and the supporters of Israel’s enemies.
Without the US, Israelis would be soon find themselves having to swim for Cyprus. They know that, their enemies know that, but we don’t really know that.
While I agree it is better to be publicly tough on power-hungry regimes, such at Iran and N Korea, I don’t suggest preemptive violence or insults to deal with such regimes. Dubya calling those nations the “Axis of Evil” did very little to open up a productive dialog.
Geoff, if I understand him, seems to follow the Right Wing view that “Barak ‘Hussein’ Obama is obviously biased towards Muslims and is bending over backwards to appease the Islamic world….” This misrepresentation of calm, cordial, if not idealistic, diplomacy has at least been effective in changing how the world views the U.S.
My point is we may need to deal with a bad U.S. image first if we are to be effective in persuading the Arab world (enemies of Israel) to come to the negotiating table. Any hint of “bias” will jeopardize our influence in the region.
I for one believe Obama knows what he is doing. I just wish we could boast some significant successes, but realistically we can hope to accomplish very little on that front. But at least showing we are listening to both sides’ concerns and mediating objectively. That is why I stand behind Obama on this.
No, I would not call being unbiased “selling out” our allies as some have claimed.
Geoff, if I understand him
Geoff is simply full of shit — not above lying when his argument falls apart.
Debating his points about Obama is giving them the dignity they do not deserve.
Unless he thinks Obama has pledged to serve Israel.
His argumentation is sheer propaganda and character assassination. There is no underlying historicity, analysis, or factual basis of any kind.
It is just bullshit.
(While I was trying for bq, the b tag also works.)
@ Troy,
Well, although I tend to agree with your sentiments,
there is clearly a growing number of Americans that follow his notion of Obama’s performance. I am alarmed at the number of bloggers who believe Obama is nothing but a lapdog for the Arabic/Islamic world simply because his name sounds foreign.
I teach foreign students here in the U.S., who envy the U.S. for its democratic system of govt. They are also extremely supportive of Obama for his vision and frankness. Political leaders in their home countries are mostly corrupt and untrustworthy (like our previous administration), but their newspapers are not allowed to criticize the govt. And I find it difficult to explain why Obama’s popularity is waning so quickly among Americans.
Most Americans have no idea how lucky they are to have someone of this caliber in the Oval Office…
It’s not that at all. Kerry, Gore, Carter would all get the same treatment.
There are forces on the right that are absolute ferocious watchdogs about Israel and the public diplomatic posture the US maintains towards it.
If you don’t utter the required shibboleths — obeisance to the state of Israel’s national interest — these forces can and will bring you down.
I think it’s why Gore had that puke Lieberman on his ticket — he knew that Florida was make or break and the Jewish vote was critical there.
I also think it’s the same reason Obama took in Rahm as his CoS and otherwise kept a policy bodyguard of known pro-Israel apparatchiks. Palestinians don’t vote and have a ant’s footprint in our media and daily discourse.
The same cannot be said for teh Joos here. The array of pro-Israel neocon and conservative attack messaging, combined with the conservative christianist powerbase’s desire to see Israel prosper at the expense of our satanic muslim enemies, is quite a weighty force in politics and media today.
Nobody in their right mind takes this on, head-on at least.
Oh, they got theirs. If memory serves me, Carter is supposedly a lapdog for the Palestinians, Kerry is supposedly a lapdog for the Vietnamese and Gore is supposedly a lapdog for the spotted owl.
I only became aware of the radical nature of Bush (jr) republicans in late October 2000 when I read an article that Bush, through his foreign policy advisor, Condoleeza Rice, advocated for ending NATO.
This seemed massively absurd and diabolically against America and her allies best interest. NATO, in 2000, was a force multiplier for America. For the price of sound reasonable foreign policy and token diplomacy (that we simply listen with patience and understanding to our allies) they, the next ten or 12 richest most powerful countries in the world, surrender effective control of the bulk of their armed forces too us… for almost no price at all.
Ending NATO as we then knew it was, of course radically wreckless, absurd and selling out of America’s interest and their democratic allies that the President is sworn to protect.
