who's side are these guys on?

Should be "whose."

Do we need much more proof that these right-wing lip-flappers only love their country when they're running it?

The "Rush to failure" is on

These guys want BHO to fail so badly,
they'd commit treason to make it so...

What is most important to them is that they be proven right, and the sooner the better. America sliding into from its perch atop the world would be a small price to pay for conservatives to see that Obama did not have a successful presidency, particularly after debacle of the Bush years.

If you look at The Drudge Report, you know whose side they're on. The enemy is Obama, not China, Russia, or even Iran or North Korea. Their allegiance is primarily to the Republican Party. The United States of America is an entity they may choose to secede from if paganism, socialism, or political correctness "takes over".

It's not a mystery why they do this. Their base requires a civil war or else it's no longer jazzed enough to wage jihad against all the enemies of "freedom". And while we can laugh at their hypocrisy and heavy breathing, we'd be sorely mistaken if we assume anyone besides us is expressing concern. They've been mainstreamed. That's why they can go on rampages yet scarcely anyone besides us feels compelled to make connections between their rhetoric and the murders that result from it.

the story about US dependence on China is not a breaking news thingie.

this repugnant asshat (not greta, the other one, cap'n kirk) is doing what republicans always do to gain attention -- and if their (special for you tr) lucky -- support... and that is hate and fear.

china knows its in a global lifeboat with us and can't throw us overboard. they just don't want us to always tell everybody else -- including them -- how to deal with the crisis.

I've been rooting for China to wise up and pull the plug on its Treasury purchases for years, so I can't complain too much now.

There is a certain converse logic to what they do. They don't believe in good governance. For 8 years they tried to bankrupt the government - why would they do that. The easiest answer is that they see it as the only way they will ever get rid of the social programs they hate - Social Security and Medicare. They want to eliminate those programs via any means possible. By whispering in the ears of the Chinese, is an attempt to have the Chinese stop funding the U.S. Government. Without funding the government would collapse. That is what they want.

AJLMAO, you might want to cast a glance at the NY Times today. Our biggest budget problems come from the business cycle (37%), not Obama. Most of the rest (33%) come from the drunken frat boy who was president for the previous 8 years. Obama's biggest budget problems, come from his continuation of Bush's policies (war in Iraq, some tax cuts). Yes, I am "blaming Bush", because objectively, it is his fault. We can use that information constructively, by not voting for people like Bush again (his record, pre-election, was pretty damn clear, if anyone cared to look).

Furthermore, if we were so lucky as to get universal health care, and so unlucky as to run it as inefficiently as the European country with the most expensive healthcare (Switzerland), we'd save billions of dollars -- 3 per cent of GDP (and yes, we would get better care -- average life expectancy is over two years longer there).

Why is this surprising? Greta van Susteren is a Scientologist whose husband is an advisor to Sarah Palin. There's nothing moderate or rational about her.

From the standpoint of economics or government policy, there is no point to this. However "lousy" our credit, and it really isn't, China's economic well being depends just as much on this particular relationship as ours does. The term "too big to fail" comes to mind. The Chinese may make some noise about our debt for their own purposes but they know full well that we are in a symbiotic relationship here and that the severe consequences of which you speak would be just as severe or more so for China. So, I suspect, does Kirk. So really, the sort of thing Kirk is doing here can only be for domestic consumption and can really only be intended to undermine confidence and political support for the President.

Here's the 14th amendment text: "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."

So how is this not open TREASON?

What koreyel said... Sounds like treason to me. Can we waterboard now?

Mark Kirk is the "moderate" Congressman from IL-10, which stretches along Lake Michigan from about Wilmette to the Wisconsin border. I used to live in the 10th, which has gone from a Republican district, with pockets of Democratic voters, to a largely Democratic one, giving Democratic presidential candidates the majority since 2000.

Kirk has managed to be reelected each term by proclaiming himself a "moderate". The voters seem to buy it and has returned him to Congress since his initial election to the House in 2000. Well, he voted with Bush nearly all the time, except for those votes in which his say was not needed and he could vote "moderate".

The Dems have run a wonderful candidate against him - Dan Seals - in both 2006 and 2008, but unfortunately he came up short both years.

There's hope for the future, I guess, if Kirk continues to go on flipping his mouth off....

Whose side are they on?

As any real American can tell you, the democrat party is unamerican. Therefore, it is obvious that Kirk & Greta are on our side in fighting the democrats and the Obama administration. While they may appear to you to be undercutting the United States, they actually are being pro-American by working to stop The Chosen One.

dr2chase on June 10 - You are missing a main theme here.

