Staff ReportsKamala Harris seems to have mastered the art of political gymnastics, flipping her positions with the grace of an Olympic athlete. After an entire debate, one must wonder why the Vice President hasn’t bothered to clarify her dramatic policy changes. It’s almost as if she expects the American public to forget her previous positions overnight, which, frankly, is a little optimistic. Politicians often adjust their views to fit the political winds, but typically they at least throw a bone to transparency, unlike Harris, who appears to be hiding behind an army of strategists.
The reality is that Democrats desperately want to shield voters from Harris’s bewildering collection of nonsensical rhetoric. To many, she might resemble an empty vessel, waiting to be filled with whatever sounds good at the moment. The last thing anyone wants is for her to go off-script and actually speak her mind, as that might strip the veneer off the carefully curated image she’s cultivated. With Harris, it’s better to keep her under wraps to avoid ruining what little enthusiasm there is for her candidacy.
“‘I’m sorry, a person can’t just wake up one morning and abandon their entire worldview without an explanation.’”
Explain Yourself, Kamala Harris! 👇 https://t.co/KOxjxZ2N5y
— AMAC (@AMACforAmerica) September 15, 2024
One can only shake their head at the prospect of Harris having no real philosophical anchor. Instead, her actions suggest that power itself is her guiding star. This raises legitimate questions about her previously held beliefs, especially as her positions seem to shift more frequently than a weathervane in a tornado. Take, for example, her previous endorsement of the infamous Green New Deal. She passionately supported it back in 2019, declaring climate change an existential threat. Yet now, her campaign asserts that she has turned her back on such extreme proposals, leaving everyone wondering what spurred such a dramatic about-face.
As anyone with even a passing interest in policy knows, Harris hasn’t just been dabbling in the nuances of tax rates. Her previous fervor for radical ideas—like eliminating fossil fuels and transforming the economy at an astonishing cost—leads one to question her motives. Did she genuinely believe that dismantling modern conveniences was in the best interest of society, or was it just a scheme to earn political points with progressives? If she’s now against policies that could cripple the economy, it would be enlightening to know what shifted her perspective.
Equally perplexing is her silence on pivotal issues affecting American citizens, especially concerning health care and immigration. Harris has also thrown her support behind taxpayer-funded universal health care for illegal immigrants, and her previous comments on providing extensive government services to non-citizens raise eyebrows. Voters deserve clarity on why she’s in support of policies that prioritize spending taxpayer money on non-citizens while ignoring the concerns of struggling Americans. The mystery deepens with her backing of policies like gender transition surgeries for detained immigrants, leaving everyone wondering how she squares that with current fiscal realities.
Moreover, an inquisitive voter might reasonably expect Harris to address her earlier stances on policing and social justice, such as her backing for cash bail for protesters wreaking havoc in major cities or her support for the controversial “defund the police” movement. The vice president has seemingly erased these positions from her political resume without a trace, suggesting that current voter sentiment may not align with her previous radical ideology. Yet, in a world where informed decisions supposedly reign supreme, Harris appears less concerned about transparency and more focused on dodging accountability. It’s a curious strategy, especially for someone enamored with the title of “defender of democracy.”
