Kamala has the Foreign Policy Chops of a Miss America contestant
It’s a sad day for Kirsten Gillibrand. Last night she was officially stripped of her title as the most lightweight Senator in American history by the far lighter lightweight Kamala Harris. And Kamala’s inexperience and lack of gravitas was hard to miss when last night’s debate shifted ever so briefly to foreign policy.
After the foolish woman exhausted her supply of memorized anti-Trump talking points, it was transparently obvious that, when it comes to foreign policy especially, Kamala has the naivete of a Miss America contestant.
But instead of wishing for world peace, Kamala waxed cloyingly about “relationships.”
That’s what it boils down to, the foreign policy neophyte claimed, relationships.
Kamala’s foreign policy knowledge has all the nuance and complexity of an Inspiration-a-Day calendar.
One can’t help but wonder if Kamala’s debate prep team even bothered to prepare her for questions on foreign policy. Did they just assume that demagoguing over the Wuhan virus and regurgitating media smears about Trump would be all she needed?
Say, did you know the only legislation with regard to the Wuhan virus Kamala Harris introduced was a resolution condemning terms like “Chinese virus,” “Wuhan virus” or “Kung Flu?” Because, according to Kamala, America needs to recommit “to serving as a world leader in building more inclusive, diverse, and tolerant societies by prioritizing language access and inclusivity.”
Yeah. President Xi must be shaking in his boots.
Anyroad.
The last time I saw a Democrat politician make such a fool of herself over foreign policy, it was that painful PBS interview with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez when she finally blurted out “I’m not the expert on geopolitics on this issue, you know.”
And hey. At least AOC admitted it.
Kamala couldn’t even admit that, when it comes to foreign policy, she’s about as well-versed as a Freshman gender studies major.
Kamala doesn’t even have the level self-awareness AOC does. Who knew that was possible?
The media isn’t helping Kamala in the least with their post-debate whining over “mansplaining” and “sexism.”
(I told you that’s how they were going to spin it.)
If Kamala Harris doesn’t have the ability to hold her own in a controlled setting with a very supportive and biased moderator, how the hell would she fare meeting one-on-one with world leaders – especially those who might not like us too much?
Could you imagine Kamala meeting with Vladimir Putin and saying in her faux earnest voice, “It’s all about relationships.”
Good grief, he’d steal her lunch money and hang her from a flagpole by her underwear.
Both America’s enemies and our allies would walk all over this vapid lightweight without breaking a sweat.
Make no mistake, if Trump loses in November, Kamala Harris will be President before Biden’s first term is out.
I suspect Grandpa wouldn’t make it through his first 100 days.
And if Kamala’s showing at last night’s debate is any indication, America would be stuck with a President and Commander-in-Chief with the intellectual depth of an Inspiration-a-Day calendar and the international gravitas of a vapid beauty contestant.
Post a Comment