Kamala Harris’ office rife with dissent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Excellent piece by Peggy Noonan re: Kamala needing to straighten up, get serious, and do her job.
***

Her real problems look more like this: She loves the politics of politics too much, and not the meaning. When people meet with her they come away saying that what she cares about is the politics of the issue, not the issue itself. But even as she’s obsessed with the game of national politics she’s not so far particularly good at it. When she sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, she spectacularly flamed out.

Ms. Harris has never seemed especially earnest. This would be a good time for earnestness.

Would a new and serious Kamala Harris be spoofed? Yes, but it would be a better kind of spoofing. Let them say you look chastened: People would be relieved to see you look chastened. Let them snidely suggest you had previously hidden your serious side. You did. Let them say you’ve been humbled. You should be. So far you’ve got a lot to be humble about.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/kamala-harris-needs-to-get-serious-biden-administration-competency-approval-rating-polling-11639093358

Sounds like she is missing her true calling in the media, or hammering away on twitter, endlessly trying to score a quick "gotcha" point on some rando.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excellent piece by Peggy Noonan re: Kamala needing to straighten up, get serious, and do her job.
***

Her real problems look more like this: She loves the politics of politics too much, and not the meaning. When people meet with her they come away saying that what she cares about is the politics of the issue, not the issue itself. But even as she’s obsessed with the game of national politics she’s not so far particularly good at it. When she sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, she spectacularly flamed out.

Ms. Harris has never seemed especially earnest. This would be a good time for earnestness.

Would a new and serious Kamala Harris be spoofed? Yes, but it would be a better kind of spoofing. Let them say you look chastened: People would be relieved to see you look chastened. Let them snidely suggest you had previously hidden your serious side. You did. Let them say you’ve been humbled. You should be. So far you’ve got a lot to be humble about.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/kamala-harris-needs-to-get-serious-biden-administration-competency-approval-rating-polling-11639093358

Sounds like she is missing her true calling in the media, or hammering away on twitter, endlessly trying to score a quick "gotcha" point on some rando.

Agreed. I honestly don’t think she’s capable of serious introspection and willingness to dig in and do the hard work. She is so far out of her depth.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, let's continue throwing millions (billions?) of dollars at Central America and hoping for a different outcome. Really logical.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, let's continue throwing millions (billions?) of dollars at Central America and hoping for a different outcome. Really logical.

This approach is doomed in these corrupt countries with no infrastructure but even if you were to suspend disbelief these sorts of projects take generations to yield results. This woman is an imbecile.

[Anonymous]

More likely, this investment plan is some sort of shake down. The corrupt leaders in Central America will make some half-assed efforts to curtail migration flows and then pocket a big chunk of the funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More likely, this investment plan is some sort of shake down. The corrupt leaders in Central America will make some half-assed efforts to curtail migration flows and then pocket a big chunk of the funds.

+100
As they have done over and over. What’s the definition of insanity again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More likely, this investment plan is some sort of shake down. The corrupt leaders in Central America will make some half-assed efforts to curtail migration flows and then pocket a big chunk of the funds.

+100
As they have done over and over. What’s the definition of insanity again?

USAID has an extremely poor track record of bringing about any meaningful change in a country. For the most recent and largest fraud they perpetrated see Afghanistan. Outside of its work on medical issues (which is pretty good), they are pretty much welfare for development groups who consistently fail to deliver (and be held accountable) and a waste of money.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Rolling out re-treads of failed policies is just about the laziest, least intelligent tactic one could think of…..it boggles the mind. And this churlish insistence on addressing so called root causes in sovereign countries is a step backwards towards colonialism and paternalistic diplomacy. How about you put your thinking cap on and address the problems within your control, like the southern border and immigration reform. She’s such an embarrassing buffoon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

"A great job?" On what, exactly? What foreign policy?


This quote is laughable:
"Her efforts at controlling immigration at its sources have directly resulted in the formation of a new anti-corruption task force focused on countries in Central America to ensure aid dollars are not misspent, a human smuggling and trafficking task force, a program on women’s empowerment, and funding for housing and business in the Northern Triangle. Just this Monday, she announced over $1.2 billion in U.S. investments in Central America, made in response to her call last spring for U.S. companies to help stimulate economic growth there as a way of helping to stem the tide of migration at its sources. Said one senior Mexican foreign ministry official, “Her result-oriented focus has made a big difference.”


I see the Daily Beast was at the WH meeting where the media was told to present more positive coverage of them.

[Anonymous]

I think it is the pinnacle of intellectual dishonesty and cowardice to dismiss every single critique of Harris as rooted in racial animus or misogyny. It's insanely stupid behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it is the pinnacle of intellectual dishonesty and cowardice to dismiss every single critique of Harris as rooted in racial animus or misogyny. It's insanely stupid behavior.

And it’s insanely stupid to look at this thread of vituperative “criticism” and not see the racial animus and misogyny that drive it. You can try to fool yourself, but no one else is fooled.