Brett Baier Puts Kamala Into a Deer in Headlights Mode with Immigration Question

If you ever wanted to know what a deer in headlights looks like, it was Vice President Kamala Harris as she was squarely trapped by a question brilliantly framed, that she thought she nailed the answer to.

"There's a lot of people that look back at what you said in 2019 when you first ran for president," Brett began. He reminded her that she supported allowing immigrants who were in the country illegally to apply for driver's licenses, that she supported free tuition for illegals at universities, as well as offering illegals free healthcare.

"Listen," Kamala Harris said, almost seeming irritated by the question by her body language. "That was five years ago."

She went on to convey her regard for the law and asserted she didn't advocate for these things while she was vice president. But of course, we all must remember, she was the vice president. Biden would have had to sign off on these things, and I contend even for him, these ideas would have been considered far too radical to take seriously.

Because of course, they are radical, and I think most Americans, including many Democrats, would be opposed to them.

She basically tried to throw out the notion that she would ever go back to her former position. But it was Brett's follow up question that was the gotcha moment. "If that's the case, you chose a running mate, Tim Walz, Governor of Minnesota, who signed those very things into state law. So, do you support that?"

Her pause was nearly 3-seconds long, which may not seem like a very long time. But clearly, she was taken aback by the question and immediately the wheels were spinning in her head. One could have pictured a sudden appearance of Will Robinson's robot in "Lost in Space" entering the frame warning, "Danger! Danger!"

The problem with her ultimate answer is the same as is the problem she has with most of her answers. She didn't answer it. She said her and Tim Walz are committed to following federal law. Yet clearly, Tim Walz had different interests as governor. So, which is it? She changed her position on the position and now Tim Walz has too?

How much more confused can the American people be made trying to figure out what Harris is actually for or against? Why didn't she condemn Walz' law or have further comment on it? Will she now, if elected, go to the courts to ask to challenge Walz' law on the grounds that it violates federal law? And will Walz, who enacted it, now side with her in the challenge?

Does this make sense to anyone?

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

READ ALL THE TAKES ON THE BRETT BAIER INTERVIEW WITH KAMALA HARRIS

Take One: Brett Baier and Kamala Harris on the Border
Take Three: Brett Baier Continues to Lock Kamala Harris Up on the Economy and Her Campaign Slogan
Take Four: The Brett Baier and Kamala Harris Interview: My Final Take

Brett Baier and Kamala Harris on the Border

From the very first question Brett Baier asked in his interview with Vice President Kamala Harris, he had to be as wholly frustrated with her "answer" as I found myself, and that I think a good many Americans would be frustrated with as well.

She did not answer it.

What she did was completely go around it. She kept bringing up the bipartisan bill, and yet the question was not about what they wanted to do nine months ago. It was about what decisions they made on day one, within hours of taking their oath of office, that caused the border issues that have now become a top concern for many Americans, that were clearly a result of their decisions, not Donald Trump's.

She kept wanting to try to hammer it home. "We have a problem." Yeah, sure, that's great to recognize that. But why is it that you can't recognize that it was the decisions of the Biden administration that made the problems big problems? What she's talking about fixing is something that, it is clear, her and Joe Biden broke.

And what of the very stinging question Brett asked her about the border patrol and the bill? "They supported it. But they also just endorsed Donald Trump and said you've been—quote—a failure with border security. Why do you think they said that?"

"I think they're frustrated," Kamala Harris told Brett. 

Yeah. Okay. But why? If your policies, as Harris suggests, were to address the border issues how come the border issue has only gotten worse? How many times, when even Democrat governors and mayors came out and said, "We've got a problem here," did Harris go out alongside Joe Biden and repeatedly tell the American people that the border was secure when clearly it wasn't?

They are her words. "I think they're frustrated." But Brett also reminded her that the Biden administration rescinded 90 Trump border patrol policies, and in the interview, she tried to make the claim that Trump's border policies did not improve things at the border. But the reality is, that doesn't seem to jive with what the border patrol believes to be the case.

If rescinding Trump's policies were an effective strategy on the border issue, wouldn't the border patrol then be endorsing Kamala Harris instead of Donald Trump? Instead, they are "frustrated." But apparently not at the man whose policies they know would be reimplemented on day one if Donald Trump were to be elected.

She was literally talking in circles in spite of herself, and the reason is, she has no answer. And that's part of the reason she was trying so hard to dance around it. They rescinded Trump's policies because they disagreed with them. The plan failed. They are responsible for it. They lied repeatedly to the American people about the issue. And now they simply want it to go away and make it appear that Trump is playing poltics now with the border, when all along the very reason they nixed Trump's border policies was because of politics. Not what would have been in the best interests of the security of our border and the American people.

