Indeed he is. Carve out seven minutes below as Cocaine Mitch runs through some of the worst examples of Democratic insanity thus far over Kavanaugh, a man whose biggest known scandal at present is taking on credit-card debt to pay for baseball tickets.

I said my piece about Booker and his “complicit in evil” shtick on Tuesday but let me swipe two points made today by others. One, via Seth Mandel, is that Booker normally is one of the most fulsome practitioners of touchy-feely political rhetoric. Catch him on the average day and his message boils down to pap like “love is the answer.”

No matter what, we always have the power to choose hope over despair, engagement over apathy, kindness over indifference, love over hate.

— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) January 8, 2013

Choose Love over hate; Choose Love over bigotry; Choose Love over darkness; Choose Love over and over and over again.

— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) May 7, 2017

Love over hate

Love over indifference

Love over ignorance

Love over ego

Love over fear

Love over barriers

Love over borders

Love over

And over

And over

Again

— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) June 22, 2018

Catch him on a day when ultra-high-stakes Supreme Court politics and a potential inside track on the 2020 nomination are in play and you’re apt to find him babbling about checking the Republican SCOTUS nominee for the Mark of the Beast. He doesn’t have to “choose love” with respect to Kavanaugh’s nomination, but choosing something other than Category Five demagoguery would be a healthy compromise.

I assume Booker would reply that only by hating hate can we clear space for love or some such new-age garbage. Every hyperpartisan feels that way: Only by being a ruthless douche to the ruthless douches on the other side can we create a world where people don’t need to be ruthless douches. But that brings me to the second point, this one from David French. What is it about Kavanaugh that supposedly makes him so “evil,” a spirit haunting the valley of the shadow of death? Why, nothing at all. And that’s a big deal.

It’s especially terrible given:

1) Kavanaugh’s sterling character;

2) Kavanaugh’s longstanding intellectual excellence; and

3) His respected (and respectable) legal philosophy

So what Republicans hear (rightly) is “Even the best among you are evil.” https://t.co/RCpHVK6dtz

— David French (@DavidAFrench) July 26, 2018

“Even the best among you are evil.” Precisely right. Damon Linker made this same point a few weeks ago after the hysteria over Kavanaugh began. The guy is a mainstream Republican judge, sufficiently establishment to have worked in the Bush White House early on. If nominating him is one of the End Times harbingers in Revelation just because he’s conservative, what conclusion must we draw?

Do Democrats really intend to suggest that Americans need to agree with them or else risk subverting American democracy as such? If so, they should be clear about it — and honest with themselves about what it implies, which is that what was formerly considered perfectly normal (the ordinary give-and-take of democratic politics) has now become a luxury the country can no longer afford.

That would signal the end of normal politics in America — and constitute a genuine crisis of American democracy. I have a hard time imagining anything more alarming than that.

Booker, the Democrat who’s normally most eager to preach peace and love, is also the most eager to demonize someone on the other side simply for being on the other side. He’d deny it, but attacking Kavanaugh as vehemently as he has without waiting for a good reason inescapably amounts to more of an attack on the Americans inclined to support Kavanaugh than on the nominee himself. He’s a perfect political figure for our age.

By the way, note that McConnell’s speech here isn’t just a gratuitous lament about Democratic hysteria. It’s in service to a point about their demands for document production. If Kavanaugh is the antichrist, why do they need to see his paper trail from his time working for Bush? Are they going to find something in there that makes him “the antichrist but confirmable”?