Eric Cantor's Pledge of Allegiance...

[tmthforu94]

There's nothing treasonous about what Cantor said, and it's hilarious that some people think it is.

[Free Palestine]

There's nothing treasonous about what Cantor said, and it's hilarious that some people think it is.

It is however, pretty terrible when a politician says he will support the interests of a foreign country over those of his own country.

The only reason people like Rahm Emmanuel or Eric Cantor are involved in American government, is because they can do a lot more for Israel by getting into elected office here, than they can by moving there.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Just imagine a Democrat saying that he will support France's or Germany's interests over those of the US.
Treason would be the least of the accusations hurled against him.

[Torie]

I think Cantor is dead wrong, but what he said was clearly within the bounds of accepted discourse.  (See American politicians openly siding with Britain before US involvement in both World Wars).

A more apt analogy perhaps, would be a politician saying that Roosevelt should have done lend lease with the Nazi's rather than the Brits, perhaps. Yes, that is not treasonous either, and no, I am not comparing Israel to the Nazis. I don't think anyone per se complains about loyalty, where the assertion is that we should take a side in some foreign conflict, rather than not.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I think Cantor is dead wrong, but what he said was clearly within the bounds of accepted discourse.  (See American politicians openly siding with Britain before US involvement in both World Wars).

And what about American politicians siding with Nazi Germany over the U.S.? You would have been okay with them?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

There's nothing treasonous about what Cantor said, and it's hilarious that some people think it is.

It is however, pretty terrible when a politician says he will support the interests of a foreign country over those of his own country.

The only reason people like Rahm Emmanuel or Eric Cantor are involved in American government, is because they can do a lot more for Israel by getting into elected office here, than they can by moving there.

that's not what Cantor said. that part was Greenwald's spin.   

[tpfkaw]

I am not a fan of Israeli policies at all, nor am I at all in favor of the neoconservative/US policy position regarding Israel, but I'll have to defend Cantor on this one.  Criticizing the President's foreign policy is not in any way, shape, or form "treason."  For the record, Cantor was wrong about Pelosi as well.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Criticizing your government politics is one, but I think, while I wouldn't call it a "treason", disawoving your govermnent in favor of foreign country, no matter what foreign country, interests, is out of the line.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

There's nothing treasonous about what Cantor said, and it's hilarious that some people think it is.

It is however, pretty terrible when a politician says he will support the interests of a foreign country over those of his own country.

The only reason people like Rahm Emmanuel or Eric Cantor are involved in American government, is because they can do a lot more for Israel by getting into elected office here, than they can by moving there.

that's not what Cantor said. that part was Greenwald's spin.   

Cantor's record of putting Israel over American interests speaks for itself. As do Obama's, Pelosi's, and 99% of Congresscritters' records.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Criticizing your government politics is one, but I think, while I wouldn't call it a "treason", disawoving your govermnent in favor of foreign country, no matter what foreign country, interests, is out of the line.

isn't Eric Cantor also a part of the government?

[Badger]

Eric Cantor's Pledge of Allegiance

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I've highlighted the more important section here that everyone is overlooking. Let's not wrongly soft sell this, people: Treason may be a little strong a term, but Cantor's statement here is still genuinely unprecedented.

[Franzl]

Criticizing your government politics is one, but I think, while I wouldn't call it a "treason", disawoving your govermnent in favor of foreign country, no matter what foreign country, interests, is out of the line.

isn't Eric Cantor also a part of the government?

no

[SvenssonRS]

I have to agree with about 75% of this thread. Cantor is insane to have actually admitted that.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Criticizing your government politics is one, but I think, while I wouldn't call it a "treason", disawoving your govermnent in favor of foreign country, no matter what foreign country, interests, is out of the line.

isn't Eric Cantor also a part of the government?

I mean executive, that is actually conducting a foreign policy.

For my European brain government equals cabinet

[cannonia]

The antisemitism here is quite disturbing.

Stop debasing that term. It's insulting.

If the shoe fits...

[Хahar 🤔]

The antisemitism here is quite disturbing.

Stop debasing that term. It's insulting.

If the shoe fits...

Again, that's insulting to the victims of actual anti-Semitism.

[Free Palestine]

The antisemitism here is quite disturbing.

Stop debasing that term. It's insulting.

If the shoe fits...

