Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL): I Told China Not To Believe U.S. Budget Numbers
Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) now appears to have taken a bold step in the debate over the budget deficit: Openly telling a foreign government not to trust the administration in Washington.
The Straits Times reports that Kirk spoke to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, and discussed a meeting he had with Chinese leaders. Here's the video:
"One of the messages I had -- because we need to build trust and confidence in our number one creditor," said Kirk, "is that the budget numbers that the US government had put forward should not be believed. The Congress is actually gonna spend quite a bit more than what's in the budget, and the health-care bill probably being the lead driver of additional spending by the Congress."
A request for comment to Kirk's office has not yet been returned.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Of course, it goes wholly without the need for saying that had, say, a Democrat done this, Fox and Friends would be all up in arms screaming traitor, traitor!
June 9, 2009 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of Democrats, why aren't they jumping up and down in the media pointing out this latest example treasonous Republican behavior? Is the word Democrat Attic Greek for ?
June 9, 2009 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Eunuch" was the word that got....cut off my post.
June 9, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ya got that right! No balls AT all!
June 9, 2009 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, I'll bite:
Marc Kirk is a traitor! He says that he's warning China "because we need to build trust and confidence in our number one creditor" but actually he's a self-serving prig who is lying to another country to score political points within a failing extremist party back home.
June 9, 2009 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heh, wiping spittle from computer screen.
June 9, 2009 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good going, it's more hygienic that way, amigo!
June 9, 2009 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's an app for that ... ;-)
June 10, 2009 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Chinese aren't stupid. They know that Kirk is an idiot stooge republicanix. They knew that Bush was the biggest idiot to run a state since Louis Napoleon (Napoleon was smarter). They count on these guys to clusterf*ck things up to help swing the balance of power their way.
In the eight years Bush was President, China gained fifty years on our ass. There are well thought out strategic studies contemplating the staying power of the United States in the far east (S. Korea, Japan) in face of a growing China (S. Korea's #1 trade partner since 2004).
The greatest hope China has of making the 21st century their century are idiot Republicanix which there is no shortage of. I'm sure China loves hearing this kind of carbon fiber coming from this guy, know that he's both a stooge, a clown and their greatest asset, and he not knowing either.
June 10, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Make that communist country.
Where's Joe McCarthy.
June 11, 2009 9:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why would THIS particular act of anti-US undermining the govt by cause for Fox News to say such a thing?
All it took when Bush was in office was for ANYONE to say ANYTHING negative about Bush and you were a TRAITOR for talking smack about the POTUS in wartime.
Correct me if I am wrong, but we are still AT WAR.
Just shows the network of fair & balanced is again just the network of double standard. What is OK for a Repub is NOT OK for a Dem.
June 9, 2009 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why do they hate America, Lars??
June 9, 2009 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Transltion+Bush lied so democrats must have.
Ethics and obeying oaths to these people are foreign concepts.
June 11, 2009 9:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
They are very afraid.
If democrats pass a public option healthcare it will improve peoples lives immensely.
They have to stop it or their party will die
June 11, 2009 9:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
well...what a guy! i can only imagine the amount of verbal slamming he is going to receive from super patriots rush/hannity/glennbeck/sarahpalin/ericcantor/etc. Surely they will find this enterprising type of betrayal of the US government treason-worthy!
(sigh)
June 9, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where was Rep. Kirk when the Bush administration was withholding the costs of the two wars from the budget?
June 9, 2009 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Er... In what universe is this not a sitting lawmaker deliberately undermining America's international and economic position for political gain? This from the same party that was getting its undies in a bunch because Obama didn't give a shout out to Pope Urban II in his Cairo speech?
June 9, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "r"s really do want the Pesident to fail, even if the whole country goes down w/ him...why is this such a surprise? Treasnous? Sounds like it to me.
June 9, 2009 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's time to stop coddling these idiots. The Republican party has basically committed itself to undermining the presidency in any and every way they can think of.
I don't care if they've got the emotional maturity of a five-year-old. They still need a serious ass-kicking and they need it right now.
When you've got someone like Grassley texting trash-talk towards the president like some teenage punk, things have gotten way out of hand. Where are the adults?
