Oh yeah, she’s secretly brilliant…
And the morons applaud.
Looking for that wood-chipper….
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Oh yeah, she’s secretly brilliant…
And the morons applaud.
Looking for that wood-chipper….
Ethics Alarms 
Not a Kamala Harris fan by any stretch, but somebody in the twitter thread linked to a longer version of the speech, and she at least knew it’s a term for unionizing.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5127712/kamala-harris-importance-unions-collective-bargaining
Good to know. Perhaps that will keep Jack from the woodchipper.
Based on that word salad, whoever, she knows it a term for unionizing but thinks it has something to do with “the collective,” meaning she doesn’t understand what it is.
And dignity!
Heaven help us.
In communism, a collective refers to a shared distribution of power within an organizational structure. It is a system where most or all property and resources are collectively owned by a class-free society rather than by individual citizens.
You know, like, oh say Ukraine in the ’30s where the private farms were “collectivised” by the original Joe and millions were starved to death.
Yes, and people wonder why Ukrainians don’t like the Russians, so much so that Nazi Germany looked like a better option for a lot of them.
I was a member of an organization of theatre profs for many years. It has a number of sub-groups, each with its own leadership. Most of these groups called these folks something like their “officers” or “executive committee.” Then, there was the one with the “organizing collective.” You can guess what they were about.
Shameless.
Yikes. Isn’t using “collective” as a noun supposed to set off ethics alarms in red-blood (or blue-blooded) Americans? That’s what bothered me most about that clip–who does she hang out with? Literally the only people I’ve met in my life who spoke admiringly of “The Collective” were Marxists (I never knew a Borg).
Her father was a Marxist.
Though she didn’t live with him, as I understand it, and Marxism isn’t genetic.
Does the term “Red Diaper Baby” ring a bell? Bernie Sanders? Noam Chomsky? Pete Buttigieg?
It is likely that her mother was a Marxist as well.
Who’s she been hanging out with??? Bernie, who honeymooned in Soviet Russia (how’d he get in?)! Tim Walz, who honeymooned in Communist China and praised their system!
Normally intelligent people in government know the baggage governmental words carry with them. She doesn’t have the horsepower to keep up. She’s completely in over her head.
I am wondering what the word will be this week. Two weeks ago, it was ‘weird’. All Democrats had to get on camera calling Republicans ‘weird’. Last week, it was ‘joy’. All Democrats had to use ‘joy’. What will the word be this week?
Oh, and I DO like the trolls who are pointing out that ‘Strength through Joy’ was a Nazi program in Germany. I mean, it makes as much sense as any other reason that every speaker talked about bringing the ‘joy’. I expect the ‘Strength through Joy’ wikipedia page will be removed shorty.
I’ve been trying to picture prior presidents and candidates running on “joy.” Truman? Ike? Nixon? JFK? LBJ? Goldwater? When guys acted, you know, presidential and took the position seriously? The Harris/Walz campaign is, and their administration will be, a re-run of the Biden campaign and administration. It too will be run by the people behind the curtain with front people for window dressing. But, instead of a demented, disabled oldster and a nitwit reading talking points from time to time, the front people will be a nitwit and a Bernie Sanders goofball.
And half the country thinks this is just fine and dandy!
Al Smith ran against Hoover as “The Happy Warrior”!
(He lost in a landslide.)
I stand corrected. Hah. Of course..
Hmmm, I was thinking of Hubert Humphrey. Yes, looking at Wikipedia it appeared that he had the nickname in the Senate of “The Happy Warrior”.
He lost, too, although it was a close election.
I did not know that one of Johnson’s finalists for the 1964 VP selection was Eugene McCarthy, also from Minnesota.
This is fascinating — Mondale took Humphrey’s seat in the Senate, then Humphrey took McCarthy’s seat. Not only that but Humphrey held both Senate seats for Minnesota, impossible to do unless you leave the Senate and return.
Humphrey had a much longer career, looking at the Wikipedia page, than I realized. He was a good guy, even if he was a Democrat.
The only time I heard a full speech in the Senate by a U.S.Senator was one by Humphrey. He was a good guy, and probably would have been a good President. (I loved Gene McCarthy. I had the wonderful experience of having lunch with him, just us, alone at a banquet table.
Humphrey was from the era when Democrat or Republican, it didn’t matter. They all wanted to do what was best for the country. Before Democrats decided they needed to wreck the country.
Or, maybe we were all naive as kids back before Political Science became a discipline and before political consultants roamed the earth?
You’re right…
Harris/Walz will be nothing but more of Barack Obama. How do you think a “candidate” – as I use that term as loosely as possible, since VP Harris was one for about five minutes in 2020, and wasn’t one at all in 2024 – like Harris, who speaks with less authority on nearly every subject than her dementia-laced boss for the last three and a half years, was endorsed by Barack Obama?
Hmmm…?
The only way that happens is if VP Harris agreed to appoint all of Barack’s choices to positions of importance. She – just like President Biden before her – will be the figurehead that simply does the man behind the curtain wants.
She doesn’t have the energy or attention span to come up with a cabinet on her own, Joel. It’s just breathtaking who similar the lack of mental capacity of both Biden and Harris is.
Ok, who here writes for the Bee?:
https://babylonbee.com/news/kamala-explains-93-of-vp-staff-quit-because-they-couldnt-handle-the-joy
That’s funny. I still can not believe The Onion went woke. How does that happen? A satire outfit goes serious. That’s a story in and of itself.
For me, at least, my expectations are being met by Harris. I have always presumed that the DEI hire is not really expected to know anything!
My ethics alarms are set off by these kinds of videos.
One alarm is favorable to Ms. Harris; the other not so much.
The first alarm is: “Why are these trivia questions being asked?” or “What is the context of this question?” We could charitably assume that the basic concept is understood by all present, and the question is her particular take on the matter. In such a context, her answer is marginal; the idea of collective bargaining is to protect the rights and dignity of the workers, negotiating as a united front (or as Ms. Harris described it, as a “collective”).
Applying this to another recent incident, such as Ms. Harris describing how the “cloud” worked, she was using metaphors to describe how the data is not directly under someone control, but in some other location making it more vulnerable to hacking. The answers are not so bad if the context is assumed to be more than Ms. Harris answering Jeopardy questions. The first alarm initially suggests these questions are not asked in good faith.
The second alarm has to do with Ms. Harris’s style in answering. It is painful to watch, particularly the deer-in-the-headlights look in her eyes every few words, begging the audience for affirmation that they understand her. On the one hand, it is comforting to know she has some grasp of how tenuous her meaning is. On the other, it is frustrating that she would have so little respect for anyone’s time as to give such ridiculous answer to any question.
The interviews and/or rally speeches Ms. Harris gives seem to consist of nothing by answering trivia questions about vocabulary terms related policy. The questions are indeed not asked in good faith, but only in Ms. Harris favor. The questions are rigged to give her only easy questions. Yet, she cannot even answer those coherently, let alone talk about meaningful policy.
This is a triple alarm fire now!