In Alabama’s fast-approaching U.S. Senate primary, Mo Brooks has been quick to vilify Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.
Over the past few months, the Huntsville Republican congressman has steadily railed against McConnell’s leadership, as well as that of sitting Sen. Luther Strange, whom he is hoping to unseat next week in the race for the rest of Jeff Sessions’ Senate term.
Why then would Brooks be harder on McConnell — a longtime leader of his own party — than he had been on former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the much-loathed Democrat from California and frequent Republican target.
In 2017, Brooks is running attack ads blasting “Swamp King McConnell,” calling for the Kentucky senator to not only step down but resign from the Senate outright.
Only seven years ago, however, Brooks was singing a different tune, panning his Republican primary opponent for saying “something mean” about then-Speaker Pelosi.
As the Decatur Daily noted in April 2010, after Alabama Magazine named him one of the state’s most effective lawmakers, Brooks defended the unprofessionally harsh treatment of Pelosi during the Republican primary.
“[Brooks] criticizes his main Republican opponent, [Parker] Griffith as lacking those skills,” Eric Fleischauer reported at the time. “He cited a speech in which Griffith — while still a Democrat — offered House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a gift card to a mental health center. ‘When Nancy Pelosi might have agreed with you on, say, (NASA’s) Constellation funding, or on missile defense, now because you’ve insulted her unnecessarily, you’ve made her less willing to work with you, even on the things that you agree on. You need to have some level of professionalism.’”
“Someone who is professional would never, under any circumstances, question the mental stability of the speaker of the House,” Brooks added.
As far as Brooks is concerned, Pelosi was “unnecessarily insulted,” while McConnell, on the other hand, is a vile “Swamp King.”
So, what in the world makes one more deserving of criticism than the other?