June 9, 2009 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
It just took them a little longer during the Clinton administration to commit to treason and rebellion. And it worked for them in 1994 and 2000.
It's called a successful coup or revolution if they succeed. It's treason if they fail.
June 9, 2009 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Umm yeah, I honestly believe that this is a traitorous act. The only reason I can think of why a Republican would say something like that to a Chinese official is to sabotage the Obama administration and that to me sounds like treason.
June 9, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure the Chinese are as dumb as he believes them to be.
Dumbed down is purely American.
June 9, 2009 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really. As if Kirk is telling the Chinese something they don't know? Do you think they believed Dubya when his budget forecasts showed his tax cuts resulting in a reduced deficit?
The Laffer curve and supply-side (aka voodoo) economics have been recognized as eye-rolling fiction for a long time. And when Congress has to pass a new budget every year -- subject to the shifting winds of politics -- can any multi-year forecast really be worth anything?
Do you (plural) believe the budget numbers???
June 9, 2009 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only budget I truly believe is the one that I have on Mint.com that creates an automatic budget based on my average spending. When I get an email saying that I've spent too much on groceries, then it makes sense since I understand how it was put together!
June 9, 2009 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I concur. They know how to read between the lines. They know this idiot represents a diminishing brand in this country. All he's doing is ignorantly highlighting political differences in over here. He mistakenly thinks he's pulling the rug out from under Obama when all he's really doing is yelling out, "hey, I'm an idiot and a total boob and I don't even know it."
June 9, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or... he is knowingly pandering to his political base of idiots and boobs.
June 9, 2009 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm...
Word is that the Chinese fudge their numbers too. Maybe he's trying to level the playing field? What a hero.
June 9, 2009 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
He can kiss that Senate race GOODBYE. If he plans on running for congress, you can be as sure as can be that the DNC will be playing this over and over again.
June 9, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Talk about politics not stopping at the water's edge. Not only does this creep want Obama to fail, he wants the country to fail.
June 9, 2009 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
With respect and affection, easy with the cries of "treason" if you please, folks.
The Founders narrow defintion of the word "treason" was an important advance for liberty for guys raised in a world where wifely direspect torwards her husband was petty treason and an adulterous affair by/with the spouse of a monarch was high treason punishable by death.
We are on the receiving end of that charge often enough for me to not want to see us getting in the habit of descending to the same level. This isn't even sedition. It's just being a stupid, disloyal asshhole.
June 9, 2009 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
However, we are certainly talking about Logan Act violations here, aren't we?
June 9, 2009 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the surface, yes. But, ignoring my rant at the top, I think that he's just trying to score points at home in the GOP.
June 9, 2009 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, yes, I'm pretty sure the Logan Act specifically criminalizes being a loud-mouthed disloyal asshole when communicating with foreign governments.
And yeah, if he was a Democrat doing this in 2005, one of Bush's U.S. Attorneys would already preparing to take it to a grand jury, assuming Justice wasn't handling it itself.
June 9, 2009 8:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are correct! In my earlier post I said "traitorous" but it's definitely "The Logan Act" for Mr Kirk:
"Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
"This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects."
The irony of this is that the man that prompted the Adams Administration to introduce the bill for this act was a Republican. BWAHAHAHA!
Read more: http://law.jrank.org/pages/8357/Logan-Act.html#ixzz0HzLkwBPi&C
June 9, 2009 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not to be nitpicky, but "Republican" at that point in history referred to the predecessor to the current Democratic party (anti-Federalists --> Democratic-Republicans --> Democrats). The GOP didn't start until about a half-century later.
June 10, 2009 8:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is that you scratching your kitties underchin? How cute is that?
June 10, 2009 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do believe that the spirit of the law is far more reaching than the letter. Calling this buffoon a "fucking asshole" would be fitting even though all concerned parties remain(ed) celibate and fully clothed.
June 9, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Contact information for this twit. Be polite.
The Honorable Mark S. Kirk
United States House of Representatives
1030 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1310
DC Phone: 202-225-4835
DC Fax: 202-225-0837
June 9, 2009 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of wifely direspect torward her husband Kirk's office announced he and his wife are getting divorced last week.
