Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Appreciating John McCain
For many years, conservatives were ideological zealots. Like Spanish inquisitors, they were on guard for the slightest indications of heresy. Talk radio gurus in particular were punctilious keepers of the flame. If a Republican figure was thought to be “squishy” on any matter – guns, spending, immigration, or anything else – he or she was reviled. Jim DeMint, the former South Carolina senator who headed the Heritage Foundation for a time, said in 2009 that he’d rather have 30 conservative purists in the senate than 60 Republicans of varying hues.
Now the Republican Party is led by a man who donated to Democrats, promised never to reform entitlements, insisted more than once that we should “take the oil” from the Middle East, and spewed more apostasy in five minutes than most Republicans could manage in a lifetime. Accordingly, we are told that personality is more important than substance.
I still care a great deal about substance, but character more. Before too long, many Americans may conclude that we need dull competence in public life and particularly in government. The spirit of President Calvin Coolidge would be salutary. He was laconic even by the standards of the early 20th century, but when he spoke or wrote, it was after thinking. He observed about politicians that:
The political mind is the product of men in public life who have been twice spoiled. They have been spoiled with praise and they have been spoiled with abuse. With them nothing is natural, everything is artificial. They live in an artificial atmosphere of adulation, which sooner or later impairs their judgment.
He was wry. “What I have ever been able to do has been the result of first learning how to do it. I am not gifted with intuition. I need not only hard work but experience to be ready to solve problems.” Quaint, right?
On the subject of character, this seems a good time to praise John McCain. McCain is one of those Republican Party squishes whose lily liver — or something – supposedly drove heaps of disgusted voters to choose a reality TV star. Being human, McCain isn’t perfect. Being a politician, he has compromised and trimmed many times. But his courage and dignity are magnificent things to behold.
I have no idea how McCain will vote on the latest Obamacare modification bill. But when it comes to human rights, the Arizona senator has always been stalwart. When Bill Browder knocked on his door looking for justice for the murdered Sergei Magnitsky, McCain didn’t hesitate. He became one of the first sponsors of the Magnitsky Act. When Secretary of State Rex Tillerson intimated that human rights were all very well, but henceforth America’s foreign policy would be based on hard-headed self-interest and realism, McCain fired off a passionate defense of human rights, denying that they are in conflict with our interests.
I consider myself a realist. What I’ve learned is that it is foolish to view realism and idealism as incompatible. In the real world, as lived and experienced by real people, the demand for human rights and dignity, the longing for liberty and justice and opportunity, the hatred of oppression and corruption and cruelty is reality. By denying this experience, we deny the aspirations of billions of people, and invite their enduring resentment.
McCain, who has already survived melanoma, is now undergoing treatment for an aggressive brain tumor. Within days of receiving the devastating diagnosis, he was thanking well-wishers and quipping that “Even those that want me to die don’t want me to die right away, so that’s good.” Who is that droll in the face of such news?
In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, McCain demonstrated that same spirit – a blend of grace and impishness all his own. There were two ways of dealing with challenges like this, he reflected, and one was “to celebrate” (he didn’t say what the other was). “I am able to celebrate a wonderful life and I will be grateful for whatever additional time I have.” He quoted a playwright who said he knew that no one was immortal but always hoped there would be one exception. He was optimistic about his treatment so far, pausing to praise the doctors, nurses, and others who had, he winked, “inflicted so much pain on me,” but acknowledged that he was facing a “vicious form of cancer.” He would do everything possible to fight it, but “every life has to end one way or another.” How did he wish to be remembered? “He served his country.”
Did he ever. He flew combat missions, endured years of torture and refused early release that would have placed him ahead of others captured before him, spoke up for prisoners, refugees, freedom fighters, the American military, and American values. He does us proud to this day. This is American greatness.
Published in Politics
In your opinion.
In my opinion it deserves More vitriol than has been served up here. Attacks on the first amendment and campaign speech strike at the very foundation of our governing process.
He didn’t see it that way. He was wrong. But it does not make a him a bad person. Even Feingold is not a bad person. He is just wrong most of the time. Why you can’t see that is beyond me. Life is about more than politics. Listen, I am not going around and around with somebody who can’t see beyond his obsessions! And for your information, you based-on-hate opinion is not better than mine. you are apparently into solipsism: Whatever you think is the only thing that matters!