Again, that's insulting to the victims of actual anti-Semitism.

Plus it's just stupid and in some cases, hypocritical.  Pretty much every hyper-Zionist I've met on the Internet will whine about antisemitism while referring to Muslims as dogs.

[cannonia]

The antisemitism here is quite disturbing.

Stop debasing that term. It's insulting.

If the shoe fits...

Again, that's insulting to the victims of actual anti-Semitism.

If I ask you your definition of antisemitism, will you bring your bias further into view?

[Torie]

Eric Cantor's Pledge of Allegiance

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I've highlighted the more important section here that everyone is overlooking. Let's not wrongly soft sell this, people: Treason may be a little strong a term, but Cantor's statement here is still genuinely unprecedented.

I don't consider that inappropriate. If the Clinton administration, had taken the side of the Serbs in the Bosnian and Kosovo conflicts, I would be telling the Croats and Muslims in the two theaters exactly the same thing. It is our right as Americans, and it isn't treason, or in my opinion, in any way execrable. And yes, again, I don't agree with Cantor's opinion, but I don't consider it offensive beyond being wrong headed.

Who disagrees with my statement in the above paragraph again?

[Хahar 🤔]

The antisemitism here is quite disturbing.

Stop debasing that term. It's insulting.

If the shoe fits...

Again, that's insulting to the victims of actual anti-Semitism.

If I ask you your definition of antisemitism, will you bring your bias further into view?

My bias in favor of accurate terminology and respect for the persecuted? Perhaps.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I don't consider that inappropriate. If the Clinton administration, had taken the side of the Serbs in the Bosnian and Kosovo conflicts, I would be telling the Croats and Muslims in the two theaters exactly the same thing. It is our right as Americans, and it isn't treason, or in my opinion, in any way execrable. And yes, again, I don't agree with Cantor's opinion, but I don't consider it offensive beyond being wrong headed.

Who disagrees with my statement in the above paragraph again?

I do. You can disagree with your government's positions but to actively promote another country's interests over your own's, that goes way too far over the limits of acceptable political behavior. If you want to do that then resign and become a lobbyist.

Not to mention how the Republicans treated anybody who simply disagreed with the Iraq War a few years ago.

[bgwah]

The antisemitism here is quite disturbing.

What antisemitism?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I do. You can disagree with your government's positions but to actively promote another country's interests over your own's, that goes way too far over the limits of acceptable political behavior. If you want to do that then resign and become a lobbyist.

I suspect that Cantor would see it as backing the interests of another country over the policies of the government of his. The distinction is quite important. To use a British example, back when the issues surrounding Northern Ireland were contentious almost all Labour MPs had Nationalist sympathies and a large minority were supportive of the Republican cause, including Kinnock's Northern Ireland spokeman Kevin McNamara. Appropriate to wheel out the t-word? And that's before we even begin to touch more obvious colonial/decolonisaton issues. Absolute loyalty to the foreign policy of the government of the day is absolutely not a requirement of acceptable political behavior. That Cantor presumably took a different line over Iraq and so on isn't relevant because this isn't really about him or his silly statement.

[MODU]

Eric Cantor's Pledge of Allegiance

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I've highlighted the more important section here that everyone is overlooking. Let's not wrongly soft sell this, people: Treason may be a little strong a term, but Cantor's statement here is still genuinely unprecedented.

Comparing what Kampeas said to what is quoted by Cantor of saying, the two don’t match up.  Kampeas says “I can't remember an opposition leader telling a foreign leader, in a personal meeting, that he would side, as a policy, with that leader against the president. “  In the provided Cantor quote, no where does it say that he would stand against the President.  It simply says, “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other.”  This is the same line of thought used by many politicians and Presidents over the years.


I’ve surfed through all the links in the article and haven’t found one that leads to the original statement from Cantors office to find the full quote, but rather the same segment cited over and over through Salon, Think Progress, Politico, and more.  Makes it hard to find the full content and context of the quote.  If you’ve got a link, please share.

[milhouse24]

Isn't Cantor driven by personal religious reasons, and hiding behind the GOP as the excuse to "balance the 2 party rule"
It seems similar to Lieberman's independence based on his religious beliefs, and thus his conflict with the Democratic party.
But I suppose some politicians put their religion and religious beliefs above the constitution or the president, and some say we have "separation of church and state"