June 9, 2009 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why do you think he's going full wingnut on us? He can't think this is going to play well if he tries to run statewide.
As we discussed earlier, I thought he'd be a formidable statewide candidate due to his perception as a moderate and potential Blago backalsh. If Kirk has a brain in his head, he can't believe running as a Limbaugh Republican is the way to win. That type of Republicanism has never been successful here.
June 10, 2009 12:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just called and asked "whose side is Congressman Kirk on?"
June 9, 2009 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
And what did they say? (Not that I expect they said something that actually makes sense...)
June 9, 2009 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why do Republicans hate America? I think they hate us for our freedoms.
June 9, 2009 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL. The headline for this article sits right atop the one for exposing torture photos. I'm guessing most here think that depicting America as a lawless ghetto of sadism, is telling the truth and therefore good - while telling the truth about Obama's financial shenanigan's is bad.
What a bunch of hypocrites.
June 9, 2009 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
We're already convinced you're both a jerk and a fool - you can stop selling.
June 9, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, Old Grouch, that is *so very true!* *RIGHT ON THE MONEY!* Good going!!
June 9, 2009 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like to suggest that you could "guess" better if you had your cranium extracted from your rectum.
June 9, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
That would assume that he was telling the truth...we don't know that.
June 9, 2009 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then you really are still idealistic. The CBO agrees with Kirk. No he isn't lying.
Here is a graph illustrating how huge Obama's spending is compared to Bush's. This is why the Chinese are laughing at Geithner.
June 9, 2009 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Meh.
2009 budget wasn't Obama's - it was set before he was even elected. Yes, he and his administration had some influence on it after January, but not much.
Unfortunately, that graph compares apples and oranges. Not by accident, either - it is the Washington Post after all.
If they provided CBO estimates, White House estimates, and real figures for the Bush years, we'd have genuine comparison.
For the later years - I'll guess CBO is assuming many of Obama's initiatives will be watered down and their estimates reflect that and consequently diverge significantly from those of the White House. I don't think I'd bet against CBO on that.
June 10, 2009 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why don't you go post on cnn etc.. Thank you and goodbye
June 10, 2009 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Shooter, go back to the fauxnews website. Soldiers torturing detainees is AGAINST THE LAW! Just think how stupid we look right now with the 2 American journalist being held in North Korea. Now, what would you think if they got the same treatment? What do you think those North Korean soldiers are going to do to these 2 women? Let's hope they don't torture them but, if they do, we don't have the moral ground to lecture them because WE TORTURED. Idiot!
June 9, 2009 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
That dingus, is a different argument. Here's an analogy I'm sure you can relate to. Did members of Congress declare Bush lied us into war? Well Kirk is declaring Obama is lying us into deficit spending beyond anyone's imagining.
Now which one of those is the more "treasonous"? The first, by far.
June 9, 2009 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. Elected democrats never told a foreign government that Bush lied us into war.
2. Bush DID lie us into war.
June 9, 2009 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. Are you kidding me? Democrats told the entire world Bush was lying. This took 3 seconds to find on Google.
2. No he didn't.
June 9, 2009 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess you didn't bother to Google #2.
June 9, 2009 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm still waiting for you to link to an example of an elected Democratic official saying this directly to a foreign government offical.
Where's the mushroom cloud? Where are the WMDs? Where's the Iraq/Al Queda connection? Bush DID lie.
June 9, 2009 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
That would require a Democrat to be honest about such a thing, an unlikely possibility.
June 10, 2009 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay Shooter, put up or shut up time...
Prove #2. that Bush did not lie us into war. I already have proof that he did, so I would like to to yours that he did not.
June 10, 2009 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh you have proof do you? Let's see it. As for my end, perhaps you've heard the aphorism that one cannot prove a negative?
June 10, 2009 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. this is not a statement by a dem. it is a question posed by a conservative.
2. yes he did.
June 10, 2009 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll just bet you were having fits about deficit spending while it was Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress doing it.
