In today's society, where authenticity and moral integrity are valued more than ever, the role of political leaders in standing by their values and beliefs has become increasingly scrutinized. Kamala's recent statement on her unchanging values has sparked a wave of discussions, leading many to question the consistency and authenticity behind her rhetoric.
Unveiling the Deception: Inconsistent Rhetoric vs Reality
During Kamala's recent interview with Dana Bash, she stated "My values have not changed." Her emphasis on unchanging values raises significant questions about the authenticity of her politics and the manipulation behind what she says politically versus what she does and has done as a legislator and current Vice President. While public figures often project an image of steadfastness in their beliefs, the reality behind their actions tells a different story. Are Kamala's values truly unchanging, or is this statement merely a facade to portray a sense of moral authenticity in order to secure political favorability and electoral victory?
This bold declaration not only sheds light on her perceived consistency but also prompts a deeper analysis of her political persona. The notion of unchanging values in the realm of politics raises intriguing questions about the intersection of personal beliefs and public image. It beckons us to ponder the authenticity of Kamala's political stance and the potential dissonance between her rhetoric and actions.
Public figures, especially politicians, often strive to present a narrative of unwavering principles to garner trust and support from the electorate. However, the discrepancy between what is professed and what is practiced can unveil a complex web of intentions and strategies. In Kamala's case, her assertion invites scrutiny into the congruence of her stated values with her legislative decisions and political machinations.
Delving deeper into the dichotomy between public projection and political reality, one might question whether Kamala's emphasis on unchanging values serves as a genuine reflection of her moral compass or is a calculated maneuver to cultivate a specific public image. The juxtaposition of her words with her deeds invites us to contemplate the intricate dynamics of political authenticity versus rhetorical manipulation.
Ultimately, the statement "My values have not changed" acts as a catalyst for a nuanced exploration of Kamala's political identity and the intricate interplay between rhetoric and action in the realm of public service. It beckons us to critically examine the authenticity of political figures and the complexities that underlie their professed beliefs.
The Flawed Narrative of Unchanging Values
It is essential to distinguish between the rhetoric of unchanging values and the practical application of this expression in professional politics. Kamala's claim of unwavering values may seem reassuring on the surface, but upon closer inspection, it reveals a narrative filled with contradictions and inconsistencies rooted in a history of reckless progressive policies reinforced by a firm and undeniable commitment to liberal ideology.
Past vs Present: A Closer Examination of Kamala's Values
To better understand the dynamics at play, it is crucial to delve into Kamala's past actions and statements to compare them with her current portrayal of unchanging values.
With the eyes of the nation upon her at the 2024 Democratic National Convention, Kamala unleashed a barrage of progressive affirmations that seemed to check all the boxes to gain the approval and applause of the thirty-thousand attendees in the stands and the scores of Democrats watching on TV nationally.
In her acceptance speech, she passionately reflected upon the experiences of her family upbringing and the influences that made her who she is today. Early on, while celebrating the inspiring words of her mother, she recalled when her mother told her and her sister "to never complain about injustice but do something about it...do something about it..." Shortly thereafter, she segued to a story about her best friend Wanda who was a victim of family sexual abuse. The highlight from this story, which she cited as an experience that inspired her to pursue law and to become a criminal prosecutor, was when she said the following:
This is one of the reasons I became a prosecutor, to protect people like Wanda because I believe everyone has a right to safety, dignity, and justice....A harm against any one of us is a harm against all of us.
As commendable and refreshing as this sounds for Kamala, the realities reflect otherwise. Fast forward to when she was the San Francisco District Attorney, Kamala oversaw numerous high-profile cases involving the sexual abuse scandal that rocked the Catholic Church.
Following Kamala's DNC speech, Bishopaccountability.org issued a scathing article summarizing Kamala's role, or the lack thereof, in the Catholic Church scandal while serving as the San Francisco District Attorney. Titled Fact Check: Kamala Harris Covered Up Sexual Abuse Allegations as a Prosecutor Before Claiming to Fight for Victims at DNC, the excerpt below from the article delves into Kamala's damaging track record:
During Harris’s 13-year tenure as district attorney and then attorney general, she failed to prosecute even one case of priest sexual abuse, even as at least 50 major cities brought charges against priests in the same period.
“
They’re full of shit,” Joey Piscitelli, SNAP northwest regional director, told Peter Schweizer, a Breitbart News senior contributor and author of Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite.
You can quote me on that. They’re not protecting the victims, Piscitelli said of Harris’s office.
Rick Simons, an attorney who represented victims of clergy sexual abuse in California, said Harris’s action of covering up documents on the cases “shows a pattern and practice and policy of ignoring the rights of children by one of the largest institutions of the city and county of San Francisco, and in the Bay Area.”
Rick Simons, an attorney who represented victims of clergy sexual abuse in California, said Harris’s action of covering up documents on the cases “shows a pattern and practice and policy of ignoring the rights of children by one of the largest institutions of the city and county of San Francisco, and in the Bay Area.”
[Victim groups] were outraged by her actions, Schweizer argued. Far from protecting victims, they argued, the cover-up was actually protecting the abusers by keeping their alleged crimes secret.
