Staff Reports
Vice President Kamala Harris, despite her spectacular flameout in the 2020 primary, still managed to sneak onto the debate stage a few times, much to the delight of political junkies everywhere. One memorable moment came during her exchanges with former Representative Tulsi Gabbard, someone who has since traded her home in the Democratic Party for the more sensible pastures of Independent thought. Gabbard, who now endorses Donald Trump for president, has even taken on the task of preparing him for the upcoming debate against Harris.
In a recent appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Gabbard addressed the not-so-simple question of whether the Vice President would be a worthy opponent for Trump. Gabbard, who has experience grappling with Harris’ slippery debate tactics, merely stated that Harris has “a lot of experience,” which is one way to put it. After all, Harris’ extensive history in public office includes achievements that don’t quite hold up under scrutiny, especially compared to Trump’s track record.
For those of you who may have missed my CNN interview with Dana Bash on State of the Union: pic.twitter.com/eeW4MKUjJt
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) September 2, 2024
Gabbard struck a chord when she pointed out that the contrast between Trump and Harris’ records couldn’t be starker. The former congresswoman made it clear that while Trump spent four years trying to revitalize America, Harris has been busy working under the swaying leadership of President Joe Biden. It’s a little rich to tout her experience when so much of it has come from being the Vice President in a term marked by staggering inflation and open borders. The supposed opportunity Gabbard highlighted is more about voters recognizing how out of touch Harris has become with everyday American struggles.
While reminiscing about their past debates, Gabbard pulled back the curtain on Harris’ notorious hypocrisy, particularly concerning criminal justice reform. It seems Harris has a talent for doing the exact opposite of what she preaches, even boasting about her prosecutorial past while laughing off her own marijuana mishaps. For voters looking for consistency in their candidates, Gabbard’s examples illustrate just how far removed Harris is from her current rhetoric.
On a more personal note, Gabbard revealed that she had been placed on a secret domestic terror watchlist, a lovely memento from the Harris-Biden administration. This act of political retribution showcases just how far the left will go to silence dissenting voices, proving that anyone who dares challenge the status quo is likely to be punished. The arbitrary nature of such lists raises alarm bells, as it signals a dangerous precedent where those in power wield their authority to target political adversaries.
In the same Sunday interview, Gabbard discussed the really important issues – like Trump’s recent visit to Arlington National Cemetery. Here, the mainstream media became apoplectic over petty grievances regarding Trump’s demeanor and alleged incidents while completely downplaying the gravity of the occasion. Gabbard was there, witnessing Trump honor the families of 13 servicemembers who tragically lost their lives due to Harris and Biden’s botched exit from Afghanistan. Instead of focusing on the memorial, the left was more interested in manufacturing outrage over trivialities.
Gabbard took a strong stand against the media’s narrative, asserting that it is the families who deserve the coverage, not the drama that seems to consume the mainstream media. It is this kind of perspective that highlights the real divide in American politics today – one side values the memory of the fallen while the other prefers to stoke outrage for ratings and clicks. Not surprisingly, Senator Tom Cotton mirrored Gabbard’s sentiments on another network, exposing the Democrats’ habit of rewriting history, particularly with respect to Harris’ schedule during critical events like the dignified transfer of service members.
In summary, as the political landscape heats up leading to the debates ahead, the contrast could not be clearer. Voters are presented with a choice between Trump’s focus on American strength and prosperity and Harris, who seems more interested in semantics and slip-ups. Will the American public be swayed by experience that leads to questionable results, or will they take note of a candidate who took action and sought to make America great again? The stakes couldn’t be higher.
