In the days since a "white-hot" and "crazily loud" Hastert blew a gasket over the FBI raid of a Congressman's office, and then again over the ABC report that Hastert was being investigated for his part in the Abramoff scandal, an interesting thing has happened. Hastert's behavior appears to have dislodged something long caught in the right-wing pundit classes' collective throats regarding the "low key" Speaker. And what they're saying isn't pretty.
American Spectator's feature piece this week by Quin Hillyer, "Hastert La Vista, Baby!"
It's time for Dennis Hastert to go.
Rep. Hastert, R-Ill., ought to announce sooner rather than later that he will not be a candidate for re-election as Speaker of the House when the next Congress convenes in January, 2007. He should do so for reasons both principled and purely political. He should do so because, in practical terms, his effectiveness is reaching -- or probably has already reached -- an end.
In a piece that nearly matches New Politics Institute's Hastert Should Resign in its Hastert hatred, Hillyer goes on to catalog Hastert's ineffectiveness and outright betrayal of the GOP agenda (if you can believe it), especially the first line of that old GOP list of talking points, the Contract with America, which Hastert signed so long ago and which begins
FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress.
And then there's Michael Reagan, so disgusted he writes
My Dad, Ronald Reagan, proclaimed the 11th Commandment - thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican. He couldn't have foreseen what a minority of arrogant Republicans would someday do to his party. So, as his oldest son and conservative political heir, I feel entitled to now repeal the 11th Commandment.
Betraying Reagan and the Contract with America? So serious is this, it seems the pundit class may be quietly suggesting to Hastert that the only way to get votes this November is to promise he will retire from the Speakership come January. Of course, Rep. Flake (R-AZ) warned Hastert back in January that DeLay's resignation wouldn't be enough to convince voters the GOP had a serious "reform agenda", and that a "course correction" (meaning Hastert's resignation from leadership) was needed.
It's understandable that the GOP loyalist blogosphere would be angry at what was more than an intemperate gaffe on Hastert's part. Just a week after the former wrestling coach's "high decibel rant" regarding buddy Goss' ouster, these recent outbursts make Hastert seem more like Curly after hearing "Pop Goes the Weasel " until Bush told Cheney to feed him some cheese.
And so what might have appeared a perfect Rovian maneuver to shift attention away from a growing tsunami of GOP corruption investigations and plea bargains turned sour when the raging Hastert ran to Bush to intervene in an FBI investigation and asserted special priveleges for members of Congress (such as himself).
But the hand-wringing on the right over Hastert's most recent intemperance has now spilled over, into areas normally touched on by fiscally responsible Democratic side of the aisle, such as his unabashed love of midnight pork feasts and deficit spending, his dismantling of the powers of the legislative branch in favor of every executive power grab attempted by the Bush administration, and his embarrassingly close ties to Abramoff.
John Locke Foundation President
John Hood:
Forgive me for being impertinent, but I think it will be impossible to convince Republican activists and some conservative lawmakers that the House leadership's protestations about separation of powers are really about separation of powers. If they cared passionately about that issue, they might consider doing something about it themselves. Congress could start by ending the longstanding practice of transferring clearly legislative (and judicial) powers to executive-branch regulatory agencies, a practice that is far more damaging to the republic than the FBI investigating congressional corruption.
Some of this was hinted at even before Hastert hotly harangued the White House about his personal rights, especially as Hastert has made numerous gaffes regarding McCain, Kerry, Soros, New York, New Orleans, oil company profits, working families and more. Last year, Cato Institute's Tax Policy Director argued that when Hastert, who he called "a champion at bringing pork home to Illinois", refuses to show budgetary restraint, it's hard to ask members of his caucus for fiscal discipline. "Pork erodes fiscal responsibility," he noted.
But never before has the invective from the right been so direct, and the right-wing establishment seems to care little that Hastert is up for re-election and has a strong opponent in Navy veteran John Laesch. Hastert's probably wishing for the good old days when he was "free to move the agenda" while eyes fixed on DeLay and 41% of the American public had no idea who he was. Has Hastert become yet another weighty albatross around the GOP Congress' necks?