Props to one of my senators, John Cornyn, for putting this forward. Also, props to him for the earlier incident where he verbally pwnt McCain.

Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? Quam diu etiam furor iste tuus nos eludet?

When those 25 democrats start selling arms and state secrets to al-Qaeda, we can talk. So long as they're voting legitimately in ways you disapprove of or verbally condemn the war, um, that's not actually treason. I'm sure some new version of the Patriot Act will make sure that it is within a few years, but for now it's just A Political Stance That You Don't Approve Of.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte

Ooooooh, wikipedia! How long did that take you?

If we are using this phrase - "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." - as a jumping off point, the simple problem is that the Democrats' actions and voting records have not actively done any of those things, they simply conflict with your idea of what is good for the country. As I said, until arms and intelligence are being sold to AQ (that's what I call "Reagan-style Treason") you might want to use a less provocative term. Really, it's on par with "Bush lied and should be impeached."

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte

This "aid and comfort to the enemy" nonsense has been spewed since the protests that took place before we even invaded Iraq. It basically boils down to "if you oppose the war in any way, it's like joining the opposition." It's a cheap political enthymeme and smacks of the kind of shameful behavior that US citizens perpetuated against war objectors at the time of WWI.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte

Germany did declare war on us first. But, to Jason C and his ilk, we should have let them attack us first, just to make it fair.

When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.

JC,

Good to see you here again. Hope all is well.

I'm going to play Switzerland here, and say I see both sides. First, I believe the outrage on the right concerning this issue is genuine, understandable, and deserving. This was, indeed, a disgraceful ad disgracefully timed.

Furthermore, any Senator that voted for Petraeus's appointment who subsequently voted against this amendment is a hypocrite, and a political opportunist. Maybe chief amongst them is Hillary who not only voted for the war and all the funding resolutions, but also supported Petraeus's appointment. As everything she does is a political calculus, and her husband was certainly involved in this vote, they've clearly concluded that in order for her to win the White House, she must be an anti-war candidate. Sadly, few on the left and in the media assuming there's a difference are insulted by this hypocrisy.

On the other hand, I don't feel it was treason for folks to vote against this amendment inasmuch as it did include language condemning MoveOn's ad. If this was just about a show of support for Petraeus, I might feel differently, especially towards those who voted for his appointment. However, given the language concerning MoveOn, one could say that a Yea vote goes against freedom of speech.

Sure, that might be a stretch. However, this is America, and MoveOn is entitled to publish such an ad, no matter how disgraceful. Did this ad rise to the level of treason? As much as I hate this group, and this ad, I don't think so. As a result, Senators voting not to condemn the ad are similarly not committing treason. They should be ashamed of themselves for not supporting a General who won his appointment without one dissenting vote. But treason? I'm not sure I'm there. FWIW. ns

I dont think she has a Boxer mentality.She is more a liberal where Boxer is left wing.There is a difference.

You're partially correct. The only two Senators who have been in DC longer than Dan are Sheets Byrd and Chappaquidick Fats. Dan was my Senator when I lived in Hawaii 44 years ago. In fact, he more than anyone else was responsible for Hawaii becoming the 50th State.

Dan's real disease, however, is home-grown. Hawaii has descended into a liberal cesspool over the past 40+ years that the Dems have been in total control. They can count among their "achievements" one of the worst "Ice" epidemics on the planet, due to their ultra-liberal state Supreme Court. Ice-related crimes are rampant-when I was back there for a visit a few years ago, a military guy who was minding his own business on one of the beaches jumped into the surf to rescue someone in danger of drowning, and when he got back to shore he found out that he was rewarded for his bravery by having everything he had with him on the beach stolen while he was doing the rescue.

Political corruption in the state has also been rife for decades, and the public education system there these days is a joke, with some of the lowest test scores in the US. The elementary school I went to in the 1960s didn't look like it had been painted since I left, and in fact during our visit they had to close several classrooms as the ceilings, which hadn't been maintained since the school was built in the 1950s, were collapsing on the kids.

Any wonder Dan has lost it?