Staff Reports
In her recent interview with NBC News, Vice President Kamala Harris has taken it upon herself to bemoan the “divisive” climate of American politics. She waxes poetic about her desire to “turn the page,” or perhaps “close the page” on this supposed era of division. It’s a baffling phrase that leaves many scratching their heads, wondering if she’s trying to pull a fast one or just has a new addiction to vague semantics. Sure, America has its rifts, and it’s no secret that both major parties share a bit of the blame—Harris included. The truth is, differing opinions about the nation’s future and values are as American as apple pie. The Founding Fathers set up this government to ensure local control, letting communities shape their destinies based on their own beliefs. For folks feeling frustrated with the national drama, the option exists to either vote with their feet or enact change up close and personal.
At the heart of Harris’ lamentation is a stark contrast between her top-down, command-and-control ideology and the more decentralized nature of American governance. She’s been branded a California leftist to the core, and her blueprint for America seems to be a colorfully repackaged version of the Golden State’s strict leftist policies. During her foray into the presidential race last time, she was all about controlling the masses, pushing identity politics and various mandates faster than most could keep up. Fast forward to her current campaign, and one might assume she’s hoping voters have selective memories. Her aides insist that her far-left stances from yesteryear are misaligned with her new persona. However, when the time comes for solid explanation, Harris tends to evade the spotlight like a deer in headlights.
Harris: The First Amendment Must Take a Back Seat to This 'Fundamental Freedom'. Just remember this, people. Harris says there shouldn’t even be any exemptions for hospitals run by religious to doing abortions! https://t.co/718cTnyDu5
— Rich Draxler (@DraxlerRic45751) October 25, 2024
There’s an undeniable pattern here—she wishes all the centrists to believe they’re not voting for the same person from the last election cycle. Instead, she’s framed herself as a “pragmatic Democrat,” eager to unite the country. Call it reminiscent of Joe Biden’s promise to bring everyone together—if only it weren’t so ironic. While she paints herself as the great bridge builder, it’s hard to overlook her affinity for avoiding the details about her ideological metamorphosis. Questions about her previous beliefs come with strict limitations—respondent’s remorse, it seems—where her answers are either vague or simply not offered at all.
While she brushes off inquiries about her once-radical views, there remains one area where she’s unapologetically consistent: her extreme pro-abortion stance. Harris champions taxpayer-funded abortion on demand, no matter the stage of pregnancy. When posed with the suggestion of even a slight limitation, such as allowing religious exemptions for healthcare providers, she deflected like a quarterback avoiding a sack. Apparently, “closing the page” on divisiveness doesn’t extend to the conversation around abortion, where she’s firmly against any compromise and insists on her vision of unfettered “choice,” regardless of anyone else’s moral or religious beliefs.
Harris frames unlimited abortion as a so-called “fundamental freedom” while simultaneously trampling on the fundamental freedom of religious expression. Her track record reveals a concerning trend where religious institutions, especially those that align with conservative values, would have no choice but to support abortion services against their beliefs. She’s in the position of expecting taxpayers to fund abortions without limitation while coercing dissenters to participate in the very act that conflicts with their convictions. It all boils down to this—when it comes to her radical approach, Harris doesn’t really practice what she preaches about openness or unity. If her past is any indication, when push comes to shove, the Vice President will come down on the side of her extreme policies, leaving the First Amendment in the dust.
As the Supreme Court stands today, decisions on Harris’ radical views may lead to a serious clash, yet her aspirations for court reform—like the infamous practice of court packing—are anything but subtle. Coupling this with her running mate’s flippant remarks about dismantling the Electoral College reveals a blatant disregard for institutional integrity. It’s a classic tactic of the left to claim guardianship over American democracy while simultaneously plotting its demise. For voters wavering between party lines, especially those hesitant about Trump, the path becomes clear: Harris and her cohorts don’t garner trust on institutions, making any calls for unity ring hollow against their radical backdrop.
