So, for McCain, was it senility or hypocrisy, or what?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

So you know how Al Franken refused to give Joe Lieberman any extra time to speak on Thursday, once his allotted ten minutes were up, prompting John McCain to rush to the defence of his pal, saying he'd never seen anything like that before and lamenting what had become of the Senate?

I posted on it yesterday and included the clip. Here's specifically what McCain said:

I've been around here 20-some years. First time I've ever seen a member denied an extra minute or two to finish his remarks. And I must say that I don't know what's happening here in this body, but I think it's wrong.

McCain's memory must be failing, or something. Levin interjected, pointing out that that very thing had just happened earlier in the afternoon. But McCain, undaunted, kept going:

Well, I just haven't seen it before myself. And I don't like it. And I think it harms the comity of the Senate not to allow one of our members at least a minute. I'm sure that time is urgent here, but I doubt that it would be that urgent.

As I argued in my post, Lieberman probably should have been given the extra time. The issue, if there is one, is McCain's righteous outrage. And not only did McCain forget, or not know, that it had happened that same day, but, as Think Progress reports, McCain himself did the very same thing back in 2002, objecting to any additional time for Mark Dayton, then a Democratic senator from Minnesota.

And why did he do that? Maybe because Dayton was speaking "in favor of an amendment that would have restricted Bush's constitutional powers to wage war against Iraq."

Hypocrisy? You betcha. Unless it's senility, which is a distinct possibility.