That is: Republicans don't care what Republicans do. Therefore, they don't care that Bush ran up $5T in debt, or lied to start a war, or outed a CIA agent, or that both McCain & Palin cheated on their spouses, or that 9/11 was on Bush's watch, or let the banks run wild, etc.

However, for anybody else - feet to the fire! So, if John Edwards cheats on his wife (or Clinton), they should be hung. Gingrich - who cheated and dumped two wives - can cheat on the third and still run as a Republican candidate for President.

So AJLMAO is saying it the way he sees it, and he has total blinders against anything that a Republican ever did. I think it's some sort of genetic defect.

I appreciate that Steve bringings these issues to our attention, but frankly the cumulative effective is taking a toll. It seems that a large chunk of American community has suddenly gone insane. There is nothing holding the dialogue together, and discussion seems futile, if one assumes that discussion serves the purpose of advancing argument and reaching consensus.

I don't watch a lot of television so I haven't bothered to spring for the cable package that includes MSNBC. So, at 9:30 when I sit down to watch a few minutes before moving on to the end of the day, these are my options: CNN, headline news, fox, and CSPAN. So, my liberal news media gives me King/Cooper, Dobbs/Grace, and Hannity/Van Sustern. They are all unwatchable. Last night Hannity had Mark Levin on the show. I watched it like a train wreck. I don't know what either of them is talking about. They live in an entirely different universe. Has anyone tried to make sense of Lou Dobbs. Forget rational, I'd settle for coherent. How am I to engage in dialogue with a version of reality that seem so dangerous and bizarre.

I visit this blog because I find Steve and Hilzoy useful sources of information and perspective. I read the comments section because there are a number of thoughtful people who frequent this site. I almost always learn something, and, frankly, the humor is rich. However, I worry (concern troll maybe) that our posts often mirror back the current state of the discourse. Maybe political bloggs are not the place for rehabiliating political dialogue, or maybe they are the perfect place, I don't know. What if we were in institute very simple parameters for discussion, like (1) no ad hominem attacks, (2) be explicit with your assumptions, and (3) adhere to the rules of logic in constructing an argument, how would that impact the comments section? I guess we'd lose some of the humor, which would be a great loss.

"China is lending us money," connotes a different relationship than, "China is buying our bonds at 3.5% interest for 30 years." But it is the second one that is reality, not the first.

What if they stop? Well, what would they buy then? Could they keep subsidizing their currency if they did stop?

What would it mean for the U.S.? Maybe higher interest rates, maybe not. 3.75, 4% interest would still be low historically. The idea that interest rates would shoot up is silly. If the U.S. is paying 6%, what would the UK be paying, 8%, Brazil 12%? Money would come out of equities and buy these bonds. China's share of all the money being saved/invested is tiny.

Kirk, apparently, believes he still works at the State Department. Another example of the down side of bi-partitanship in the the retaining of RepuG appointees. One of Bill C's mistakes in keeping this GHWB fellow. Kirk, if only, you had gone into acting as have so many of your high school alums. Geez, even the fellow who shot John Wayne, Mr Dern, would be better as a politico, than you. Now, was that really you running across the fences and lawns in "Ferris Buehler"?

This is treason absolutely and should be prosecuted as such. Yeah, I know, nothing will come of it.

Let's see. Don't buy GM and Chrysler cars because they're socialist companies. Buy Toyota and VW. Don't buy T bills and notes because they're worthless. We're the patriotic party putting America first. Got it?

C 'n C wrote:
"Do we need much more proof that these right-wing lip-flappers only love their country when they're running it?"

if you change it to:
Do we need much more proof that these right-wing lip-flappers only love their country when they're ruining it?

then it is true even when they are in the minority.

who's [sp] side are these guys on?

Their own.

-Z

who's side are these guys on?

Whose your third-grade grammar teacher? He/she's got some 'splainin' to do. ;)

"Do we need much more proof that these right-wing lip-flappers only love their country when they're running it RUNNING IT INTO THE GROUND FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CORPORATIONS?
Posted by: Cap'n Chucky on June 10, 2009 at 9:29 AM

There... I fixed your typo! :-)

Wordnet's definition of treason:
-a crime that undermines the offender's government
-disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior
-treachery: an act of deliberate betrayal

Cheney undermines the president with his calls to Israel; this clown undermines the economic well-being of the entire country; and limbaugh advocates failure of the president and preaches boycott of GM products. Don't these behaviors easily conform to items one and two and combined become item three, treachery?

