John Fetterman surprised a lot of people by recovering enough to speak clearly about politics and personal attacks, drawing unexpected respect from across the aisle while facing health scares and pressure from his own party.
I’ll admit it: I was wrong about John Fetterman. At first, after his massive stroke and the aphasia that followed, I thought Democrats wanted a compliant figure they could control, someone who would be easy to manage the way some had managed others.
He proved that assumption wrong. Fetterman regained most of his faculties and emerged as an independent voice, often standing against the party’s far left when it mattered, which cost him inside-the-party goodwill.
Now he’s back in the hospital after a fall tied to ventricular fibrillation, a dangerous heart arrhythmia that affects the heart’s lower chambers. Doctors are adjusting medications and conservatives — myself included — have shown concern and support without making cheap political hay out of his health.
Just before that hospitalization, Fetterman spoke plainly about how he’s been treated by people on the Left, and the reaction has been ugly.
“It’s just been my personal experience on this thing,” Fetterman said. “The difference is the right would say probably rough things and names…but the Left…they want me to die or ‘We’re cheering for your next stroke’ or ‘Why couldn’t the depression win?’ or ‘I hope your kids find you.'”
That reaction from parts of his own side is striking and disturbing; even some mainstream anchors sounded shocked by it. My respect for Fetterman has grown because he hasn’t returned mean for mean, and he hasn’t given in to the tribe’s worst instincts.
He’s still a Democrat and we disagree on many big issues, but on character and conduct he’s earned quiet credit. He refused to play the expected game when Katie Couric tried to bait him into condemning someone for rhetoric tied to violence.
Refusing to take the bait wasn’t weakness, it was discipline. The typical playbook is to punish a political opponent with outrage, but Fetterman declined to escalate an already painful situation and instead kept the conversation focused on principle.
Couric: Did you have any issues now in hindsight over some of the things that Charlie Kirk said? …
Fetterman: Charlie engaging in debate would never justify what’s happened. I just chose not to take the opportunity to argue his views after children lost their father in the most violent public way.
Couric: I think some people might say Charlie Kirk’s rhetoric was extreme … People think his words lead to violence.
Fetterman: I think we agree that we probably didn’t agree with much of what he said. But I’m sure we both agree that you shouldn’t execute them in public.
Scott Jennings summed it up neatly when he called some of those questions “hateful views being laundered as questions.”
Fetterman also resisted the easy route of slapping labels on political rivals, refusing to call President Trump a fascist when prompted and instead choosing a calmer tone. Couric asked, “Would you concede that some of the things that he is doing are clearly anti-democratic and also are potentially even unconstitutional?”
And Fetterman answered plainly: “We happen to have a different view of these things. I don’t call people fascists or Nazis or compare people to Hitler.”
Because of that restraint and because he rejects vindictiveness, I like John Fetterman more than I expected to. I plan to donate to his reelection if he runs again and if his health allows, even though his politics remain different from mine.
I’d rather see Democrats in Congress who behave like Fetterman than the violent socialists trying to pull the party further left. We need Democrats like John Fetterman in Congress because he doesn’t want people like me dead, and he won’t govern vindictively like some of his colleagues have, and will.
