Tell me true: how did Kamela Harris, a woman even our slackjawed, drooling leftist “media” was labelling worthless and a drag on the brilliant Joe Biden’s presidential re-up effort as late as this May end up the Democrat party’s presidential candidate? And where did Joe go?
Remember “Selected, not elected?” Yes, the election of 2000, when the Supreme Court – the old one, mind, before Trump’s appointments gave the Left apoplexy – told the all-Democrat Florida Supreme Court to stop making excuses to conjure up votes for Al Gore unless they were going to permit the same for George W Bush? Perish the thought, right? Hence the criticism of the younger Bush: he was “Selected, not elected.” Which was a catchy lie, but a lie nonetheless.
Now the same accusation can be made with far greater accuracy of Kamala Harris’ transmogrification from necessary nuisance to ticket-topping genius of joy. We can even name the selectors with a good degree of confidence. Hakeem Jefferies and Chuck Shumer were in the room. In all probability Susan Rice and Anthony Blinken as well. But Nancy Pelosi shanked the old goat when he was publicly exposed for being, well, an old goat. With a bad memory and serious cognitive problems.
Why was it done? Because Democrat Big Wazoos came to the conclusion that Joe would be a disaster for the “down-ballot races,” code for “other Democrats running for other offices at the same time.” And that just couldn’t be allowed to happen.
Note that their concerns weren’t even remotely about any true national interest, like if Joe was up to facing down some of the worst international gangsters the world has seen in awhile. One could make a case that, given rising global tensions and ongoing conflicts in Europe, the Middle East and Asia, Joe had to go in favor of someone who could stand up to Russia, Iran and China, but that wasn’t the reason there was a soft coup in the Democrat party. The entire issue revolved around Democrats arrogating and retaining power. Period.
“Down-ballot races” have nothing to do with whether you can put food on your table and have a roof over your head. They don’t have to do with keeping you or this nation safe – with the occasional exception of George-Soros-funded chaos mongers like George Gascon or Alvin Bragg. They have little to do with defending national sovereignty or security. They have to do instead with enlarging the scope of the Democrat party’s power until, in the words of one of their guiding lights, there is “Nothing against the state, nothing above the state, nothing outside the state.” Democrat politicians will use any crisis to get to that point. How do we know? Because they’ve said so, right out loud.
To judge the nature of the current Democrat party one only has to look at the way this coup unfolded. Joe Biden ran for re-election in primaries. Protected and mischaracterized by the Progressive ad agency most of our media has become, he garnered millions of votes. From the credulous, perhaps, but votes nonetheless. Then, when the illusion of competence was undone, a small group of top party officials in a room somewhere said something like “Joe, ya gotta go.” And he went. No voting, No transparency. No public input. Because the leadership of this party couldn’t care less about you, your opinions or your preferences. It is they, not Donald Trump, who are the true “threat to democracy.” They’ve demonstrated it in the clear light of day. Because, as cartoonist Thomas Nast once said of New York’s notoriously corrupt Boss Tweed, “what are you going to do about it?”
So now we have Kamela, who got exactly zero delegates in 2020 when she ran against Joe, and exactly zero delegates in 2024 when she ran as his vice-president despite herculean efforts to replace her by the same people who now praise her to the heavens.
And we have a campaign that mirrors 2020: Kamela dodges questions and hides from the public while a fawning Democrat media praises her for her invisible accomplishments and accuses her opponent for being every evil thing Democrat leaders have shown themselves to be. Her public pronouncements are Progressive puffery at best; her announced policies range from hideously unconsidered to demonstrably dangerous and damaging. But having apparently succeeded once the question is, will the American electorate be so credulous as to allow itself to be flimflammed twice in a row?
Well? Will you?