That, however, doesn’t have much to do with how well one does in combat. In fact, the last-place graduates at Annapolis, the “goats”, have a pretty illustrious combat record. But in everything I’ve read about combat, and in talking to combat veterans, one point gets made a lot: you can do everything right and still get killed or wounded. I’ll leave it to actual combat vets here to comment on that, if they like.
There is some dispute of those assertions.
This is hard to know. What we do know is that the North Vietnamese offered him his freedom early on in his captivity and he rejected it, keeping faith with his fellow POWs, and earning himself five more years of torture and hardship. If that isn’t heroic to you, then our definition of heroism is very different.
I certainly am. Did you ready my original comments about him? I think he’s a terrible Senator. But again, it’s not necessary to denigrate his legitimate heroism in order to judge him harshly as a politician.
*In the global sense, meaning anyone who serves under combat arms.
And today he killed maybe the last chance to chip away at Obamacare this year.
Damn it!
I want to congratulate you, Archie. You and I may differ on his record as a Senator – that is what a good debate is all about. But, as distinct from many others on this thread, you will not denigrate his record as a warrior. This speaks well of you. This man was willing to lay down his life for his country. And yet, because of blind hatred, from people who I am not sure could or would do the things he has done, he is subjected on this thread to the vilest vitriol. It is truly stunning!
I’m looking at Mona Charen’s Twitter page. I guess she’s going to pretend that today’s events didn’t happen.
Jimmy Kimmel: “Thank you, @SenJohnMcCain for being a hero again and again and now AGAIN.”
All the big conservatives are speaking out on behalf of John McCain.
If you think what you’ve seen on this thread constitutes “the vilest vitriol”, I’d advise you to never sneak a peak at Twitter.
for Heaven’s sake, I’ve seen Twitter. They even keep the four letter words in. It too is vile. How in the world does that justify this thread?
Monynihan was right. We have truly Defined Deviancy Down. You are excusing this display because Twitter is worse! If this continues, there is no Hope!!!!!!!!!
Off topic of Deviancy but I am curious on your thoughts about today’s news that McCain will again vote against health insurance reform?
Dissonance!!!
New comment as an update to old comment #28 – no kudos to John McCain here – he, and the rest of the ingrained, entrenched, crusty, decaying, swamp- dwelling, rusty, no-results oriented remains of the Republican Party proved that being given both houses, a majority, the presidency, and positions of power even during the last administration, that they are ineffective to accomplish the will of the people – ObamaCare remains and the State of Arizona can thank John McCain for that while they eat dog food for dinner to pay their premiums.
He was wrong, in my judgement. This isn’t the best bill, but it fulfills the requirements of Federalism, which he ought to be for.
His complaint is sound, actually, but he is picking the wrong topic. The Democrats are the ones refusing to compromise. In an ideal world, we need bipartisanship. But they are the ones fighting it.
This does not detract from my gripe: This is no reason to hate him so. The man is dying! He has served our country well, because he loves it. There are people, supposedly on are side, who wish him dead. That is an outrage!!
Nah. Not so outrageous.
I’m paying more than $1200/month in medical insurance with a $3000 deductible while people who have made really bad decisions throughout their lives get it nearly for free. My family is facing chronic imminent hunger and destitution and McCain doesn’t care. He wants attention. A pox on him.
Well if nothing else one can certainly appreciate your careful and well thought out consideration of the matter Mr. Townsend. Thank you for your response.
Destiution? Imminent Hunger? McCain doesn’t care?
Nice to be in a room full of grown-ups! I am leaving before this mind-numbering, adolescent idiocy starts an epidemic!!
Thank you very much! Can we clone you?
Explain how I was reading anyone’s mind…? I merely pointed out that he didn’t SEEM to want to win, and that’s based on his actions, not any thoughts that you claim I’m trying to read.
I think history is on my side on the 2008 campaign run by McCain and his crew, it was a train wreck which in turn brought us Obama and the cascade of failure that followed. Another notch on a long and growing idiot stick for the good Senator from AZ, and just to be clear I voted for the guy in ’08.
