Steve at No More Mister Nice Blog is correct- this really is astounding:
It’s McCain vs. Hastert on meaning of sacrificeA 2-month-old House-Senate standoff over the 2005 budget burst into public acrimony Wednesday, when House Speaker Dennis Hastert questioned Sen. John McCain’s credentials as a Republican and suggested that the decorated Vietnam War veteran didn’t understand the meaning of sacrifice. …
On Tuesday, McCain gave a speech excoriating both political parties for refusing to sacrifice their tax cutting and spending agendas in a time of war. At the Capitol on Wednesday, Hastert shot back: “If you want to see sacrifice, John McCain ought to visit our young men and women at Walter Reed (Army Medical Center) and Bethesda (Naval Hospital). There’s the sacrifice in this country.” …
First: Hastert isn’t making sense. McCain is not asking for cuts in the military budget. He’s asking for legislators to put their other legislative wishes, specifically tax cuts and new spending, on hold in response to the deficit. Hastert seems to think that the federal government has no obligation to balance revenues and expenditures, as long as he can point to the existence of wounded soldiers.
If Hastert believes what he’s saying, he should quit his post and go write for the Wall Street Journal editorial page. He certainly has no business in my government.
Second: I’m not the first, and I won’t be the last, to read this and say, “McCain spent five and a half years in a Viet Cong prisoner of war camp. Where the hell does Hastert get off lecturing him on sacrifice?”
Third: Why are the grown-ups in the Republican party the ones who get spanked?
UPDATE: Digby has a little more on the man being lectured on “sacrifice”.
I often have wondered whether there is a divide between the “War” Republicans on the one hand — those who have served in actual wars like Bush I, McCain, Bob Dole, Colin Powell — and “non-War” Republicans — those who never actually fought, like Bush II, Reagan, Hastert, DeLay, Santorum, Cheney, Ashcroft.
I don’t know if fighting in war moderates your ideology, or if there are “character” issues involved in chosing to not avoid military service, but a Republican party dominated by the first group would be a valuable opposition voice in politics, while a Republican party dominated by the second is just scary.
Was Hastert implying that the sacrifice of the military makes it unnecessary for anybody else to sacrifice something?
McCain advocating a restrained and responsible course of action represents a serious threat to politicians who have lived in neocon fantasy-land for the past three years. Hastert’s nonsensical criticism adds to the growing mountain of evidence that the wheels are off the Republican wagon.
Richard, I have a feeling that you weren’t an avid supporter of Bush I or Dole. Further, I’m not sure what the groups you’ve lumped together are supposed to represent. Hastert is a conventional Illinois Republican—he’s not a movement conservative. DeLay is fiercely partisan, but has rather ill-defined views on foreign policy, and the views he has take second place to his partisanship. That’s why he opposed Clinton’s many military adventures. On the other side, McCain doesn’t have much in common with Powell. McCain is socially conservative, while Powell is not, and McCain favors a much more robust and interventionist foreign policy than Powell. I could go on, but I think you can take the point.
The difference is one of character. If McCain or Dole or Bush I had an objection to something, I’d consider their position before making a decision. If Hastert or DeLay or Santorum had an objection, I wouldn’t.
Yeah, I think Hastert’s comments are disgraceful, but he doesn’t care what I think. His words were directed at ‘his’ people in the House— the translation is ‘If I see any of you acting like this, you’re dead meat’.
The remark is silly, but it’s worth noting that if McCain had, over the years, exibited some of that passion for Republican causes, instead of being the Republican who made so many Democratic initiatives “bipartisan”, he might have a bit more pull with his own party.
And not trying to win the nomination with crossover votes would have helped, too.
And not trying to win the nomination with crossover votes would have helped, too.
You mean, by trying to draw non-republicans into the party he lost cred with the party? All the Demo voters I know who cross-over do so to sink the Republicans (by voting for nutters like Buchanan and, for some, Bush II). McCain-voting Democrats were voting for the nominee most likely to defeat whoever their party nominated. (imagine McCain versus Gore in 2000). Those Republicans who hold this, in any way, against McCain deserve his and our contempt.
Silly? I think the word you’re looking for is “disgusting”.
“Second: I’m not the first, and I won’t be the last, to read this and say, “McCain spent five and a half years in a Viet Cong prisoner of war camp. Where the hell does Hastert get off lecturing him on sacrifice?””
Because that’s the current state of the GOP. And because this will cause Hastert exactly 0 problems.
If it were a Democrat saying that, of course, the Democrat would get roasted.
“Third: Why are the grown-ups in the Republican party the ones who get spanked? “
Because that’s the current state of the GOP. It’s like some SF book I read once, where, when somebody turned 30, they lost all civil rights, and were tossed out into the streets.
Hastert is just pissed about not getting his $1.5 billion worth of highway money for his district.
He could give a shit about anything else.
Brett, why is it worth noting? The comment would have been equally disgraceful if it had been directed against a Democrat who spent 5 1/2 years in the Hanoi Hilton.
In any case, McCain has voted with Republicans quite a lot. If you look at the Poole-Rosenthal D-NOMINATE scores McCain is well within the Republicans. (That’s a fancy way of saying, statistical analysis shows McCain votes with Republicans more than with Democrats.)
I think what Brett is trying to say is that when you’re a Jet, you’re a Jet all the way.
What Matt said. McCain consistently has a pretty conservative voting record. He’s as likely to part ways with Republicans for conservative reasons as he is for moderate reasons.
In any event, what McCain said is just wrong. The fact that there is a war on may require sacrifice, but that’s not what McCain is calling for. Rather, he’s suggesting that Republicans and Democrats should sacrifice their tax and spending plans because of the war; McCain, on the other hand, will not sacrifice his tax and spending plans. Instead, the war justifies his tax and spending plans.
Thomas, WTF? Don’t you think that McCain would like a lower deficit than he’s going to get, given that there’s a war on?
Listen. If you want to be in the Judaean People’s Front, you’ve got to REALLY hate the Romans.
I’d note that that’s Brett’s basic point, but I’m truly not interested in a reply from Brett.
Matt, no I don’t. McCain favors a balanced budget in peacetime and in wartime, and he doesn’t much care whether the budget is balanced through spending cuts or tax increases. His calling for sacrifice in time of war isn’t something new; he’s also in favor of sacrifice (higher taxes or lower spending, or both) in peacetime. The only one who doesn’t have to suffer in war in the McCain scenario is John McCain. Republicans give up taxes, Democrats give up spending, and McCain gets the budget balance that he wants in peacetime as in war. Why is that a heroic position?
Harry, you may think that Democrats’ motives in crossing over to vote for McCain were pure, but Republicans think that they’re entitled to chose their OWN nominee, thank you.
And a player can have a darned good record, and still be looked at askance if he’s got a habit of kicking the ball through the wrong goalpost when the game is important. McCain, justly or unjustly, isn’t known for all those little loyal votes, he’s known for the big issues like campaign finance deform, where he champions the OTHER side’s cause.
And if you want your opinion to carry weight within your party, you don’t do things like that. Hastert’s langage was badly chosen, his attitude a perfectly predictable consequence of McCain’s own choices.
Thomas—
That would be an absolutely brilliant point if McCain were proposing to balance the budget. If McCain is proposing anything short of a balanced budget, then he’s sacrificing what you say is his own agenda because of the war.
Brett—
I owe you an apology; I thought your comments were directed toward Hastert’s “sacrifice” comment, but clearly they were directed toward the “Is he a Republican?” comment. I have no real problem with the GOP trying to define its own membership. In fact I encourage you to drive McCain out. :-) (The apology is sincere, though.)
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review