What about it? As I have noted in the post above the Democrats have a long history of doing the very same thing apparently without consequences.

Like the old saying goes, "If it weren't for double standards, the left wouldn't have standards".

You know I'm quite sure you can replace "left" with almost anything - including but not limited to "right"...

Some of them sound shady. I'll have too look into those incidents using a source that isn't absurdly biased.

But just on the face of it, there are some obvious key differences.

According to the reporting of your wonderful Washington Examiner, a grand total of 15 Democratic senators and reps were involved in incidents, along with 1 ex-president who was then a private citizen. Only 2 of those incidents seem to reach the level of mendacity that your beloved Republicans just pulled - the visit to Iraq in 2002, and Ted Kennedy's shenanigans in 1983. So that involves a grand total of 4 people over a span of 20 years.

Did any of those incidents take place during negotiations with the country they affected? Apparently not.

Did any of those incidents take place a week after the party of those involved in the incidents broke diplomatic, procedural and ethical norms by inviting the controversial leader of a country with an interest in the then current negotiations to speak before Congress just before his election? Nope.

Did any of those incidents involve not just a few idiots, but almost the entire caucus of the instigators' party in the Senate signing a letter deliberately designed to harm delicate, critical negotiations with another country going on at the time? NOPE.

Not just one or two, but 47 SENATORS from your party just committed a crime, the future effects of which are anyone's guess, and you don't care? You'd rather point to events that happened 13 years ago at the latest, which were kind of similar but not really, just to score some points, just to try and draw attention away from the giant SNAFU that your party just pulled RIGHT NOW? Where is your outrage? Oh, that's right, you don't have any, because the fools behind this debacle have Rs next to their names.

They did not commit a crime! Get that through your head. Wishing otherwise just won't make it so no matter how hard you try.

I guess they were fortunate enough, with the exception of Pelosi, to do it before the age of the internet. Also, four out of the five incidents in the article were by individuals rather than a group, Pelosi, Carter, Bonior and Kennedy.
Honestly, I think that if they break a rule then they should be punished and I really don't care what political affiliation they are. I wasn't aware of the rule in particular until earlier today, I'm not an expert on US law, but indeed two wrongs do not make a right, and if that would mean fining the individuals involved in breaking this law who are still alive today and collecting it in back payments...well, it might go some of the way to paying off the US debt, might it not? :O::03::haha:

You've been shown the statute and the case law. Who knows, maybe it's never enforced. That doesn't mean that it's not a crime. Get that through your head, as wishing otherwise won't make it so no matter how hard you try.

And regardless of whether it's legal or illegal, it's plainly despicable.

This wasn't done just by the Louie Ghomerts of your party, men who would have difficulty finding the US on a map, let alone Iran. This was done by almost all your senators, people who should know better. But you're perfectly fine with it - it somehow isn't wrong because its your party that's at fault. And that's just sad.

So you claim but the law does not and cannot make free speech illegal therefore the members of the United States Congress have the right to speak to anyone just like you or me.

BTW I am not and never have been a Republican or a member of any political party. I vote for whoever I think is the least likely to promote the nanny state or try and limit my rights as a citizen regardless of their party affiliation. Can you say the same?

Oh and you might want to read the actual letter rather than just the Politico talking points. Nowhere in there do they try to negotiate anything just remind them that no agreement is lasting without their approval.

Easy:

If "the right" does it, it is patriotic.
If "the left" does the same, it is treason.

There can be only black, and white.
A little media information helps the good cause, of course :03:

Eff it.... I'm moving to Denmark.

Before Denmark moves to you!

http://vikings.history.co.uk/wp-cont...5872_still.jpg

Please, yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Or publish confidential military secrets on your blog. Then claim that it's cool because of free speech, and see how far that gets you in court. Please, try. Just don't forget your Subsim login so you can reply to this thread once you get out on good behavior.

Obviously free speech is limited by law. And you're contradicting yourself anyway - a lot if not all of the incidents that involved Democrats that you just cited are also examples of the exercise of free speech, and should be protected by your logic. Unless free speech only applies to Republicans, that is.

When was the last time you voted for a Democrat in a national election? Please tell me.

And no, I can't say the same. I tend to vote for whoever is least likely to turn America into a theocracy, for whoever actually understands and supports science, and for whoever is against using Bronze Age dogma to determine social policy.

And I have read the letter. Please read the relevant section of the Logan Act again, and tell me how the letter is not a clear violation of the law.

I cited those examples because the Democrats are claiming that what the Republicans did was unprecedented. Obviously that was yet another Democrat falsehood in a long list of them.

Is the 2012 election good enough for you? And why do you limit it to national elections? Are local office republicans somehow less evil to you?

Of course you do. Personally I think voting for individuals is far smarter and more healthy for the republic than voting any silly party line.

For one thing because they're not negotiating anything. Show me where they made any proposals. Show me where they made any demands. All they did was inform the Iranians of how the law works in this country. Dumb? Yeah probably, but illegal? Not a chance.

Now correct me if i'm wrong but it sounds to me like you're claiming that only the sitting president is allowed to have any communication at all with any foreign dignitary. Sorry but that is just not the case. Either what those Dems did was just as illegal or none of it is illegal. End of story.

And to a leftist like you it's the exact opposite:

If "the left" does it, it is patriotic.
If "the right" does the same, it is treason.

What's your point?

Uhh, it is unprecedented. As I have already explained, none of those instances involved almost half the Senate trying to hamper important negotiations going on with an important adversary. Rather a material difference, I should say.


:roll: On the local level, the party identification of candidates is much less meaningful than on the national level.

:/\\!! The Logan Act, for the millionth time:

Show me where it says that proposals or demands have to be made to run afoul of this law.

Read the act, it's pretty clear. Does it say that? No, it says that unauthorized Americans cannot contact foreign governments to influence them in regards to disputes with the US, or to defeat measures taken by the US. You can't honestly say that the letter did not do exactly that. End of story.