The bill was nothing more than a last-ditch effort to make it appear they were taking the border issue seriously. But of course, we know that was simply a trick. One that in other circles, she's been able to get away with performing. But Brett wasn't letting her have her "moment" to pour on the spin.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

READ ALL THE TAKES ON THE BRETT BAIER INTERVIEW WITH KAMALA HARRIS

Take Two: Brett Baier Puts Kamala Into a Deer in Headlights Mode with Immigration Question
Take Three: Brett Baier Continues to Lock Kamala Harris Up on the Economy and Her Campaign Slogan
Take Four: The Brett Baier and Kamala Harris Interview: My Final Take

I'm Just Going to Stick with What I Know, Thank You Very Much: It's Columbus Day

by Leonard Knath, staff writer

I'm sorry. Did you just call it Indigenous People's Day? I have a new name for it too, actually, now that you mention it. I am going to call it Blow it Out Your Ass Day. In other words, you can take your political correctness and literally shove it where the sun doesn't shine, and I don't really care about what you think about that any more than you care about changing history, and what a holiday is called.

As it happens to continue to be a free country, with the 1st Amendment so far untouched by cancel culture, I am going to say what I want just like you feel so free to.

By the way, have you seen a bottle of Pearl Milling pancake syrup lately? It says right on the label, "Formerly Aunt Jemimah," so what are you really accomplishing here anyway? I think nothing but more liberal BS that only a very small circle of people care about that accomplishes nothing but to create more division.

Curated by the very people who drive around in Tesla's crying about climate change with "Coexist" stickers on their bumpers while acre and acre of land is mined for minerals to make batteries as coal plants burn ton after ton of coal to bring sparks of electricity to the very plug you put in where the evil gas pump is supposed to go.

Ah. I get it. We're saving the planet and saving ourselves from...ourselves. For the greater good, supposedly. 

Ten years from now we'll be burying those massive car batteries, and ten years after that we'll have aquifers polluted by them after we bury them. The left who clamored so loudly for them will simply blame the big corporations for being the problem, of course.

"You were supposed to figure out how to recycle them. Not bury them!"

Look, whether or not it was Columbus who landed on our shores way back when or whether or not the people he saw when he landed were people from India or indigenous people doesn't matter. It's our history. Right or wrong. It's what it is. It's what it was.  

Why can't we just discuss the mistake? Why do we have to change the history? Why do we have to cancel it? What purpose does it serve to deny it? I mean, what if, in Germany, they completely tried to erase the Hitler era and make it sound more appealing? Because that's really what Indigenous People's Day is all about. Making people feel better. 

Like it or not, good or bad, we have a history just like anywhere else in the world. We don't have to like it. It doesn't even have to be a good history. Slavery sucked, for example. It was terrible. The Jim Crowe days are no more appealing than a colonoscopy without anesthesia or lube. But it still happened.

You can call the day whatever you want to call it. That's your right just like it's mine to call BS on it, and to continue to call it Columbus Day. I'm only mad about it because you're mad about what I want to call it. Otherwise, I couldn't give two hoots.

But that's part of it too, isn't it? You want to control me. You want me to conform to your demands. You want me to crater under the weight of your pressure.

"You can't call them Indians."

Oh, the hell I can't. You can try your best to rewrite history and change the story. You can tear down the statues and rename the pancake syrup. But what you can't do is change the facts, no matter how badly you want to or no matter how hard you try.

Since 1937 it has been called Columbus Day. If you want to call it something else, that's fine. But you're going to have to step in line and wait your turn if you want everyone else onboard with it. It's been Columbus Day for far longer than you have been opposed to it being called that. And if I call it what it is to me, well, you're just going to have to accept it just like you expect me to call it what you want me to call it now.

Season's greetings or Merry Christmas? I don't know. Both are correct. You decide. But don't try to tell me which one is right, and which one is wrong. You don't get to have exclusive dibs on who makes the rules. That's not how it works.

Leonard Knath, pronounced like math, is a seeker of truth and an adamant denier of the status quo. He makes his home in Stratford, New Jersey in Camden County where he lives with his wife Dee and their two cats, Lawson and Saul.

Do you want to keep up with the latest posts from The Springboard? Follow us on our Facebook page to keep up with the latest posts wherever they may be posted.

© 2024 Leonard Knath

The Role of Businesses in Society: It's More than Just Taxes

I often revisit the topic of taxing the rich and big businesses because I think it's crucial to understand it in a different way than we usually tend to. Although, I will admit, it's probably a rather controversial thing to say, I think it's likely in the best interests of most Americans to maintain the current system, even if it appears unfair.

If we view taxes as a contribution to society and our way of life, as they fund essential public services, infrastructure, and social programs like Social Security and Medicare, forming the glue that keeps everything functioning, similarly, businesses contribute enormously too, even if they pay a lower percentage in taxes than the average working-class citizen.

If we consider taxes as a means to enhance society, ensure smooth functioning, and in some circumstances, redistribute wealth, businesses also play a crucial role in achieving these goals through what they produce.

Consider that businesses provide employment, helping people support themselves and their families. They drive innovation, creating new products and technologies that improve our lives. Although they may not send a physical check to the IRS, they significantly contribute to the tax base by stimulating economic growth through their goods and services, which generate tax revenue. Businesses also make substantial contributions to society by supporting communities through charity, sponsorships and volunteer efforts. For example, Anheuser-Busch has donated cans of water for disaster relief, and Elon Musk made Starlink available for communication in hurricane-affected regions. Additionally, businesses heavily invest in infrastructure, including communication networks like telephone and Internet services, as well as rail and shipping services.