You didn't happen to notice when things started going in the tank, did you? Since the private sector is so thoroughly hosed that just throwing more tax breaks at them (the republican recovery plan) wouldn't cut it, it called for the only body large enough to be capable of a massive influx of funds to jump-start the economy again. Hence, the stimulus package.
It's downright hilarious to hear Republicans rant about us borrowing from China now. What do you think we've been doing for well over a decade? Where do you think the money was coming from while Cheney was declaring that deficits don't matter? The borrow-and-spend GOP didn't have a problem with it back then.
Just crawl back under the rock. If you couldn't be bothered to pay attention while the Republicans were in control, don't suddenly pop up now and act like you're on top of things.
June 9, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Nimrod, do you really have no idea how much Obama is spending? It's just amazing....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/03/21/GR2009032100104.html
Meanwhile, no matter what Bush spent, voting out a President in the middle of a war wasn't going to happen. Especially for a stiff like Kerry. Who by the way served in Vietnam. Heh.
June 9, 2009 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey numbnuts, the amount that Obama is having to spend is directly proportional to the size of the clusterfuck your pal Bush left us with.
It's huge! Hu-u-u-u-u-u-u-ge!
June 9, 2009 8:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read the front page of the NY Times today. 33% of the current deficit is Bush's fault. A whopping 7% is the fault of Obama's spending.
Krauthammer had it right... Thanks to Fox News Channel, ya'll really do have your own alternate reality.
June 10, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
The NYT? Apparently you didn't bother to click on the link to the CBO deficit graph linked to my comment. There actual Bush deficits are compared to OBAMA's own projected deficits. Two trillion in this year alone.
But hey, if you want to believe the Times instead of your own lyin' eyes, be my guest. Put your money into longterm CD's or treasuries. Heh.
June 10, 2009 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where the fuck is the democrats’outrage? If a democratic congressman did this the right would be in a all out apoplectic rage. The republicans would make this was lead story on every cable news channel. What do we get from the democrats? Absolutely nothing which is so typical of these spineless cowards
June 9, 2009 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
"because we need to build trust and confidence in our number one creditor"
How does calling the Budget Office a liar build trust and confidence?
June 9, 2009 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, this is over the line, close to treason. When are these people going to be sanctions for such treasonous conduct? This is way over the line. I will give the Republican party credit, they are keeping to their word, in that they want this administration to fail. It is not over for these people, the actions of the Republican party will get progressively worst if they are not held accountable.
June 9, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've been following and writing about Kirk's career for years. I live in his district. He does this sort of thing all the time. He loves to grandstand. Kirk views China as a good role model for the US and probably will not rest until we have the same labor conditions and salaries as their workers.
June 9, 2009 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
As Sinclair Lewis once said: "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."
June 10, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's part of the GOP's total war of insurgency. Rush and Hewitt tell their listeners to boycott GM to help Obama fail. Hold up Sotomayor until 2011. Gum everything up, then complain about how nothing gets done. They see that as a way back to power.
June 9, 2009 8:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Check out the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. It begins ...
"Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law,[...] shall not be questioned."
This is certainly an ethics violation at a minimum. I wonder if there are any statutes in force that would make it a criminal offense.
June 9, 2009 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nobody is questioning the validity of the debt just it's worth after the dollar is debased. And if this is a criminal offense there is a host of Democrats that will hang along with Kirk for similar offenses.
June 9, 2009 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
It means "questioned in court." It was just meant to end any question as to the legality of some of the laws Congress passed to fund the Civil War. According to Perry v. United States, one of the Depression era Supreme Court cases that drove FDR to push for his Court-packing plan, it also means Congress can't retroactively change the terms of government debt obligations.
It also was there to make it clear that the next clause invalidating the Confederate and Confederate states' war debt didn't apply to the debt of the federal government and the loyal states. (Which, knowing lawyers, someone would surely have tried to argue given the slightest room for doubt.)
Unfoturnately, it doesn't act as a muzzle on disloyal assholes.
June 9, 2009 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if this bozo (and Hoekstra, who ran to the press telling them all about the private hearing on torture) have ever heard the old saying: "Loose Lips Sink Ships"? They are both walking WAY over the line and I'd even say that in doing so, they are engaging in traitorous behavior!