The feel-good stories from Kamala's youth that were presented earlier quickly fade amidst the egregious counter narrative she created in her failure to defend and protect the victims of clergy sexual abuse during her time as San Francisco District Attorney. This story alone evidences the schism that exists between the feel-good rhetoric she uses in her superwoman portrayal and the flawed reality in her failure to live up to the lofty image she propagates for herself. In the next example, I shall revisit my article from last month titled Kamala's Nigerian Christian Persecution Problem is a Disqualifier.
After meeting with the President and Vice President of Nigeria, a country torn asunder by sectarian violence and bloodshed where "52,000 Nigerian Christians were slaughtered by Islamists from 2009-2022. During this same period, over 18,000 Churches and 2,200 Christian schools were destroyed or damaged by arson."
The White House readouts from these meetings reflect numerous topics discussed, but no mention of Christian persecution and atrocities. Let's go back to those famous words she quoted in her DNC speech where she said her mother taught her, "to never complain about injustice but do something about it...do something about it..." And yet, decades later, while meeting with Nigerian leaders as Vice President of the United States, she failed to "do something" or even say something to advocate for Nigerian Christians, who continue to be persecuted and slaughtered by Islamic radicals. Nor does she pursue the legislative option of rallying Congress to support Representative Smith's timely resolution calling for a special envoy to Nigeria who would be authorized to exert U.S. diplomatic and economic pressure with its international partners to help quell anti-Christian aggression. Clearly, she had every opportunity to do something to proactively respond to the bloodshed, but the official record presents an unforgiving reality for which Kamala must be held accountable.
Lastly, Kamala's support of electric vehicle mandates (EV) is well documented. However, this. to the surprise of many, seems to be in transition. For long, she has been a staunch advocate of electric vehicles due to her Climate Change commitments, but as recently as this past Tuesday (September 3rd), when asked for her position on this issue, she declined to comment. This is a complete reversal from her aggressively outspoken approach to a policy priority that was the basis for her Zero-Emission Vehicles Act that she spearheaded in 2019. This sudden about-face was best captured in a September 4th Washington Free Beacon Article, Kamala Harris Won't Say Whether She Would Sign Her Own EV Mandate Bill:
Months after she announced in January 2019 that she would run for president, Harris cosponsored the Zero-Emission Vehicles Act, a bill that was later modified to include language mandating that 43 percent of car sales be electric by 2027 and 100 percent be electric by 2035. That language closely aligns with the language the state of California and other Democratic-led states have codified mandating EVs.
Harris also vowed during the campaign to implement climate policies ensuring 50 percent of all new passenger vehicles sold are EVs by 2030 and 100 percent are EVs by 2035, an archived version of her campaign website shows. She also backed a mandate requiring all new vehicle purchases for corporate fleets, transportation networks, and heavy-duty vehicles be electric by 2030, a policy that would be, by far, the most aggressive of its kind worldwide.
The examples above provide a snapshot of Kamala's historical track record that paints a picture that is seemingly at odds with her recent declaration of unchanging values. By juxtaposing her past versus present stances, a stark contrast emerges, revealing inconsistencies and contradictions that are indefensible and impossible to ignore.
Understanding the Dangers of Moral Apathy
During a time when moral apathy and indifference is widespread, the idea of consistent values shines as a symbol of assurance. Nevertheless, failing to act upon these principles can cast suspicion on the genuine nature and convictions of individuals in high-office and influential roles. Kamala's situation serves as a warning to political leaders about the hazards of declaring unwavering values without backing them up with concrete actions given ones status and ability to effectuate positive change.
The Mirage of Authenticity
In a world where authenticity is a prized virtue, the gap between rhetoric and reality becomes even more pronounced. Kamala's struggle to embody the values she espouses exposes the deceptive nature of performative righteousness, where words fail to translate into meaningful actions.
The Call for Change: Embracing Authenticity as a Pathway to Effective Leadership
As consumers of information and citizens of a global community, we have a responsibility to hold our leaders to account and demand transparency and consistency in their conduct. Kamala's unchanging values statement serves as a reminder of the importance of looking beyond surface-level affirmations and political pontifications for correspondence and consistency between past and present, words and action, and integrity without compromise in those who wield influence and yet seek the public's support.
Moving forward, it is imperative that we challenge the status quo of unchanging values and embrace a paradigm shift towards a more authentic and accountable leadership ethos. By demanding greater levels of transparency and aligning rhetoric with actions, we can create a more honest and principled society that prioritizes integrity over illusion thereby making it the norm and expectation rather than the exception.
Kamala's deceptive discourse is a cautionary tale about the moral hazards that infuse and infect political speech resulting in distrust, cynicism, and apathy. By scrutinizing the gap between rhetoric and reality collectively, we can pave the way for a more honest, authentic, and ethical political ethos where leaders are held to a higher standard of accountability and transparency. Let this be our guide as we strive to uphold integrity in governance and elections in order to promote and protect American exceptionalism without compromising our principles, virtues, and values. In the end, we need to be relentless in our efforts to maintain our standard as the best that democracy has to offer under our highly envied Constitutional Republic. In so doing, we can happily and wholeheartedly reject the comfort of Kamala's "unchanging values without substance" rhetoric while promoting a society where words and deeds align seamlessly thereby guiding us towards a more principled and authentic existence.
To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful. — Edward R. Murrow
Power is actualized only when word and deed have not parted company.
— Hannah Arendt
