“What is
so appealing to men about a cat fight?” Elaine asked on a famous episode of Seinfeld.
Just the use of the term is enough to make her friend Kramer stop in his tracks
and exclaim, “Oooh, cat fight!”
Last week,
instead of the female hair-pulling contests that, Elaine noted in exasperation,
turn on so many men, our nation’s capital was transfixed by a male
variant involving two U.S. Senators from the same party: Rand Paul of
Kentucky and Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma, the Trump Administration’s
nominee to replace the late, unlamented Kristi Noem (nom de guerre “ICE
Barbie”) as Homeland Security Secretary.
Trust me,
I have seen more examples than I’d like of heated confrontations between our
nation’s representatives and individuals testifying before them, but nothing
even remotely like this.
Yes, it’s
the Capitol Hill answer to the cage fight, those Ultimate Fighting
Championships, with contests unapologetically brutal, in an enclosed area to
prevent participants from going out of bounds.
Mullin
first came across the radar screen of many of us in 2023, when he sparred at a
Senate committee hearing with Teamsters head Sean O’Brien, challenging him to
“stand your b—t up” over a social media post.
Matters got so heated between the
two that Senator Bernie Sanders, the panel’s chair, had to remind the two
would-be gladiators to maintain Senate decorum. (Nice to know that the two men
have apparently since reconciled.)
Senator
Paul brought up that exchange in his own face-off with Mullin, and added to it.
The background to this—and the resulting anger and bitterness on Paul’s
part—are worth quoting in full:
Paul: Senator Mullin, if you have time
to listen, you were confronted by constituents that were angry because you
voted against my amendment to stop all funding for refugee welfare programs.
Instead of explaining your vote to continue these welfare programs for
refugees, you decided to transfer the blame. You told the media that I was a
freaking snake and that you completely understood why I had been assaulted. I
was shocked that you would justify and celebrate this violent assault that
caused me so much pain and my family so much pain. I just wonder if someone who
applauds violence against their political opponents is the right person to lead
an agency that has struggled to accept limits to the proper use of force.
You
might argue you were mad and upset about being confronted by your constituents,
but Senator Mullin, your constituents are justifiably upset with you. By now, most
of America knows that the Somali welfare fraud in Minnesota stole over $9
billion. But instead of defending your vote, you took to continue the vote to
continue these refugee welfare programs, you chose to lash out at me. You went
on to brag that you had already told me to my face that you completely
understood and approved of the assault. Well, that's a lie. You got a chance
today. You can either continue to lie or you can correct the record.
You
have never had the courage to look me in the eye and tell me that the assault
was justified. So today you'll have your chance. Today I'll give you that
chance to clear the record. Tell it to my face. If that's what you believe,
tell it to me today.
Tell
the world why you believe I deserve to be assaulted from behind, have six ribs
broken, and a damaged lung. Tell me to my face why you think I deserved it. And
while you're at it, explain to the American public why they should trust a man
with anger issues to set the proper example for ICE and Border Patrol agents. Explain
to the American public how a man who has no regrets about brawling in a Senate
committee can set a proper example for over 250,000 men and women who work at
the Department of Homeland Security.
Did Mullin
apologize, let alone “explain,” as Paul demanded? See what you think.
Mullin: I think everybody in this room
knows that I'm very blunt and direct to the point and if I have something to
say, I'll say it directly to your face. If you recall back in your back in my
house days, we actually did have this conversation because of remarks that I
made. You were in a room. I simply addressed that I said I could understand
because of the behavior you were having that I could understand why your
neighbor did what he did. As far as my terms, the snake in the grass, sir, I
work around this room to try to fix problems. I've worked with many people in
this room. Seems like you fight Republicans more than you work with us. I did
address those remarks. I did explain your gimmicks by the amendment you put
forth. And as far as me saying that I invoke violence, I don't think anybody
should be hit by surprise. I don't like that. But if I do have something to
say, everybody in this room knows. I'll come straight to you. I'll say it
publicly and I'll say it privately, but I'll never say it behind your back. So
for you to say, I'm a liar, sir, that's not accurate. And I got proof to say
that because you have spent millions of dollars in my campaigns against me
because we just don't get along.
However,
sir, that doesn't keep me at all from doing my job. I can have difference of opinions
with everybody in this room, but as Secretary of Homeland, I will be protecting
everybody, including Kentucky, as much as I will my own backyard in Oklahoma.
It's bigger than the partisan bickering that we have. It's bigger than the
political differences we have. The truth is I have a job to do and I don't like
to fail at anything at all. So I can set it aside if you're willing to set it
aside. Let me earn your respect. Let me earn the job. I won't fail you. I won't
back down from a challenge.
You have
to ask, as MS-NOW’s Joe Scarborough did: Why didn’t Mullin just apologize?
He
was certainly risking his confirmation, as demonstrated by Paul’s committee
vote against forwarding the nomination to the full Senate. Mullin was lucky to
squeak by in committee, courtesy of a “yea” vote by (take your pick)
maverick/renegade Democratic Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. Despite
their experience with this feisty colleague, the Senate approved the nomination
last night, 54-45.
It’s just
another example of Congress letting Trump having his way with them. Back in
1989, the Senate rejected one of their own (and the hoary tradition of
“senatorial courtesy” with it), John Tower, when George H.W. Bush nominated him for Defense Secretary.
There were concerns about the nominee's past experience with alcohol intake and hitting on women--issues also raised about Pete Hegseth for the same post in the second Trump administration, but not enough to sideline him.
Mullin, then, is not even the worst
nominee that Trump has sent up to Capitol Hill. All the President’s major
nominees have been confirmed. Why should Mullin be any different?
Mullin is
an example of a notable trend of the second Trump term: facho, or fake
macho. As the Iranian War began, Secretary of War Hegseth vowed “No stupid
rules of engagement,” before a US military-guided weapon struck school building,
killing 168 people, including over 100 children. Health and Human Services Secretary
Robert Kennedy Jr. went shirtless with Kid Rock in a bizarre workout video.
Not to be
outdone, Mullin glories in his past as an undefeated professional mixed martial
arts fighter. Like his new boss, he doesn’t so much stand his ground as dirty
the ground beneath him. He sees an apology as groveling rather than a grace
note and confuses rudeness with candor.
No question:
cage fights like Mullin’s make for great spectacles. They don’t make for good,
let alone great, government.