What makes matters even worse is that despite the fact that they are purposely trying to undermine our Government - and President Obama specifically - they're both doing it without so much as a hand-slap from anyone in congress when they should be, at the very least, STRONGLY CENSURED.
As I read in today's NYT - "On On June 9, 1954, Army counsel Joseph N. Welch confronted Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy during the Senate-Army Hearings over McCarthy's attack on a member of Welch's law firm, Frederick G. Fisher. Said Welch: 'Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?'"
IMHO, both men - and any other loose-lipped pol that pulls this type of stunt - is endangering our country and if I had my way they'd be kicked out of office IMMEDIATELY!
Mr Kirk, Mr Hoekstra and the Right-Wing Nuttia:
"At long last, have you left no sense of decency"?
Apparently not!
June 9, 2009 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Republicans are forming themselves into a pretty substantial "fifth column," IMO.
June 9, 2009 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um...Mark Kirk is a reserve Navy intelligence officer. Am I the only one who thinks Mark Kirk needs to lose his security clearance for chatting up the Chinese government and telling them to ignore his own? Hell, if you think that what he talked about was technically "information relating to the national defense" (and I think that's not a difficult case to make), then Kirk could be charged with espionage under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 106a.
June 10, 2009 1:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kirk should have lost his security clearance years ago. He uses it in the district to gain trust and get votes. In a 2002 debate with his opponent, he said he had special access to information and from that had personal knowledge that there were WMD in Iraq.
June 10, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
You guys slay me. Are you prepared to apply those standards to all the Democrats who did the same to Bush? What hypocrites.
June 10, 2009 7:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
This coming from the people who went apeshit insane screaming "treason" because Nancy Pelosi covered her hair when she was visiting Muslim countries? (And just did the same when Hillary did it last week?)
June 10, 2009 9:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well then, since you've joined the chorus declaring treason, you must approve of the same being said of Pelosi when she visited the Syrian President against our President's wishes.
You are after all, doing exactly the same thing you've just criticized... So which is it? You either approve of people speaking their mind on Pelosi, or a hypocrite.
June 10, 2009 9:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi's visit to Syria is a false analogy; Kirk didn't simply visit China; or speak on behalf of regional peace, as Pelosi did; by his own account he advised China not to believe the US in economic matters. Very different situation. It's not treason though. Just a foolish partisan thing to say that will probably hurt him politically.
June 10, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you'd look upthread and see what the people you're responding to said before, instead of just at your own brilliant comments, you'd see that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
But that goes without saying, now, doesn't it?
June 10, 2009 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Fourteenth amendment proscribes Americans from questioning the validity of the national debt (i.e. suggesting to debt-holders that the obligation might not be repaid). Rep. Kirk seems to be walking pretty close to that line.
June 10, 2009 7:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Rahm is the attack dog that they say he is, this guy is in for a size 9 Gucci procto exam!
June 10, 2009 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
We need to wrachet down the treason talk. I also live in Kirk's district. We have unsuccessfully tried to get him voted out the last 2 elections. There is a core of solid Republicans here who could not allow themselves to vote for Dan Seals (African-American). I certainly hope Kirk runs for the Senate. He will lose and that will give us a chance to take the seat in the house. He is no different from most Republican politicians today. They will stick to their "philosophy" no matter how many times it is proven to be wrong. And the other part of that philosophy is, yes, the best way for their party to succeed is to do anything they can to make sure Democrats (Obama) fail, even if it means our country fails.
June 10, 2009 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stick to their philosphy or not, I'm not to sure this really isn't far from treason!
June 10, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
This "treason" talk is all wind. Were it enforceable, Michelle Bachmann would have long ago been rendered culpable, to say nothing of the recent secession talk. No, these laws are only enforced when a non-politician violates them. The Obama Justice Dept won't prosecute as it runs counter to O's bipartisan outreach program.
June 10, 2009 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
republicans are saying that Section 4 of the 14th A doesn't apply here because it was only a Civil War provision. However, I will point out that the language is:
"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."