The Treasonous behavior, thus, was that done by movement republicans in the Bush regime, repeatedly.
Insanely, and treasonously, the Bushies drove a wedge between us and the democracies of Europe and East Asia, in the pursuit of rogue foreign policies designed to make oil and other multinational corporations richer.
Treasonously the Bush administration exposed Valerie Wilson, putting in danger all her contacts and overthrowing an anti-nuclear proliferation black market. If a nuclear or dirty bomb is ever blown up by a terrorist, you can blame the Bush administration.
The Bushies, wanted to undermine NATO and UN – both very important stabilizers for maintaining world peace, and therefore world trade and economic growth. They wanted to because they wanted to pursue rougue foreign policies that would help make their backers richer.
The bushies pushed mercenaries and mercenarianism upon the U.S. army.
The Bushies lied, to the world, and our allies, to start a war that was not in ours or our allies best interest.
I don’t understand Geogh when he says:
It’s a tough call. When your own President is selling out his allies and betraying the country that he pledged to serve, do you try to reassure the allies that the insanity is limited to the Executive branch? Or do you join the asylum and hope that the message is too bizarre to be believed?
I mean, where was Geogh when his own President, George Bush, was selling out our allies and betraying the country that he pledge to serve. Why did Geogh decide to join the asylum then?
Why did Geog join the asylum when Bush was looting the countries treasury during the Bush regime? The deficits we have now, were created by Bush… he’s the one that inhereted a surplus. He trashed it. He trashed and ruin the country.
That’s why Republicans are called the wrecking crew. We are living in the age of Deconstruction.
Geogh backs the Deconstructionist that are deconstructing our country and our world as we know it.
The collapse of the economy, in autumn 2008 was part of that deconstruction… the junking and ruining of America… the raping and looting and junking and ruining of America and leaving it by the road side as she struggles to repair and get back on her feet…
These are the Deconstructionist… these are the wrecking crew… these are the movement conservatives,…. these are the republicans of our times….
All republicans have at least these two instincts in common… a destructive instinct towards the institutions and organizational arrangments that made America successful and a hatred of ordinary people, the once middle class, that those arrangements were designed to keep in the middle class.
Traitors? Thy name is Republican, thy name is conservative. Take a look in the mirror, and see that which is diabolical and hateful or ordinary people.
I think it’s a mistake to confuse movement conservatism with treason.
40% of this country, in off-year elections at least, is supporting the movement conservatives.
They’ve been building their message of less government power and more corporate power since 1964, and their formerly extremist positions wrt foreign relations and rugged individualism have made it into the mainstream of the Republican party.
Thanks to coalitioning with the religious right (a force Goldwater did not want to have anything to do with), they basically own most of America on the ground, anywhere where cows and pigs outnumber people at least.
Middle America doesn’t need social ism or people in DC telling them to wear their seatbelt or what guns they are allowed to have.
The actions of the Bush team 2001-2008 IMHO can be summed “C’est pire qu’un crime, c’est une faute” — worse than a crime, they were a mistake.
Ideology-driven decisions wrt invading Iraq (gonna be a cakewalk), deregulating banking (people are smart), destroying the mission of public education (NCLB), tax cuts (pay for themselves) were avoidable own-goals, but We The People are just kinda not smart enough to see through the BS.
Where was the lefty vote to keep the Republicans out of power? They got 20% of the vote this time, but it was enough.
Is Cantor by any chance a Jew?
@SOUSA-POZA
yes, Cantor is one of the ~40 Jews on Capitol Hill, and the only Republican, other than a Jewish Mormon representative from Utah.
Troy, it is tempting to say “it figures” -but it may be a simplification. Did you say “Jewish Mormon”? Interesting combination: never heard of it before. It looks to me like an oxymoron, like a “capitalist communist”.
Luis, by the way: where is my photo coming from?
I am guessing that you signed up for some WordPress blog or service, and are still logged in, and so might be logged in at any WordPress site.
I’m also assuming that is the case. My gravatar image hasn’t been showing up, but that is separate from my wordpress account.
Oh sure, now my gravatar starts working properly… =p
Well, the husband is always the last to know …