Nearly vomit inducing…
I could be wrong, but I read that as sarcasm…
BTW, You ought to check out this post on the quality of Mr. McCain’s sense of humor.
http://ricochet.com/456982/mark-steyn-eviscerates-john-mccain-an-oldie-but-goodie/
You could very well be right. I did think of that. But I prefer to think more positively of people. Of course, being a participant in this thread has made me realize that my usual warm feelings about people have taken a decidedly wrong turn!
If these people (many of them anyway) are representative of what we have walking around nowadays, Heaven help humanity!!
You are correct. But the point was not to denigrate or humiliate, but was instead a prod for others to seek knowledge.
McCain the hero, who endured that torture and suffered that punishment. That was a man who never made it out out of Vietnam. He died there.
The person who came back wants his cut, his wife was a cripple who supported him for years? To hell with that, time for a new trophy wife with a bag of cash. Make a promise one day and say something entirely different the next? Who cares?
The guy suffered and paid his dues, what he want’s now is payback. Everyone owes him. His legislative history indicates almost nothing worthy of praise as opposed to opportunism.
You can either find a lesson in there or not, that’s entirely up to you.
Moderator Note:
Please review Ricochet's CoC to appreciate the difference between attacking public figures and attacking fellow members – http://ricochet.com/code-conduct/[Redacted.]
what about them attacking me, as in when this person writes this: You can either find a lesson in there or not, that’s entirely up to you.
Who the devil is he to imply he can teach me anything?
Also: I never got the answer to a question I posed to one of the moderators: What is the moral distinction between attacking a public figure, or a Ricochet member? I can see one difference: We pay you to belong, and they don’t! We are all God’s children. To say it is okay to attack a public figure, when he isn’t attacking you, should be a violation of a Human being’s Code of Conduct!
If I may, I’d like to make a further comment about this statement:
I believe the second sentence is immoral, and completely contradicts the first. Nothing was said about this thread until I called one of the members arrogant. In one of my earlier comments I had stated that I know of people who wish John McCain dead, and that is outrageous. Next thing I know someone is saying to me, “Nah. Not so outrageous.” Forgive me for being argumentative? But I believe that wishing someone dead is just a tad worse than calling someone arrogant!! I would humbly ask the founders of Ricochet to change the Code of Conduct, to better adhere to the decency we need to expect from a site like Ricochet.
I just wrote a piece, for the entertainment section, about the old TV show My Three Sons. I love Ricochet. It is not only a place for reasoned debate about issues, but a place to come to to post fond memories. It is wonderful, and I congratulate the Founders, and everyone else who helps to keep it alive. But it will be made better if you disallow the meanness expressed by some.
Respectfully,
George Townsend
George, I think you are taking offense too easily where none was intended and responding as though your offense is justified. I once said an idea seemed strange to me and you responded as though I had called you strange.
I wish instead your default reaction would be to assume we are all friends with at times differing opinions.
I am going to say something that is heartfelt, and I wish you would think about:
I think you statement above is fine. I like people who disagree with me. I have dear friend, for thirty years, who is on the left. She doesn’t even like the movies I like. How could you not like La La Land? She doesn’t. We joke that we don’t agree on anything. But I love her. For 30 years.
But how I react to someone is not just about me. This is solipsism. I care how they treat others too. Neither of us, I presume, ever meant John McCain. So why must you assume the worst about him because he cast votes on which you disapprove? If I were to take your way of thinking as gospel, I would not even like my friend. She supports and votes for people I think are ruining my country.
You – and others – say I take things personally. Perhaps I do. We do not live in this world alone. I like to honestly think about things. Let’s take this philosophy of yours to an extreme: Suppose someone I knew was really nice to me? We went out to dinner together. He even bought me dinner a few times. One day I found out he murdered someone. Should I continue to like him, and go out with him? He may have even been tried, and found not guilty. Insufficient evidence. But I know for fact he was guilty. Should I still see him? He murdered one of God’s children, who did not deserve this.
Dump the murderer along with McCain.
You are too cute, skyler. I am afraid you and I speak two differences languages. Or, to put it another way, you are from Mars; I am Venus!
I will hope our planets do not collide. So long!
McCain did get himself involved with the beyond sleazy Charles Keating. Maybe that’s why he cultivates the “I’m the only man in Washington with any character” persona. Nice trick Senator, since a lot of people see you as just another member of the swamp.