Vice President Kamala Harris declared during an interview broadcast on September 11th with NBC’s “Meet the Press” anchor Chuck Todd that the Supreme Court’s abortion ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson “causes me great concern about the integrity of the court overall.” She complained that “we are suffering as a nation” because an “activist” Supreme Court took away “the right of women to make decisions about their own body” when the Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
Vice President Harris and her co-leftists are the ones who lack integrity, not the Supreme Court, which is only trying to interpret the Constitution as written.
Harris’s reckless attack on the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is part of the Democratic Party’s playbook to exploit the emotional issue of abortion in order to win the midterm elections. It is meant to distract voters from focusing on the real-life problems they are experiencing on President Joe Biden’s watch, such as runaway inflation, rising crime, an energy crisis, and the open border.
The party’s candidates are being spurred on by pro-abortion activists who demand the right to abortion at any time. These candidates are seeking to galvanize Americans who might not otherwise come out to vote in the midterms with the pitch that a Republican victory would mean a return to dangerous back-alley abortions and the end to personal privacy. And they are making the conservative justices who formed the majority in Dobbs v. Jackson the villains in their narrative.
The strategy appears to be working in moving some independents towards the Democratic column, including suburban women, and further stirring up the leftwing base. Fear is an incredibly strong emotion to manipulate, along with anger.
The candidates for the midterm elections who oppose unrestricted abortions are playing defense. They are letting their pro-abortion opponents control the political narrative.
Pro-life candidates need to go on the offensive. They should emphasize that those who clamor for abortion on demand mean the right to end a precious human life very late into pregnancy, even the life of a fully formed human ready to enter the world.
At every opportunity, Democrats running for office should be asked: “Do you think there should be any restrictions on abortion at all? If not, why not?” Watch them squirm, while trying to change the subject.
When Chuck Todd asked Vice President Harris whether she believed that the government should put any limit on abortions, she said, “I believe government should not be telling women what to do with their bodies.” In other words, she believes that there should be no limits on abortion no matter when it is demanded!
Supporters of the abortion on demand philosophy, which the Democratic Party has embraced, show no concern for how much pain the tiny innocent humans will suffer as their lives are cruelly snuffed out.
Vice President Harris shamelessly claimed that the nation was “suffering” because the Supreme Court returned policy decisions about abortion back to elected officials, including whether to enact measures to prevent the real suffering caused by late term abortion procedures. But decent Americans across the country who understand what is really going on will instinctively feel compassion for the defenseless victims and revulsion for those who, like Harris, would condone such suffering in the cause of abortion on demand.
A majority of Americans polled on the question believe that abortion should be illegal after the first three months of pregnancy. Only 35 percent believe that abortions should be legal under any circumstances. Vice President Harris and her cohorts on the Left are in that small minority.
The vice president totally mischaracterized the decision by Kansas voters in August to reject an amendment that would have allowed the state legislature to ban abortion in the state altogether. She falsely claimed that the voters were rendering their verdict on “the issue of choice” and that the people decided it was not right to deprive the women of America of the ability “to make decisions about their own body and instead say the government’s in a better position to do that.”
The voters in Kansas went only as far as opposing the government’s ability to institute a complete ban on abortion, a position that is consistent with the view held by a large majority of Americans. A total ban is a far cry from placing reasonable restrictions on abortion that the elected representatives of each state determine to be appropriate for their state.
Since Vice President Harris brought up “the issue of choice,” it is too bad that Chuck Todd failed to ask her about the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate. The CDC’s workplace mandate would have forced Americans to choose between their jobs and having something injected against their wishes into their bodies with unknown potential side effects. That is called a Hobson’s choice. Fortunately, the Supreme Court intervened.
Chuck Todd also might have inquired why the Biden administration’s notion of choice does not extend to school choice. The answer, of course, is the power that the teachers’ unions hold over the Democratic Party. The unions’ money and campaign muscle are more important to the party than allowing public education funds to follow students to the schools they or their parents choose as best fitting the students’ needs, rather than go to the failing public school monopoly.
Vice President Harris’s “Meet the Press” interview dealt with more issues than just abortion, but her answers were of the same leftwing ilk. For example, when Chuck Todd asked her whether the border was secure, noting the two million people crossing the border for the first time ever, Harris responded with the lie that the border was secure. “But there are still a lot of problems that we are trying to fix given the deterioration that happened over the last four years,” she declared. Is that why the Biden administration has turned the border from one that was under control during the Trump administration into an open border with thousands of illegal immigrants streaming into the country every day and released?
Harris said that we need “a plan for a pathway for citizenship for the millions of people who are here.” She did not explain, however, why we should reward people who enter the United States illegally, some of whom have criminal records, and who cut the line in front of individuals trying to play by the rules.
Abortions are on the rise again in the United States, nearing one million in 2020, according to the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute’s latest Abortion Provider Census. How ironic it is that Vice President Harris and her pro-abortion colleagues would condone the aborting of so many who could have been born American citizens while pressing for a pathway to U.S. citizenship for so many illegal immigrants.
David Ray says
When a homely slut ascends to a position by spreading her legs and then cashing in on affirmative action, one could certainly question her legitimacy. (God knows that a compliant press never questions it; they’re too busy cleaning up after her.)
Nice to know that a low-life with a lower IQ, can rise/sell-out to high positions in government. Her ethics are far less secure than our border which is considered an asset in leftist circles.
Kamala is one to talk of integrity, lol. She parleyed a career in the oldest profession into a career in the second oldest. If I ever need to know how to blow the boss to get ahead, I’ll be sure to ask an expert like her. But she isn’t good for anything else.
Doc Moore says
Kam challenges the integrity of more than the SC. She challenges the integrity of every citizen of this country who allowed her to become elected along with her criminal running mate.
Steven Brizel says
Harris and radicals want a SCOTUS that will rubber stamp radical legislation and decisions by administrative agencies
Ted Weiland says
The Supreme Court never has had legitimacy. Along with the other two branches of the Constitutional Republic, the entire judicial branch is an illegitimate offspring of the biblically seditious Constitution.
See Chapter 4 “Article 1: Legislative Usurpation” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at Bible versus Constitution dot org. Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 4.
Then Chapter 5 “Article 2: Executive Usurpation.”
Then Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation.”
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”
Isn’t using the word “Kamala” and “Integrity” in the same sentence against all logic?