Staff Reports
Kamala Harris recently decided to finally clarify her policy positions, which had previously been muddled and vague—much like her speeches. With a new “Issues” page on her campaign website, she aims to dodge any tough questions during the upcoming debate. Naturally, this move comes after relentless pressure from both sides of the political aisle, proving that clarity is not her strong suit.
The Issues page is replete with self-promoting narratives about her life story and, not surprisingly, disproportionate mentions of former President Trump. Harris’s team appears to think that if they keep invoking Trump’s name, perhaps they can distract people from the actual content—or lack thereof—of her proposed policies. In fact, the Trump name shows up a staggering 29 times, while mentions of Biden barely make it to seven. This feels less like a policy discussion and more like a campaign against his memory—almost as if she believes mentioning him enough could somehow justify her own ineffectiveness.
The first item of business on her issues page is her economic background. She presents herself as the poster child of the middle-class dream, boasting about her upbringing with a working mom. However, there’s quite the disconnect when one digs deeper. Her mother wasn’t a down-on-her-luck waitress; she was a respected biomedical scientist, while her dad taught Marxism at Stanford. It’s almost comical how Harris insists on spinning the narrative to fit her political agenda.
Kamala’s New Policy Page Reveals What She’ll Do With Illegals She Let Into the U.S. #PJMedia https://t.co/UfR7PioM16
— Matt Margolis (@mattmargolis) September 9, 2024
Then there’s the pièce de résistance: the border policy claims. With all the flair of a magician, she insists that she supports “tough, smart solutions” to secure the border while also promising comprehensive immigration reform. This is supposed to make her sound tough but really just reveals her desire to maintain the status quo. Let’s not forget that while she claims to have championed bipartisan border security legislation, the only thing that seems to have bipartisan support is the confusion surrounding her actual stance on border control.
It’s clear she doesn’t plan to deport the millions who entered the country during her tenure as Border Czar. Instead, she envisions a grand plan that involves giving a pathway to citizenship to those who illegally crossed the border. In the eyes of conservative Americans, this is not just irresponsible; it’s a blatant disregard for the rule of law. In summary, Harris’s so-called plans seem designed more for talk than action, bolstered by a hefty dose of misdirection and an impressive knack for exaggeration. As the debate looms, one can only wonder if this new page will be met with the same skepticism as the policies it outlines.
