Rep. Louie Gohmert is perhaps the most politically fearless member of Congress. The conservative Texas Republican is legendary for bucking his party leaders, including a high-profile challenge this month of House Speaker John Boehner for his position. And he’s a favorite target of liberals and late-night talk show hosts, who routinely mock the Tea Party favorite for what they consider his extreme — or even conspiratorial — views.
Yet for Gohmert, 61, a lawyer and former judge from East Texas first elected to Congress in 2004, it’s all worth the hassles and headaches, as his legion of loyal supporters back home and nationwide serves as vindication for his efforts. He adds he’s often misquoted, misunderstood and underestimated, and that his critics — not him — are the ones harboring far-fetched ideals.
The congressman spoke recently with the Washington Examiner about his rivalry with Boehner, his role as a Tea Party favorite and a life-changing summer in Ukraine. The following version of the conversation was edited for space.
Examiner: Why did you challenge John Boehner for speaker? In hindsight, was it a good move?
Gohmert: It’s never wrong to do the right thing, and it was the right thing. … Two years ago, I had felt the need to have a different speaker. [I] didn’t have support but felt like I had a chance to detail chronologically the failed [House Republican] leadership since January of 2006, when the current speaker was first elected leader. And [I] did so and nominated Newt Gingrich. I had had some others who I thought might win the speakership back two years ago, [and] I had made clear that anybody who nominates me, I’m withdrawing my name immediately. You don’t have to be a member of the House to be speaker, according to the Constitution. … But anyway, up until about two hours before the election two years ago in January, there were more than a sufficient number of votes to force a second ballot. … And it was close. But the speaker was able to turn some votes at the very last minute who had actually committed in writing that they wouldn’t vote for him.
Examiner: Was this more about messaging than actually wanting to be speaker?
Gohmert: This time, it was never about me. And I want to make that very clear. There were a number of us who were talking to different members about voting for a different speaker, like we did two years ago in January. And we’re running into some of the same blocks we did two years ago. [Rep.] Thomas Massie explained it better than I could — he said, in essence: Members knew that their constituents did not support the current speaker two years ago and also not this time. But they were able to say two years ago, … “Well, there was nobody else that was an announced candidate, there was nobody actually running, so I had no choice but to vote for the speaker.” Because if you support the speaker, then you have a chance to get money he raises, you’ve got the chance to get the committee [assignment] you want, and that kind of thing. So they get the best of both worlds — they satisfy their constituents [because] there’s nobody else that’s a candidate, so I don’t have any choice. …
[So] they said, “We think we need an announced candidate [this year], and we think you’re the only one in all of Congress that can get enough media attention to give this movement a chance.” And I said, “Well, I don’t think that’s a good idea because if I announce, then you have all of the Establishment groups, you’ll have all of the speaker’s allies, all of his donors, turn and make the race about Gohmert instead of looking at the failed [House GOP] leadership over the last nine years.” And I think that’s where the concentration should be.
But they said, “Yeah, but if we don’t have you announce, we don’t ever get close to having enough [votes], and we end up like we did last year — falling miserably short.” … I said the only way that this could work, to keep it from being about me and taking the focus off the current speaker, is if somebody else announced today, Saturday, and then I could see if Fox News would let me on in the morning and I could announce there. [Rep.] Dan Webster is talking about announcing Monday, and if we do that, we have a different person who announces each day and that would make very clear to the public that this was not about Louie Gohmert — this was about having choices and having a real leadership election.
So [then Rep.] Ted Yoho, being a consummate patriot, said, “You know, I could announce today [as well].” … But all that is to say, it was never about me. It was trying to get 29 [votes], which was how many we needed to vote for a person other than the speaker that would’ve thrown it to another ballot. … And Republicans at that point could agree on a consensus candidate, and I knew all of the people who would’ve been willing to jump in there once I’ve broken the ice.
Examiner: Weren’t you worried about the consequences of your actions?
Gohmert: It’s never wrong to do the right thing. And I’ve come to see in the years I was on the bench as a judge, and since I’ve been in Congress, that doing the right thing may initially be politically unpopular but in the long run, you’re always better off doing what you know is right. And I’ve found that to be true. … And I’ve seen across America, people want elected officials, servants, to do what they said they would do before they got elected.
Examiner: But what about Ronald Reagan’s “11th Commandment”: Thou shall not speak ill of any fellow Republican?
Gohmert: I agree with that, but there are times when it’s time for different leadership. And if you will recall, yes, that was his 11th Commandment. But it didn’t keep him from challenging Gerald Ford, who was going to be the [1976 Republican presidential] nominee. He realized there was a real need for standup leadership in America. So he challenged Gerald Ford in 1976, when all the Establishment was saying, “You’re not going to beat him, don’t do it, you’re going to divide the party.” But guess what? He challenged [Ford] anyway because he knew there was a need for leadership. In my case, unlike Reagan, I knew I was not going to get elected [speaker]. But I knew it would open the door for someone else.
Examiner: Have you spoken with Mr. Boehner since the speakership election?
Gohmert: I said congratulations.
Examiner: How would you describe your relationship with the speaker?
Gohmert: A lot of love, warmth, affection.
