I like Tulsi Gabbard more and more as time goes on. I may not always agree with her on policy — but then, I have never always agreed with anyone on policy, sometimes not even myself. But I like Tulsi Gabbard. She has conviction, she exudes confidence, and frankly, I like her grit. She's never shied away from saying precisely what she thinks.
In the latest example of this, she took on Kamala Harris during her appearance on Fox News' "America's Newsroom" on Thursday — and as usual, she did not mince words. Tulsi said:
I think she revealed in that debate the same thing that I think her campaign handlers are worried about right now... Kamala Harris is an empty suit. They are trying to create this new version of Kamala Harris to match what their pollsters are telling them, so she can say whatever she needs to say to try to win over voters, which is the most offensive thing, I think, because they think we're so stupid as to forget what her record actually is. In 2019, very simply, I confronted her with her hypocrisy of how what she said was very different than what she actually did, and she had no answer for it. She had no explanation. She didn't even try to own or justify what her actions were. And that's going to be the key thing here for voters as we head into this election is Kamala Harris will say whatever she thinks she needs to say. We have to pay attention to her actions, because on every single major issue, you will see that same kind of hypocrisy that I pointed out in 2019 where she'll say one thing, but her record tells a very, very different story.
We remember fondly that moment from the 2019 Democrat presidential primary debate, when Tulsi Gabbard eviscerated Kamala Harris and left her in a metaphorical bloody heap on the floor, twitching reflexively as her (minimal) ability to frame a coherent reply abandoned her.
Maybe that's why Tulsi has inexplicably ended up on a TSA surveillance list.
Tulsi Gabbard Sounds Off on Being Put on TSA 'Quiet Skies' List: 'The Ultimate Sense of Betrayal'
It's great fun to watch Gabbard take Harris apart, partly because she's just so good at it and partly because it seems to be somewhat out of personal animus; the two clearly know each other to some degree, and it's abundantly clear that there's no love lost between them.
But what Tulsi doesn't mention in this interview is the very real danger a Harris/Walz presidency represents. Harris isn't a liberal, not as we understand the term; she calls herself "progressive," and as used in modern political parlance, we can take that word to imply "progress on the path to socialism," because that's where a Harris administration would take us. She is a socialist; she favors government-controlled health care (ask anyone in Canada or Britain — or the old Soviet Union — how well that works) and has never seen a tax increase or government spending program she didn't love. When it comes to the national debt — the last several administrations have a lot of guilt to share for spending and borrowing our republic into penury, but we can be certain that Kamala Harris, as president, would get out the checkbook, look at her predecessors, and say "Hold my beer."
Kamala Harris, as president, would be a calamity — a Kalamity if you like. Tulsi is right about her being an empty suit, but that doesn't mean she doesn't present a threat.