A certain number of Republicans in Congress are holding up progress. They don’t seem to care about the security of regular Americans. They don’t care if what they do  or should I say what they don’t do hurts America as long as President Obama doesn’t get any credit for accomplishing anything.

To my wife they are commiting a hate crime. Disrupting Congress just because they don’t like a “black man in the White House” (GASP)! This reminds me of the way the KKK worked. It is a crime to disrupt the parts of government that are tasked with protecting America. The Republicans who don’t like “the black man” President Obama are obstructing and disrupting progress.

Or is it just politics as usual? Has there ever been a time when Congress was as disfunctional as it is today? Is Speaker Boehner a strong “leader” ? Is he even a “leader”? Is the Speaker being lead by a minority of republicans from Gerrymandered districts who are safe in obstructing since they are safe in their positions? Are these few “Whitepublicans” guilty of a hate crime? (Special thanks to Ad Lib for ‘Whitepublicans”)

I want to say here that I don’t believe all Republicans are guilty of hating President Obama. There are some who just don’t believe that the government is going in the “right” direction.

So, my question is; Is it a hate crime for them to obstructing and disrupting the Congress because they hate the President?  Let me know what you think? Lets discuss this. I honestly do think that a few of these Republicans are racists and haters.

Leave a Comment

Please Login to comment
4 Comment threads
11 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
KillgoreTroutglenngoleafsgoKalimaNirek Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Hey Nirek,

I usually don’t come to the Planet during the day, but just wanted to share my thoughts about your article. I agree with Agrippa that the republicans’ rhetoric and/or obstruction is not necessarily a hate crime. However, today, I think the republicans have crossed the line from hate crime to sedition and/or treason. With this letter that republicans have “sent” to Iran, they are blatantly saying that if a republican is elected to the Presidency in 2016, then they will “dishonor” all foreign agreements President Obama has made, specifically the one with Iran. They are subverting the President’s and the State Department’s efforts to negotiate. If that isn’t treason, I don’t know what is. Bastards, all of them!


Republicans’ Botched Iran Letter


Hey glenn. I don’t know about treason, but what the republicans in Congress have done, could surely be called sedition.

“In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.”


Hey KT–It seems republicans have been schooled:

“Asked about the open letter of 47 US Senators to Iranian leaders, the Iranian Foreign Minister, Dr. Javad Zarif, responded that “in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.

Foreign Minister Zarif added that “I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States, and the conduct of inter-state relations is governed by international law, and not by US domestic law. The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfil the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal law as justification for failure to perform their international obligations.

The Iranian Foreign Minister added that “change of administration does not in any way relieve the next administration from international obligations undertaken by its predecessor in a possible agreement about Irans peaceful nuclear program.” He continued “I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law.

He emphasized that if the current negotiation with P5+1 result in a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, it will not be a bilateral agreement between Iran and the US, but rather one that will be concluded with the participation of five other countries, including all permanent members of the Security Council, and will also be endorsed by a Security Council resolution.

Zarif expressed the hope that his comments “may enrich the knowledge of the authors to recognize that according to international law, Congress may not modify the terms of the agreement at any time as they claim, and if Congress adopts any measure to impede its implementation, it will have committed a material breach of US obligations.

The Foreign Minister also informed the authors that majority of US international agreements in recent decades are in fact what the signatories describe as “mere executive agreements” and not treaties ratified by the Senate.

He reminded them that “their letter in fact undermines the credibility of thousands of such mere executive agreements that have been or will be entered into by the US with various other governments.

Zarif concluded by stating that “the Islamic Republic of Iran has entered these negotiations in good faith and with the political will to reach an agreement, and it is imperative for our counterparts to prove similar good faith and political will in order to make an agreement possible.” From Crooks and Liars website

I think the republicans have been told in diplomatic terms that they “shit the bed”.

So, treason or sedition, whatever you call this letter of the republicans, it doesn’t help international relations. I’m hoping that the leaders of the other five countries who are negotiating with the US will also weigh in on this letter.


glen, thanks for this reply. This is a very well written letter by a professional leader who understands international politics far better than those 47 embarrassments we call congressmen.

It’s a damn shame when a foreign nation, especially one like Iran, has to school our leaders on just what their jobs entail and just what our own constitutional provisions are. This congress is truly an embarrassment to all thinking Americans.


You’re right KT–these Senators are indeed an embarrassment to our nation. It’s good to see that the foreign minister of Iran recognizes the letter for what it is–propaganda!

There is also an online petition to sign asking that treason charges be brought against these senators. If not, treason, that they be prosecuted under the Logan Act. I’m not good with links, and as I’m typing this, can’t find it anyway, but if you just google on-line petition for Iran letter, I’m sure you’ll find it.


Hello, Nirek.

That they hate the President with every fiber in their limp bodies is not in question. Neither is that they hate him because he is half black, beat them twice and they just can’t get over it.

I posted this on the 22nd of Feb, and although it’s not a “hate crime” it is a fact that two thirds of Congress are not working for the American people and therefore not doing what they are being payed to do. In any other job they would be fired, but in this case the only way to punish them is to vote them out.

Here is that article about the definition of a hate crime.


What’s the definition of a hate crime?

The FBI is investigating whether the fatal shootings of three Muslim students in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, were hate crimes. What is the definition of one and how do you prove it?


Not a hate crime at all.
I believe that it is politics as usual. They are the opposition.
They may be overdoing it; but, they are the prisoners of their passions. I am not surprised.

It is a shame that they are practicing rational problem solving. But, typically, politicians do not rationally solve problems until all other options have been exhausted. Sad, but true.


Hi Nirek. I work to end hate crimes as part of my job, and I know the terms and conditions for what those mean.

No – these people are exercising their 1st Amendment rights, however much we despise them. There is no crime at all. This is a good thing – too loose a definition of ‘hate crime’ opens every last one of us to that charge if we push hard for what we believe and stand in our policy doors to block what we hate.

Like it or not, even the RENJs have right of free expression. Without an overt act of violence or a ‘true threat’ that specifically targets the president for harm from a human actor (not God), there is no crime. There is only massive disrespect and obstruction. But that is part of the process.