In other words, when we demand the rich and the businesses pay their fair share, are we overlooking the valuable contributions they already make? We all play a role in a functioning society, and if we solely measure contributions in dollars and cents, we're missing the point. We're focusing on the wrong things.

How would we feed our families without the jobs that businesses provide? Beyond that, how much wealth would we miss out on without the opportunity to invest in these businesses through stock sales? Without the profit incentive, what inventions that enhance our lives might never have existed?

Taxing businesses or the wealthy more pulls money out of the real economy and places it in the hands of the government who are not equipped to function as drivers of innovation and growth. The rich, with less to invest, would be hindered in creating new ventures or expanding existing ones. Instead of fostering economic growth, as the government suggests more taxation would achieve, taxing businesses more actually depletes resources, leaving less money available for meaningful contributions to society.

Sure, it can seem disheartening to see the top 1% getting richer and richer, and it may seem like they're holding back the lower rungs of the financial ladder. But I believe the opposite is true. Without strong businesses growing and generating massive profits, society would be in far worse shape than it is today.

As I said before, we all have a role to play. I think understanding our place in the world is important, and rather than undermining the achievements of one class, what another class achieves should be an incentive to have loftier goals for ourselves—on top of that, success should never be something that we should ever want to penalize. 

When it comes to taxation, we have to ask ourselves what truly improves our lives? Is it economic growth that fosters better opportunities for working Americans, or the artificial redistribution of wealth that fails to lift anyone out of their current class and circumstances?

Regardless of what anyone thinks "fair share" really means, I think businesses are already paying their dues and we have more to be thankful for than to be angry about. No matter how unfair it seems. When we look around us, all we see are the businesses and the massive profits they generate. We fail to see how our lives might be very different if they did not exist, or what opportunities might not exist without what they contribute for them to even be possible.

The United States is the richest nation in the world for a reason. And that's because we allow people to become rich and be more in control of their own wealth. You can say my commentary here is a commentary on trickle-down economics and claim it doesn't work. I contend it has always worked, and the only problem we have with it is that some people simply don't open the spigots to their faucets.

Taxing the rich and businesses more is not the solution to our own financial problems we face. Allowing the free markets to work and educating people on how they can participate in it is the answer. Taxes do not contribute to better opportunities for society as a whole. It robs us of them.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them. You may also want to check out The Springboard on YouTube.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

Kamala Harris and the Illusion of Change

Looking at the Kamala Harris campaign, I can't help but recall the early 90's Jack in the Box E. Coli outbreak, which tragically killed four children and infected 732 people across four states. This comparison isn't meant to disparage Jack in the Box or dredge up old events that they likely prefer to remain in the past.

The truth is, it was one of the worst incidents of its kind at the time, and Jack in the Box nearly went under for good. Their name was tarnished, and no one would dare eat there. So, what did they do? They tried to rebrand themselves as Monterrey Jack's instead.

The problem is, it's essentially still Jack in the Box with nothing more than a new sign and name. The leadership, business practices, food sources, quality standards, and sanitary standards all remain unchanged.

Which brings me back to Kamala Harris. They've done nothing more than slap a new label on the same product. It's the same Kamala Harris as always, just with a different facade.

There was a time when you could be fairly confident that a rebrand wouldn't fool anyone. People would catch on quickly. "Hey, wait a minute, this is just a Sourdough Jack with a new name. What's going on?" But the difference is that the times we are living through now are probably the most politically divided as we have ever seen.

In times like these, logic and critical thinking go right out the window, and they have.

Yet, I can't shake the feeling that times might not be so different after all. Perhaps it's just hope, wishful thinking, or even naivety. But I want to believe that as a people, we haven't entirely lost our grip on reality. Can it be that now, when it seems like we've lost all sense, it's really still there? Lurking in the shadows. Just waiting for the right moment to emerge and bring back our faith in the system and what's right in the world.

When you look at the polls, there are so many things that point to this presidential race being a very close one. Based on what we know, it shouldn't be. Not if the elements that make up commonsense were working properly.

Moreover, the media should be falling all over itself over what the Harris campaign is trying to pull off. After all, they own the archives. All they have to do is rewind the tapes, and not all that far back, to see we're being lied to and badly.

The rebranding shouldn't work. Not only based on what they are trying to sell us as the new and improved Kamala Harris. But based on the last four years that Kamala Harris was part of. She went along with all of the policies Biden put into place, and when those policies failed, she went out and defended them.

The economy is humming along. The border is secure. Inflation's not so bad (hey folks, dontcha love this thing we call Bidenomics?)...

How could it ever be possible that the past four years could be in such stark contrast to the four years prior, that we could be lied to about the president's health, and that Kamala Harris could go on the view and tell the hosts she would not change a single Biden policy decision, and still be elected president?

If Kamala Harris pulls this off, take note Jack in the Box. If you ever need a comeback, she's your gal.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them. Check out my new YouTube channel as well, appropriately titled The Springboard, where I discuss a variety of topics there as I do here.

© 2024 Jim Bauer