Mitch McConnell, Absolute Asshole

For a glimpse at DC ego in action, check out Kentucky Sen. Mitch “Mitch the Bitch” McConnell berate, belittle, and bedrabble AEI policy nerd Norman Ornstein for having the temerity to ask the senior senator from the Bluegrass State, aka “the Chinless Wonder,” a question he didn’t want to answer. I suppose that a right-wing thug like McConnell, when he appears before an American Enterprise Institute function, expects nothing but unlimited ass-kissing. Finding his wrinkled posterior insufficiently moistened, McConnell goes absolutely ape-shit on poor Norm. “You’ve been consistently wrong on almost everything!” bellows Mitch, giving an excellent imitation of brain-damaged hippo with a snake up its ass. “Who do you have lunch with here?” he adds, with a sneer. Yeah, Norm. You’re liked, but you’re not well liked!

How did Ornstein manage to provoke this explosion of spittle-flecked rancor and rage? By touching on the always touchy issue of campaign finance. Back in the day, Mitch was the prime opponent of campaign finance reform, saying that he wanted “full disclosure” of contributions, but no limits on either contributions or expenditures—which happens to be my position as well, not that anyone gives a damn. But that was then. The Supreme Court’s decision on Citizens United opened the door to unlimited contributions with no disclosure, which McConnell rushed to embrace. Full disclosure versus no disclosure: isn’t there a bit of a contradiction here? Well, not if you’re Mitch McConnell.

Afterwords
I actually agreed with Citizens United, because I don’t like censorship. Controlling the free speech of corporations becomes hopelessly complicated because, of course, newspapers, television stations, et al. are corporations. Trying to sort out the “good” corporations from the “bad” ones is not a good idea. The real sticking point for Citizens United is the fact that it allows certain nonprofits to receive unlimited anonymous donations, something aggressively exploited in 2012, but not producing the results Mitch and his Gang expected.

The argument that nonprofits engaged in political activity should not have release the identities of its members or contributors dates back to a Supreme Court decision in 1958, NAACP v. Alabama, in which the Court ruled that “Immunity from state scrutiny of petitioner’s membership lists is here so related to the right of petitioner’s members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in doing so as to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment.” But one suspects that stretching a ruling intended to protect poor blacks from the unscrupulous and malignant harassment of a racist state government and culture until it allows billionaires to create and fund any and all manner of political pressure groups with complete anonymity is stretching a good decision too far. Which is where Mitch the Bitch and I part company.