Oh, for the glory days when all an average citizen - not even a political figure, mind you - had to do was visibly not go along with the government's rush to war, or publicly question the necessity, to be the immediate recipient of howls for his or her execution for, yes, treason. Oh, for the glory days when protestors were given the choice of keeping their mouths shut, or repairing to the specially-arranged "protest area" that was designed to keep them away from the media. Remember when Nancy Pelosi's simply VISITING Syria was treason? Republicans so overused the word that it began to lose all meaning, like saying "cupcakes" over and over again when you're stoned.

Apparently there's too much freedom in America. Time to trot out those old chestnuts about how freedom isn't free, and all that. Sic transit gloria mundi.

Thanks to effluviantone and goalkeeper for fixing my errors. I can always count on the Political Animal commenters to set me straight.

Sic transit gloria mundi

Who's Gloria Mundi? Or maybe: Whose Gloria Mundi?

Both compelling questions.

Sic transit gloria mundi

I didn't know Gloria was sick!

Apologies to Mel Brooks,
-Z

Well the thing is.... is the guy right? He shouldn't have said what he said, but I wonder if Geithner is feeding the Chinese a pack of lies myself. He's fed US a pack of lies make no mistake of that.

Who's Gloria Mundi?

That's who.

Zorro, @12:01

It ain't Gloria who's (whose?) sick; it be transit. An' you know why it be sick? Transit = transport. Transport = LaHood. LaHood = Republican. QED.

Several weeks ago, Matthew Yglesias' blog addressed the issue of how right-wingers can call themselves "patriots" while doing things like calling for seccession or armed insurrection. Or now, in Kirk's case, that includes going to a foreign government and undermining the government's credit and the President's authority).

Yglesias' point was that the far right sees themselves as the "true" America, and that they also see the opposition as fundamentally illegitimate (for a variety of grounds). And for that reason, it is actually patriotic for them to take extreme actions to undermine this immoral, illegitimate government (and, as collateral damage, their country) when the interlopers are running things.

I think Yglesias is on to something. This explains a lot about the current dynamic.

And ... yeah, it is absolutely astonishing to see politicians like Kirk rediscover fiscal conservatism now that Bush is out of office, after years of silence (and lockstep voting) during Bush's unparalleled deficit spending and recklessness. That's particularly evident at a moment when Kirk's party is opposing EVEN A SMALL REDUCTION IN THE RATE OF GROWTH OF THE PENTAGON'S BUDGET.

At the very least, this new concern for sudden, abrupt deficit reduction stinks of rank hypocrisy. At worst, it reinforces the idea that the GOP is using the deficit and debt as a political tool to starve the government and achieve their ideological goals through bankruptcy. Going to a foreign government and conspiring to bring the nation's finances up short is just a logical escalation.

By any means necessary, baby. By any means necessary.

Sooooo...FAUX news has become the 'goto' place when your lips start moving before your brain engages. They will try to clean up or pretend it never happened, any inane thing a GOPper says?

I hope the IL Dems have you-tubed this piece of theater, since Kirk is the only hope the republicans have of taking the Senate seat now occupied by Roland Burris. Along with his just announced divorce, these shenanigans should be widely advertised.
I must say, as a longtime observer of Mr. Kirk, this doesn't surprise me. He likes to call himself a "moderate" while supporting Bush and his Repub cronies something like 98%.

Sooooo...FAUX news has become the 'goto' place when your lips start moving before your brain engages. They will try to clean up or pretend it never happened, any inane thing a GOPper says?

I dunno....remember CBS edited a McCain interview with Katie Couric so his answers would appear less stupid.

By their policies AND their actions we can clearly see the Republican strategy. They wish to precipitate the mother of all crises here in the US, because they see it as their only hope to return to power. In short, they will cheerfully destroy this country in order to rule it.

Patrick is right. If Kirk thinks the Chinese can bring down the US by divesting themselves of US treasuries, he's both stupid and not very patriotic. The best thing to happen to the US would be having its own citizens buy treasury bonds as a savings vehicle instead of the Chinese.

If the shoe was on the other foot, the Republicans would have a field day with this kind
of news. THE REPUBLICANS SEEM THAT THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT AND NOT PAY THE PIPER.
I HAVE CALLED THE WHITE HOUSE SEVERAL TIMES TODAY, TO BRING THIS INCIDENT TO THEIR ATTENTION.
IF YOU WANT TO CALL THE WHITEHOUSE COMMENT LINE
THE NUMBER IS 202>456>1111 THE OFFICE IS OPENED FROM 9am TO 5pm. OR IF YOU WANT TO E-MAIL ITS
www.whitehouse.gov
FOX NEWS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED, ITS BECAUSE OF THEIR 24/7 OF GLO0M AND DOOM, ALONG WITH FEAR MONGERING ITS SETTING PEOPLE OFF.
THIS HATE AND FEAR MONGERING