Is Kamala Harris as dumb as her critics claim?
I don’t know; it probably depends on what context we’re talking about. Intelligence comes in different forms, as we intuitively understand. There’s the rational problem-solving mind, the creative artistic mind, the mathematical mind, etc.
Kamala Harris appears to be good at the kind of Machiavellian behind-the-scenes scheming that politicians are known for. She’s also apparently talented at figuring out who she needs to service, if you will, to get ahead in the Democrat Party machine.
And, I guess, her saccharine Mamala routine — which doesn’t impress me, but then again I’m not her target demo — really hits her liberal female supporters in the feels. So credit there, too.
But technology — even the basics — which one may be forgiven for assuming is important for a president to have a handle on in the age of artificial intelligence and Chinese killer robots, appears to be a deficit of hers.Consider this moronic statement from 2019, recently resurfaced, in which she discusses the need by someone (ostensibly the government) to get Donald Trump banned from all social media:
We're talking about a private corporation, Twitter, that has terms of use, and as far as I'm concerned, and I think most people would say, including members of Congress who he has threatened, um, that he has-he has lost his privileges and it should be taken down.
And the bottom line is that you can't say that you have one rule for Facebook and you have a different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply, which is that there has to be a responsibility that is placed on these social media sites to understand their power. They are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation, and that has to stop.
Amazing stuff.
Twitter and Facebook, which are platforms and not publishers, are, according to Kamala, “directly speaking to millions and millions of people.”
Furthermore, you can’t have “one rule for Facebook and… a different rule for Twitter” because…. (non-sequitur). What rules are we talking about, who makes them, and how are they enforced?
The last I checked, the constant Democrat refrain justifying the brutal censorship regime the government clandestinely enforced through its Big Tech partners was legally justified because these are “private companies.”
So when Big Tech is servicing Democrats, it’s hands-off private industry. When it allows free speech, it desperately needs “rules.”
Related: Rachel Maddow: Shut Up About Censorship While We Censor You
None of it makes sense, but none of it has to for Democrat voters. All they know is Mamala loves Democracy™ and the orange man wants to genocide transgender migrants or whatever.
Tampon Tim, Kamala’s business partner, is likewise deficient in his understanding of fundamental Constitutionally guaranteed liberties: “I think we need to push back on this. There's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.”