Examiner: You’re considered a key voice in the Tea Party movement. A lot of Tea Party folks consider you a hero. Are you comfortable with that?
Gohmert: I know I’m not a hero, I’m a servant, I’m just a lowly legislator. But I think it points to just how desperate people are to see somebody make a promise and keep a promise. I don’t think it’s any more than that. It’s a pretty low bar to jump over if I’m a hero.
Examiner: You’ve never been shy to broach controversial topics. You’ve compared homosexuality to bestiality, you’ve —
Gohmert: No, I haven’t. There’s been a lot of unfair things taken out of context, and the fact that you would say that indicates that, you know, there’s a lot in the media that has flat misquoted me. … I didn’t compare homosexuality to bestiality. We had a debate [in the House] over hate crimes, and some of us were trying to force the issue and say, “OK, you want to protect homosexuality, at least vote with us and say pedophilia is not a protected status or class. Let’s at least vote together and say bestiality is not a protected class under the hate crimes.” We could not get the Democrats to agree. They’re the ones that wanted to say there’s no difference — we’re not going to carve out pedophilia, we’re not going to carve out bestiality. They’re the ones who have actually put them as parallel or equal. That certainly was not me. I don’t believe that, never said that.
Examiner: Do you think the mainstream media, the media in general, has treated you unfairly?
Gohmert: Not any more than any other conservative. But there’s just a lot of dishonesty and a lot of efforts to marginalize people who take the positions that Hubert Humphrey did in the ’60s as an extremely liberal Democrat. You can go back and hear Humphrey talking about the importance of a mother and father in the home and how much damage divorce has done, that we need a mom and dad in the home. Well, now liberals like the extreme liberal Hubert Humphrey was, would be considered right-wing extremists. Actually, I’m not taking any positions that are not particularly different from people that were considered liberal back in the ’60s. So I just think it’s also an indication about how far the left wing — the hippies and yippies of the ’60s and early ’70s, as they’ve taken over the media, taken over Hollywood — [have gone] that they have convinced America to move left. And actually, if you get right down to it, I’m extremely mainstream. It’s just the Left wants to paint it otherwise.
Examiner: Does it bother you when liberals, when comics, when TV late-night talk show hosts, make fun of you, make you the butt of a joke?
Gohmert: Well, if it’s funny, no. But sometimes it’s crass or they misquote or fail to portray. There was some great deal miscommunicated by the mainstream and the left-wing media when I was basically quoting the FBI director saying we had people from radically Islamist countries, or countries where there was radical Islam, who would change their names to Hispanic-sounding names and then try to blend in to come in illegally into the country. And so, yeah, there was a lot of mockery over things like that. And they failed to ever point out that actually I was quoting the FBI director. That kind of thing has happened.
Examiner: What’s one thing that most people don’t know about Louie Gohmert that they may be surprised to learn?
Gohmert: Well, I’ve been portrayed by the Left as being ignorant. One guy wrote me that I was a moron and misspelled “moron.” But if all you ever read is the left-wing media or see MSNBC and CNN, then you would say, as some do on the Internet, how ignorant [I am], maybe the most stupid person in Congress. I know how well I’ve done on national standardized testings. I know the awards I’ve won in high school … I know the awards I won at [Texas] A&M. Academically I know the awards I’ve won at one of the best law schools there is, Baylor Law School. So I know how I stack up competitively. … So I’m quite comfortable with my intelligence level and realize that, hey, ignorance is something people are entitled to have if they want it. And I won’t hold it against them.
Examiner: What are your political ambitions? A run for Senate?
Gohmert: Recently I had friends like Glenn Beck and others that were pushing me to run for Senate. … And the truth is, I’m willing to run for anything but president, but I have to have a peace about it. And with all the people urging me to run for Senate, I didn’t have that peace that that was what I was supposed to do. And I’m certainly, as you may have guessed, not afraid to run and fail. I’m afraid of not doing what I was supposed to do, regardless of the outcome. So, may it be a run for the Senate in the future? I don’t rule that out. But for right now the battle’s where I am in the House, and I’m giving it all I’ve got.
Examiner: I understand you spent a summer in college as an exchange student in Ukraine?
Gohmert: That was back [in 1973] when it was the real Soviet Union.
Examiner: What was that experience like?
Gohmert: It was, until [I got to] Congress, the most mentally and emotionally draining experience I’ve ever been through in my life. I went from Texas and got thrown into an environment that was completely new. I feel in love with Ukrainian people. … There were eight Americans let in [my program] that summer, and we were put in a summer camp with other college students. But one of the most frequently heard sayings when I would ask things like, “You know your government is lying to you, doesn’t it bother you? Why don’t you do something about it?” You’re talking about college students, the intelligentsia, the ones that jump up and protest and demand equality, demand truth, those kinds of things. And here in the Soviet Union, they would shrug and basically say, … “There’s nothing to be done.” And the fatalism was so depressing, emotionally draining, and I felt so sorry for the people there.
Examiner: Did the experience make you more patriotic?
Gohmert: Oh, absolutely. I’ve been amazed to hear that people would go to the Soviet Union and end up becoming dedicated communists. I thought, man, I don’t know where you grew up — must’ve had a pretty tough home life not to realize how good we have it in America.
