A rare alignment: Hannity/Ruhle vs. Boebert
A rare alignment: Hannity/Ruhle vs. Boebert
“If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.” John Quincy Adams, 6th President of the United States
There is an addlement in the American character that induces an imbecility through which it is impossible to grasp complex issues and process them outside of a binary context. For example, since Lauren Boebert is an extremist loon, and she is opposing Kevin McCarthy that must make Kevin McCathy the “good guy” in the perpetually simplistic white hat vs. black hat scenario that is delivered to the American people by the overwhelming majority of the American media.
There are rare astronomical alignments that occur and are worth noticing. For example, on April 20, 2023, there will be a “rare hybrid solar eclipse that is a combination of an annular eclipse and a total solar eclipse,” as pictured below:
Similarly, there has been the rarest of political alignments, as pictured below:
Let’s take a look at what both Sean Hannity and Stephanie Ruhle have to say when interviewing Lauren Boebert last night:
The shared premise of both interviewers represents a shared conviction about American politics that is profoundly wrong. At the core of these questions is a self-evident belief that American culture exists downstream of American politics, and that the American people are somehow suffering a great tragedy because the US House of Representatives lacks a Speaker of the House.
The questions that were posed to loony Lauren Boebert by both Sean Hannity and Stephanie Ruhle are less interrogatories than passionate arguments bordering on an emotional one that demands the elevation of Kevin McCarthy to constitutional office in the name of achieving “consensus” because consensus is right and good.
Here is the Hannity/Ruhle argument: Kevin McCarthy has 205 votes for Speaker and the obstructionist “Never Kevin” loons have 20. Two hundred and five is more than 20, and therefore, in the words of Kevin McCarthy himself, “Goddammit, I’ve earned it” — except that he hasn’t because he hasn’t reached the 218 vote threshold. Because he hasn’t, the argument seems to be that the country is in crisis, and the American people are angry because Kevin McCarthy remains a squatter, not a tenant, in the Speaker’s office.
There seems to be a common thread in the coverage that intuits American society’s desire for instant gratification with Kevin’s desire for power at any cost into an extrapolation that the American people want Kevin and they want him now. I had long thought that peak ludicrousness was Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump having West Wing offices, security clearances and Secret Service details, but now I know I that was wrong.
Deadline White House’s Nicolle Wallace, a former White House communications director and veteran of multiple US presidential campaigns, seems to have a much greater grasp on the cause of Kevin McCarthy’s demise. Let’s watch Wallace with the Bulwark’s Tim Miller:
David Jolly was right when he predicted that Kevin McCarthy would never be Speaker following the November midterm elections. I was, too, when I predicted this back in April 2022:
Bingo. Kevin McCarthy never had the votes. That is precisely what is happening. The ‘Lord of the Flies’ moment has been a long time coming, and it is a good thing for the country because the best disinfectant is transparency. The crux of the absolutely spot-on Democratic Party argument has long been the Trump/McCarthy/Greene/Boebert/Gosar/Santos Republican Party is unfit to govern.
The deficiency in the argument has long been the Democratic Party’s inability to convince the American people of this reality in a decisive fashion. Now, the job has become much easier. Leader Jeffries can simply repeat the following: “Don’t take my word for it, take their word for it. These people are nuts.” It’s a powerful argument —particularly because it has the added benefit of being true and caught on video without the appearance of a single Democrat.
This brings us full circle to the most important aspect of this historic crackup that was accurately predicted long ago:
It is clear from Stephanie Ruhle’s body language and agitation that she was disgusted by Lauren Boebert, which is a perfectly rational, and maybe even appropriate, reaction. Boebert is a contemptible figure, but is she more contemptible than this person who supports Kevin McCarthy?
Or Thomas Massie, R-KY.?
Or Jim Jordan, R-OH, ranking member of the House Oversight Committee?
Or George Santos, R-NY, a.k.a. The Talented Mr. Ripley?
And on and on it goes.
Stephanie Ruhle began her interview with Lauren Boebert with the following comment: “All of this is stopping the work of Congress.” This is a staggering statement. The premise of it is that, without Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House, the American government is rendered dysfunctional. Come again?
Kevin McCarthy is a leading cause of America’s broken political system. He is corrupt, cynical, arrogant, entitled, incompetent, disloyal, faithless and inept. Kevin McCarthy is this guy:
Now, because reprehensible people are fighting him, he is suddenly wearing the “white hat?”
It is preposterous. Truly.
There was a telling moment at the end of the confrontation. Lauren Boebert demonstrated her abject ignorance of the US Constitution when she claimed it requires 218 votes to elect a Speaker of the House. It doesn’t. Article 1 Section 2 Clause 5 of the US Constitution reads as follows: “The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”
Ms. Ruhle responded by saying, “Our founding fathers aren’t here…”
I don’t agree with that at all. Our founding fathers are here because we are here. Our founding fathers are here because the US Constitution endures. Our founding fathers are here because America is still becoming, and with each new generation are new American founders. This is what makes John Lewis and Rosa Parks a founding father and a founding mother, respectively. It is what makes Martin Luther King, Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln founding fathers.
Daniel Webster spoke to this shortly after the 50th anniversary of the birth of the United States 197 years ago when he eulogized both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, who both died on July 4, 1826. This is what he said:
ADAMS and JEFFERSON, I have said, are no more. As human beings, indeed, they are no more. They are no more, as in 1776, bold and fearless advocates of independence; no more, as at subsequent periods, the head of the government; nor more, as we have recently seen them, aged and venerable objects of admiration and regard. They are no more. They are dead. But how little is there of the great and good which can die! To their country they yet live, and live for ever.
Before he died, John Adams left us a message. Here it is:
Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it.
It should be heeded. Though his opponents are as equally as unfit as Kevin McCarthy, none of them will ever be Speaker of the House. Though all parties are as equally offensive, their respective positions are not. Stopping Kevin McCarthy is a virtuous position, regardless of the vileness of those obstructing his vision.
The Syrian civil war offers a pristine example of the dynamic at hand. Occasionally, Al-Qaeda factions and ISIS factions have fought and killed each other. When they fight, it doesn’t make one side the “good guys” and the other the “bad guys.” They are all bad guys, and the right answer regarding who to root for in that fight is this: root for both sides to kill each other. Let God sort it out.
And this is why I watch Nicole Wallace and read Steve Schmidt! Thank You!!
Stephanie Ruhle is by all accounts of those who know her a very nice person, fun to be around, kind and caring, a good mom. She was a capable business reporter when she was doing that on CNBC and then on MSNBC, because that is where her experience is - she worked on Wall Street and knows that swamp. But unlike Ali Velshi, who came from the business reporting side at the same time, she is not that knowledgeable about politics in any deep way, and it shows, every night. She is way out of her depth. If they were going to elevate someone to replace Brian Williams, it should have been Velshi, the James Brown of Cable TV News ("The hardest-working man" in TV).
You were right to partner with Nicole on the McCain campaign. She is "one smart cookie" when it comes to politics. I never miss her show, because she brings both breadth and depth to her knowledge. As they say, "Experience matters!"