One of Donald Trump’s proteges, Rep. Lauren Boebert, behaved so outrageously at a a Denver theater last week during a performance of the Broadway musical “Beetlejuice,” that she was asked to leave by the theater managers. She was loud, sang along with the performers in places, got in arguments with audience members, was ostentatiously groped by her male companion, and perhaps most objectionably, vaped during the performance, which is what you see her (in the middle of the frame, second from the aisle) in the act of doing—see the little puff?— in the security camera shot above. She also took a selfie during the second act. As she and her date were ushered out, the distinguished member of Congress actually uttered the magic phrase I regard as signature significance for an insufferable celebrity jerk, “Do you know who I am?” and threatened consequences for the staff.
That’s not all. She had her office deny that she had been vaping, not realizing that security cameras memorialized it. And still that’s not all. Here is her head-exploding “apology” for acting like a 17-year old raised in a barn who had never been at a live theater show in her life:
Wow. That’s one of the worst apologies from a public figure that I’ve ever read. Let’s see:
- She tried to re-frame the conduct she is apologizing for by calling disrupting a performance, disturbing patrons, breaking basic rules of live theater, embarrassing her party, her constituency, the House of Representatives, and Colorado and showing herself to be an arrogant, juvenile asshole “bringing unwanted attention” to the community.
- She used the hoary old “I didn’t mean any harm” excuse, which doesn’t apply when one exhibits atrocious manners in public, since adults are presumed to know that such conduct is per se inappropriate and offensive.
- Astoundingly, she tried to blame going through a divorce for such obviously wrongful conduct as vaping in a theater and singing along with performers. It’s not the divorce, you creep. It’s you.
- Boebert patted herself on the back for “strength and courage” while supposedly showing remorse and contrition for outrageous public conduct that displayed neither.
- She honestly didn’t recall vaping? Right. Who believes that? She issued a lie because she didn’t realize she was caught on video, and in the process presumed that the public is made up of gullible dolts.
- She attributes her idiotic actions to the “excitement” seeing a road-company perform a Broadway musical and “anxiety” from being in a “new environment”—live theater? Is she ten-years-old?
- I bet Boebert was drunk or stoned, but doesn’t have the guts to admit it.
This isn’t just conduct unbecoming for a member of Congress, it’s disqualifying conduct, not that Boebert again proving she is one of the very worst is exactly a shock. The only question for me is whether her behaving like drunk teeny-bopper in a theater is less ethical, as unethical, or more unethical than Susanna Gibson, the Virginia House of Delegates candidate who performs sex acts on line for cash. I’m leaning toward ruling Boebert as worse. To begin with, Gibson is just a candidate, and only for a state legislature. Boebert is a member of Congress, and her behavior should be held to the highest standard, not the standards of some junior hick who’s never seen a play before. Gibson didn’t issue a phony apology, nor did she try to lie her way out of trouble. Not being quite as unfit for high office as Lauren Boebert—boy, can Trump pick ’em, or what?—is hardly much of a mitigation, but still, Gibson isn’t in a high office yet.
Yes, I know: I’ve run a theater and directed musicals, so Boebert’s act hits close to home. In 20 years of producing professional productions, I never had a single audience member who conducted themselves as atrociously as Boebert, and it one had, I would have thrown her out personally. She’s not fit to be an audience member: anyone who votes for her after this doesn’t comprehend the basic theory behind representative democracy. See, you’re supposed to find people with good judgment to represent you, not entitled, lying idiots.
Perhaps we haven’t made that clear in civics classes…
[What’s the other worst apology of the week? Watch this space…]
Ethics Alarms 
I’m convinced that she was stoned. Probably borrowed Britney Griners vape refills. This is a serious problem. Socially one step below attending a session of congress. I dread the next time she decides she’s entitled to vape her way into the hearts of her fellow congresspersons. I see it coming and there’s not a thing I can do about it.
I agree, and yet I haven’t seen any media report suggesting that.
Thank you, Mr. Marshall, for expressing my feelings so well.
One of the significant problems with those in what is considered a position of authority is they do not feel but act as if they are the untouchables; the other sad part is that a majority of society allows and dismisses this conduct.
The only reason she is SAYING how humble and sorry she is is that she was caught and appropriately treated for being removed for disgusting conduct and that she was no better than anyone else. I do not believe her apology.
I’m having fun thinking of the innumerable defenses that would be on offer if Boebert were a Democrat or, God forbid, a Democrat of Color.
I have no reason to believe the reported behavior by Boebert is not true and she should be ejected from the theater. However, the photo above does not clearly show her vaping or engaging in any other of the reported behaviors. The photo distorts the hands of her date and casts a greenish ooze all over those seated in the rows in front of her. This photo also shows numerous patrons engaged with their cell phones and talking so I have to assume this photo was prior to the performance.
I really don’t understand why Boebert’s behavior has any bearing on Trump. For all we know he might be similarly outraged. Trump endorsed Boebert because Boebert supported him; that is the way it works and to assume that endorsements require substantial vetting of the psychological makeup of one’s choice to endorse indicts the choices made by virtually all of the electorate at some point. To assume that Trump or anyone else would have anticipated such behavior makes us all guilty of bad choices based on actions by others after the fact.
This essay could have been written without the Trump references. I have said many times I am not a big fan of Trump and did not vote for him in the 2016 primary. I am also not happy that he is the frontrunner now, but I find it grossly unfair to link him to another’s idiotic acts.
“the photo above does not clearly show her vaping or engaging in any other of the reported behaviors.”
THIS VIDEO may clear things up.
Paul, the video is smoking gun proof of the behavior. I really did not dispute that it took place only that the photo itself included was not sufficient. My real issue is that in text associated with the video clip and also within this essay candidate Trump was included in the story. For what purpose? Her date was a Democrat and may have supported Biden and it was her date who was handsy. The reporter did not associate Biden with this Democrat’s behavior because it would be wrong even though we know old Joe can be handsy himself. Why should Trump be mentioned at all because Boebert supported him and he supported her?
My point is that the ethical way to condemn this is to include only those whose behaviors are to be called out. Using one’s questionable behavior to take a swipe at a third party who is disfavored but nonetheless linked to the offender is unfair to the disfavored third party. If you want to call out behavior of that disfavored third party for the behaviors of that person have at it. To me it is no different than calling Trump supporters a basket of deplorables simply because they support Trump.
Oh, come on, Chris.
She is turned to him and obviously not making any attempt to get him to stop. Meanwhile, she’s giving him about the closest thing you can get to a hand job without actually unzipping his fly. He’s not the only one being “handsy.” At a show recommended for kids 11 and up. Tell me again how drag queen story hours are harmful to kids because they are allegedly sexual, Bobo.
Neither of the links Jack provides mention Trump at all. He is brought into the story elsewhere not because he supports her or vice versa, but because she’s on the short list of possible VP choices should Trump get the nomination. I think that’s a terrifying thought, but there it is.
Curmie it was the Daily Mail UK that included references to Trump. As for the behavior I did NOT suggest, imply or state that the Boebert was innocent. That was in my first sentence.
If you want to impugn Trump for supporting Boebert have at it but you should also condemn the senior ethics counsel for the Biden administration for giving the legislative candidate and porn queen his endorsement in the form of $1000 for her campaign. We should also condemn Biden for choosing an ethics professional who was too lazy to vett Susanne Gibson.
If you are going to tie a third party to the bad behavior of another be consistent.
I kept trying to freeze the video to get a bigger puff but gave up eventually. My fault. Couldn’t get a video of it to embed.
Trump endorsed one useless and unfit candidate after another, Boebert being one of the few who won. He shares responsibility for her being in Congress, and deserves to be linked to her as an example of his execrable judgmnet in appointments, staff and allies. She’s been an obvious hack since well before this.
And “it” doesn’t work that way, or shouldn’t. She unqualified to serve and incompetent. Endorsing such a clod is itself incompetent and irresponsible.
I would agree if she demonstrated that behavior prior to the endorsement. Whether Trump endorsed her or not is irrelevant. Trump supported other candidates some good and some bad. Voters that rely on the endorsement by a third person are lazy voters so the blame for bad elected people lies squarely on their shoulders. The people of her district elected her not Trump.
How is this different than laying the sins of the father on a son or vice versa?
Chris, he endorsed someone capable of behaving like this, lying and issuing a phony apology. Qualified Reps don’t do any of that. She’s been embarrassing from the moment she was elected. Ether Trump didn’t vet her responsibly, or he didn’t care that she was a loose cannon. Either way, he’s accountable.
I understand your pov I just have a hard time with holding anyone responsible for another’s behavior after such an endorsement.
I just learned that the senior ethics counsel currently in the Biden administration gave a $1000.00 donation to the Susanna Gibson campaign (Source: Larry O’Connor show WMAL radio 9/18/23). Should an ethics professional like this be held accountable for the activities of the candidate he endorses the candidate performs on Chaturbate?
Oh, Jack. I’ve been at the political ethics dunces’ dance too long, 30+ years now, and in Chicago, to boot.
The dance is ongoing. It’s tiring me out. As a friend once wisely remarked, “all politicians are asshats.”
At least it’s true of both parties (and unions too). “So there’s that.”
Thank you, always. And l’shanah tovah.
“Gibson… nor did she try to lie her way out of trouble.”
Yes she did, she and/or her lawyer said the videos were leaked and/or revenge porn – neither of which is true.
At some point it’s asking which is worse, the slut or the prostitute.
One is being selfish, the other is profiting from depravity (and at some point it’s hard to tell which is which, but at least Bobert isn’t soliciting donations for sex acts).
It’s just sad, all of it.
You’re right—I was just talking about the apology, which came after her vaping lie was blown.
It’s clear by now that anybody who openly supports Trump in the public sphere is going to make themselves the target of a very powerful, highly organized effort to destroy them personally, by hook or by crook. It takes a certain kind of person to stare down such a threat and carry on, undaunted. Now, maybe a few of those people will undaunted by virtue of great courage and unshakeable integrity. But that clearly isn’t the only kind of person with that kind of fearlessness, and (I fear) neither is it the most numerous. There’s another personality type characterized by a muted ability to feel fear and total indifference to the approval of authority or society at large, and that is the sociopath. Finally, we must also consider those born without the good sense God gave a mayfly, who don’t fear these threats because they’re unable to comprehend them. I’m leaning towards considering Boebert a member of the third group.
You’re giving her too much credit, Dave. I don’t see what Trump has to do with her problems at all. If Nancy Pelosi behaved like that in a theater, she’d be pilloried, and would deserve it. Michelle Obama.