It was the republicans who had relabeled the Iraq War an "insurrection" and that is the term used in the provision. The term "insurgent" was used to describe the Iraqis we were fighting and one of the Webster's definitions of insurgency is "an insurrection against an existing government." The debt to China we now have was for the mostpart incurred in fighting that insurrection.
No where in the Amendment does it specify the Civil War and the provision has never been repealed.
June 10, 2009 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not a Republican, I'm a Democrat. I'm also a lawyer, however, so I know that a) the Fourteenth Amendment didn't abolish the First Amendment and, b) Constitutional provisions don't mean whatever the hell someone in a political argument wants them to mean at some particular point in time just because it advances their argument of the moment. That's not how it works. That's how the people you are mad at wanted it to work when they held the reins. Please don't emulate them.
June 10, 2009 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow!!!. I wanted to report on my decision not to watch cnn (deliberate lack of capitalization), however, after seeing the report of this traitor, I will talk about cnn next. I am speechless. Would this guy have been charged with treason years ago?. I am just at a loss for words. I don't wish to be like republicanos -emphasis on the 'no', but this bum should be arrested. Period. Shocking!. I cannot even say how I truly feel. He is a traitor, and should be tried for treason.
Unto cnn. After lauding them for their comprehensive coverage of last year's election, I have stopped watching them. I woke up this morning, checked the news, and happened to check c.., of course their usual band of repugs were featured, I immediately changed the channel less I became contaminated. Join me in the boycott of any report re: repugs. cnn becoming fox lite was a punch in the gut. Can anyone recommend balanced sites, commentators I can visit and listen to. I refuse to lower my intellect to accomodate the ignorant and deceitful. Thanks for all you who post here, it a comfort to come here. Ironically I can watch faux, listen to rush limbaugh, because I expect verbal filth from this cadre, but cnn pretended to be balanced but now their colors are shining through. Wow
June 10, 2009 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now that's "appeasement". Republican hypocrisy on parade. I should stop being surprised. I will never stop being outraged.
June 10, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hopefully, he will send a bill to China for his trip and time.
I for one despise having to pay for lawmakers trips... especially when they are working for someone ELSE at the time...
On the other hand, if this meeting with Chinese leaders was at home... perhaps it is time for taxpayers to demand a refund on his salary.
In any case, Kirk should declare himself a lobbyist for a foreign nation... or be prosecuted for not doing so... IMHO
June 10, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
SO,let me be clear on something..anyone who undermines the government to another country is considered a traitor,,RIGHT?also,i am rather tired of hearing the reflubes talk nothing but what cant work..why wont they come up with something that will?and not the same ole crap?
June 10, 2009 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Textbook TREASON.
June 10, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
This man is a traitor.
June 10, 2009 11:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Imagine for just a minute that this was a Chinese representative who had come to the United States and made similar comments about China. How long after his return to China would he be thrown in jail? Would they just frog march him from the airport? If he had the intelligence of Kirk he would probably return rather than seek asylum here never suspecting what is likely in store for him. And yet for Kirk and republicans like him it's just all in a days work.
June 11, 2009 2:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Kirk, remember when our federal budget didn't even depict the cost of our wars?
Maybe you are really upset over China learning that the GOP budget under Bush was all smoke and mirrors (that's nice talk for 'lies'). Figures don't lie, but liar's can figure.
Now that our government isn't treating us all (China included) like a bunch of idiots we can finally get down to business and fix the many problems Republicans try to pretend we don't have.
June 11, 2009 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kirk was (even in 2004 when he was a US Representative) and might still be a CIA agent.
Although he was named "Agent of the Year" in 1999, he leaves this off his bio. The closest he comes to disclosing this is that he was in "Navy Intelligence." (His beard...I mean "wife" ...after serving her purpose and allowing yet another closeted gay Republican to run as a family man....is now divorced and living back around CIA headquarters)
I think the real question is why the CIA wants to undermine our relationship with China. (Why *would* an lowly Representative
be going to meet with Chinese leaders?)
The biggest propaganda lie is that Kirk is a "moderate." Huffpost calls him a "faux" moderate. Sure, he supports gay rights (he may be closeted, but not a hypocrite)...and the far right hates him for "cap and trade"....but make no mistake...he's a wing nut.
November 3, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink