In my ideal world, there'd exist a U.S. senator who goes by a moniker something like Miffington McNasty. He'd be an ornery cuss who figured his primary goal in life would be to give grief to the president of the United States, particularly one Barack Hussein Obama.
And Sen. McNasty wouldn't have been anywhere near as nice as current senators have been with Obama after he issued his challenge that they "go after me."
Obama was trying to defend U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, who's been criticized for citing the anti-Islamic YouTube video "Innocence of Muslims" as the reason the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was attacked, leaving four Americans dead.
Since then, evidence has emerged indicating that the attack on the consulate had nothing to do with the film or the riotous reaction to it. It seems the attack was a premeditated hit by terrorists.
There have been questions about why security wasn't beefed up, and why the Obama administration didn't heed requests from consulate personnel for more protection.
In short, it appears that what happened in Benghazi amounted to what I call a Brobdingnagian screw-up for the Obama administration, but I'm sure lovers of irony will note that it happened on the watch of a quite Lilliputian president.
At a press conference last week, Obama challenged Senate Republicans, telling them, in essence, to stop picking on poor lil' Susan Rice.
"If Sen. [John] McCain and Sen. [Lindsey] Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. When they go after the U.N. ambassador apparently because they think she's an easy target, then they've got a problem with me."
It is at this point that Sen. McNasty, if he existed, would have given the president an answer something like this: "Excuse me, Mr. President, did I hear you right? Is the community organizer from Chicago jumping bad with members of the U.S. Senate?"
That would have been for starters. Then Sen. McNasty would have gone into that "easy target" business. "You think we're going after Rice because she's an 'easy target'? Really? With those ears you have, who could be an easier target than you?
"We're focusing on Rice because we're going up the chain of command, which you should be familiar with from your military service. Oh, that's right. You don't have a military record, do you? You served not one day in our country's armed forces, because I'm sure you figured being a community organizer was a much nobler calling.
"Basically, going up the chain of command means we'll be starting with those at the bottom and then working our way up. Fret not, Mr. President. We might be focusing on Susan Rice now, but rest assured we'll get to you. And it will be sooner, not later."
To his credit, Graham has been quoted as saying, in response to Obama's "they should go after me" bravado, "Mr. President, don't think for one minute I don't hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi."
There's only one thing wrong with Graham's quote: It's not nearly nasty enough, certainly not as nasty at the one I'd love to hear my fictional Sen. McNasty deliver.
And I have no problems with Republicans being nasty, especially to this particular president. Didn't he indicate that all Republicans think like Missouri Rep. Todd Akin when it comes to rape? And wasn't that assertion downright nasty, not to mention false? Didn't this president try to hijack the freedom of religion clause clean out of the First Amendment, and try to replace it with "women's reproductive rights"?
Wanted: one U.S. senator who will take off the gloves and tell this president, "OK, Bam baby, no more Mr. Nice Guy."
Examiner Columnist Gregory Kane is a Pulitzer-nominated news and opinion journalist who has covered people and politics from Baltimore to the Sudan.