Colorado Republican Representative Lauren Boebert is having her moment.
On Wednesday, she appeared not just on Fox News but also on MSNBC to blast California Republican Representative Kevin McCarthy and to pledge never to support him for speaker. Her various interviewers—Bret Baier, Sean Hannity, and Stephanie Ruhle—seemed both dumbfounded by the inanity of her statements and frustrated that they had to speak with her at all.
The exchange with Hannity got decidedly spicy.
When Boebert said to Hannity that she understood his frustration over her position, he gruffly insisted, “I’m not frustrated, you didn’t answer my question,” only to say moments later he was in fact frustrated… because she wasn’t answering his question.
Why the sudden interest in the enfant terrible of the GOP?
Why grant any attention to someone who clearly draws her evil powers—and much of her fundraising—from acting horribly wherever she can, then basking shamelessly in the media spotlight?
Math is hard. Let’s go trolling.
The answer, somewhat ironically given that Boebert only recently obtained her high school diploma, is basic math. In a world where McCarthy can only afford to lose four votes, Boebert’s hardening opposition is increasingly worrisome to the GOP establishment, given that there were already five other “Never Kevins” out there.
Until Boebert began tossing congressional grenades, the hope among McCarthy’s camp was that they could peel at least one of the five away. Now they may need to win over at least two, and that simply might not be possible.
She might become the true political spoiler of their best laid plans.
Not even a personal call from her ailing overlord, Donald Trump, could convince Boebert to stand down from off her high chair.
On Wednesday when she rose to nominate yet another little-known Republican challenger to McCarthy, Boebert drew gasps and “oooohs” from the assembled members.
Boebert declared as she nnominated Florida Representative Byron Donalds as the House prepared for the fifth round of voting:
“Even having my favorite President call us and tell us we need to knock this off, I think it actually needs to be reversed."
“The President needs to tell Kevin McCarthy that sir, you do not have the votes, and it's time to withdraw.”
Hannity tried hard to turn the math around on Boebert during their interview.
Hannity asked the petulant Congresswoman, who in the moment honestly felt like the cursed love child of Sarah Palin and Alex Jones:
“Isn’t it time for you and your side to pack it in considering [McCarthy] has over 200 and you have 20?”
Boebert responded defiantly:
“There are more for us than against us.”
Hannity pulled out bigger ammunition when Boebert drew a hard line.
Boebert:
"I am not going to support McCarthy."
Hannity:
"You will not abide by what you told President Trump you abide by?"
Boebert:
"I love President Trump. You will not turn me on him. You’re not going to pit him against me."
If Hannity could have reached through the camera to shake basic greater than/less than math sense into her, he probably would have.
When Boebert later suggested she might even nominate Donald Trump as Speaker, Hannity responded:
“Is this a game show?"
"Like we’re gonna pick Jim Jordan one day, Trump the other day?”
Hannity didn’t realize he was foretelling what would happen.
Boebert’s fellow demon spawn and brother-in-harms Florida Republican Representative Matt Gaetz actually rose to nominate the twice-impeached ex-President, resulting in a single vote for Trump on the boards all day, which they eventually changed to “Others” because it looked so awkward.
We didn’t start the fire.
The great irony in all the Boebert handwringing is this: Without the GOP establishment’s assistance, specifically McCarthy, Fox News and the Trump MAGA base, Boebert wouldn’t be where she is.
Her outrageous behavior won her media coverage, which only encouraged more bad behavior, which in turn became red meat for small dollar MAGA donors.
Former Trump budget director and Freedom Caucus member Mick Mulvaney on Thursday tweeted:
“Just got a fundraising email from Lauren Boebert.”
“Which I assume is what a lot of her NeverKevin stuff is all about.”
Boebert wound up winning her most recent race by only 500 some odd votes, despite representing a deeply red district that should have been a R+8 easy victory, and only after a lot of financial support from the GOP.
Her most outspoken critic these days, fellow idiot turned professional McCarthy ass-kisser Georgia GOP Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, had some choice words about that part.
Greene said before reporters:
“Lauren Boebert? Under $2 million from Kevin McCarthy to get elected.”
“Many more people have taken Kevin McCarthy's money to get elected, and then there’s a few of them that don’t want to support him as Speaker, so imagine that.
"This is not anything about the country, this is all about ‘Never Kevin'.”
Once Boebert tasted how delicious a meal the media often serves to a strong political spoiler, there was no stopping her.
On Fox News on Tuesday—indeed, Boebert was on Fox News on back-to-back days this week—Boebert complained to anchor Bret Baier she and two colleagues had put forth proposals on term limits and border security but “were not taken seriously” by McCarthy.
Imagine Boebert & Co. not being taken seriously!
Boebert quipped “our votes didn’t seem to matter as much as they do in this slim majority now.”
Baier tried to push back on Boebert’s actual argument, pointing out critics claim her proposals, such as needing just a single House member to initiate a motion to vacate the speakership, were “untenable for any leader.”
Boebert, true to form and apparently not understanding the word “untenable,” responded “there was nothing that we proposed that is unattainable for him.”
Boebert still has no idea how government actually works.
The real bonus came when Boebert was invited onto liberal MSNBC for an interview with host Stephanie Ruhle, who acknowledged to viewers the strange circumstances of Boebert’s appearance on the show.
Ruhle explained:
“I want you to know that we are not giving her a free pass to talk about conspiracy theories, we’re not giving her a free pass to talk about the lies that she has spread at other times.”
“But trying to understand what is keeping Congress from starting the work of the American people, that’s why we talked to her tonight.”
That said, once the interview started it was hard for Ruhle to contain her bewilderment, and so instead she began to skewer her guest.
As pictures are worth more than even the best bon mots, here are one Twitter user’s screen captures of Ruhle’s varied expressions:
MSNBC
It became clear early on during the often painful and definitely-seemed-longer-than-15 minutes interview that Boebert actually believed she was putting a stop to Democratic priorities in Congress through her stonewalling of a new speaker.
That became clear in this exchange:
Boebert:
"I see it as Congress not spending money that they don't have….The taxpayers are actually winning here because Congress hasn’t organized. Look, my conservative colleagues and I…"
Ruhle:
"Hold on, excuse me, I’m going to interrupt you."
"With every passing day, it’s not that Congress isn’t spending money."
"Anything that was put in place during Nancy’s Pelosi’s term, none of that is going to stop."
"And until you put a speaker in place, nothing that you want to do is getting done."
What also became clear during her interview is that Boebert isn’t interested in supporting any of the establishment leaders for speaker, not just McCarthy but even a possible replacement for him from their ranks.
Ruhle cut to the chase with a direct question, asking Boebert:
“Could you support Steve Scalise?”
Boebert responded:
“I don’t think I can support any current leadership.”
Ruh roh, GOP.
@lpeterp/Bluesky
@FPWellman/X
@bobsbeatgmail.com5/Threads