Some folks have taken to labeling him “Moscow Mitch”. This would not be my style. I have been trying to come up with a descriptor that captures my personal frustration. I am looking for just the right phrase to describe someone who is fearful of doing the wrong thing and of offending a benefactor. Mitch reminds me of a dog who has been beaten but still desires the approval of his abuser. Submissive Mitch.
Yes, the pronouncement that President Obama would accomplish little during his second term despite the strong support of citizens and Mitch’s passive-aggressive unwillingness to bring the nomination of Merrick Garland forward for confirmation were bad. These inactions wasted the creative power of and public support for a transformative leader. These behaviors sparked the deep animosity and divisions that mark the country today.
It is Mitch’s lack of confidence in his leadership of the Senate that annoys me the most. Unless I have been misleading myself, Mitch should be in his position because the Republican Party holds the majority in the Senate. This should mean that a party line vote would decide any issue brought before that body. Why is it Submissive Mitch has to check with other parties before the Senate considers bills brought before it. Yes, some of the bills were passed by a Democratically controlled House. Still, if the Senators did not support the House-based positions, a vote should end the matter.
Is Mitch really acting to accomplish a different goal. Is he blocking votes that would reveal Republican voters to their constituents? National polls clearly indicate citizen positions on gun control. Forcing Republicans to vote would clearly document whether these individuals come down on the site of citizens or the NRA. Whether it is Trump or Putin or the NRA, it is obvious who dominates Mitch McConnell. Time for a leader allowing citizens to have a voice through a Senate that makes decisions.