THE HARRIS-WALZ TICKET

Price for Admission: Policies & Principals Beyond Personalities

BEFORE DIVING INTO A CRITIQUE OF THE HARRIS-WALZ TICKET from a principled perspective, we recognize that President Trump has engaged in behavior that reflects immaturity, narcissism, and other unfortunate personal shortcomings.

Similarly, we must address the known moral improprieties associated with Kamala Harris. Her rise to political power has been marred by accusations of a lack of discretion, including reports of her engaging in relationships with influential figures to advance her career. Such actions raise significant ethical concerns, particularly for those who hold public figures to a high moral standard.

The focus here is on evaluating platforms and policies rather than personal preferences and personalities.

With this context in mind, the following points highlight the radical nature and incompetence of the Harris-Walz ticket.

UNYIELDING SUPPORT FOR ABORTION RIGHTS: Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are united in their extreme support for Roe v. Wade, which, under broad “health” parameters, effectively allows abortion on demand throughout all nine months of pregnancy. This position starkly contrasts with pro-life values, and Walz’s actions as governor of Minnesota, including signing a law permitting abortion up until birth, further amplify these concerns.

ADVOCACY FOR RADICAL SOCIAL POLICIES: Both Harris and Walz have consistently supported far-left social policies that undermine traditional family values and religious liberty. Harris's endorsement of the Equality Act, which could force religious institutions to act against their beliefs, and her support for taxpayer-funded abortions signal a commitment to expanding progressive policies at the expense of religious freedom.

EROSION OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: As California’s Attorney General, Harris targeted pro-life activists, prosecuting them for exposing controversial practices by Planned Parenthood. This history suggests a willingness to use governmental power against those with differing views, raising alarms about the future of religious freedom under a Harris-Walz administration.

INEFFECTUAL LEADERSHIP AND RADICALIZATION: Harris’s tenure as Vice President has been marked by a lack of effective leadership, particularly in her role as “border czar.” Harris's inability to manage the border crisis has directly contributed to a surge in child trafficking and a weakened national security posture. The open border policies endorsed by the Harris-Walz ticket have not only overwhelmed border communities but also allowed potential threats to the United States to go unchecked, putting the safety and security of Americans at risk.

AGGRESSIVE UNDERMINING OF PARENTS AND FAMILIES: The Harris-Walz ticket represents an aggressive push towards policies that promote unrestricted abortion access and radical gender ideology. This includes supporting laws that could remove children from parents who do not affirm their gender identity, as seen in Minnesota under Walz's leadership. These policies are direct assaults on parental rights, religious beliefs, and the sanctity of life.

HERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER notable concerns with the Harris-Walz ticket:

1. ECONOMIC POLICIES AND TAXATION:

Higher Taxes and Economic Regulation: Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have supported policies that would increase taxes and expand government regulation, which conservatives argue stifles economic growth, job creation, and innovation. Walz has proposed significant tax increases in Minnesota, and Harris has supported similar measures at the federal level. Such policies could lead to slower economic recovery, especially post-pandemic.

Government Overreach: The Harris-Walz ticket advocates for expansive government intervention in the economy, including proposals for greater control over the healthcare and energy sectors. This is contrary to free-market principles and likely to lead to inefficiencies and higher consumer costs.

2. JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS AND COURT-PACKING:

Threats to Judicial Independence: Kamala Harris has voiced support for ideas like court-packing, expanding the number of justices on the Supreme Court to shift its ideological balance. This is seen as a direct threat to the judiciary's independence and a dangerous precedent that could undermine the rule of law. A Harris-Walz administration could push for judicial appointments that would reinterpret the Constitution to align with progressive ideals, potentially eroding rights such as religious freedom and gun ownership.

3. ENERGY POLICIES AND THE GREEN NEW DEAL:

Support for the Green New Deal: Harris and Walz have supported the Green New Deal or similar environmental initiatives. These policies could lead to drastic changes in energy production, resulting in higher energy costs, loss of jobs in traditional energy sectors, and increased reliance on government subsidies. Such policies are unrealistic and economically damaging, potentially harming the U.S. economy while having minimal impact on global climate change.

4. EDUCATION AND PARENTAL RIGHTS:

Promotion of Progressive Curricula: The Harris-Walz ticket is expected to support the implementation of progressive curricula in schools, including critical race theory (CRT) and comprehensive sex education that includes radical gender ideology. Such policies undermine parental rights, indoctrinate children with divisive ideologies, and distract from core educational objectives like reading, math, and science. These educational approaches could erode traditional values and further polarize the nation.

5. NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENSE:

Weakening of National Defense: The Harris-Walz ticket will pursue policies that weaken national defense, such as reducing military spending, compromising on global conflicts, or underestimating the threat posed by adversaries like China and Russia. There is also worry that their approach to foreign policy might prioritize diplomatic gestures over substantive action, potentially leading to a more unstable international environment.

6. CRIME AND PUBLIC SAFETY:

Soft on Crime: Both Harris and Walz were soft on crime. Harris's record as a prosecutor includes controversial decisions that many conservatives view as too lenient, while Walz's handling of crime in Minnesota, particularly during the riots following George Floyd's death, was ineffective. A Harris-Walz administration would weaken law enforcement, higher crime rates, and less support for police, which would endanger public safety and security.

Leniency on Pedophiles and Violent Offenders: Kamala Harris's tenure as San Francisco's District Attorney has been widely criticized for her lenient stance on certain criminal cases, particularly involving sex offenders. Reports indicate that Harris's office failed to inform the public about over 50 Catholic priests accused of child sexual abuse, despite evidence linking these individuals to serious crimes. Her office did not pursue charges in many of these cases, raising significant concerns about her commitment to protecting vulnerable victims, particularly children, from predators.

Prosecutorial Inconsistencies: Harris's approach to prosecution often appeared inconsistent and driven by political expediency rather than justice. While she championed progressive reforms publicly, such as opposing the death penalty, she was criticized for prosecuting minor drug offenses, disproportionately affecting minority communities. Moreover, her office handled cases involving violent criminals with considerable leniency, allowing offenders who posed a substantial risk to public safety to escape harsher penalties. This duplicity in her prosecutorial record has made many question her effectiveness and integrity in upholding the law.

These aspects of Harris’s record raise concerns about how she might approach law enforcement and criminal justice nationally, potentially undermining public safety and justice for the most vulnerable in society.

CONCLUSION:

These concerns, combined with the previously mentioned issues related to abortion, religious freedom, and border security, create a broad spectrum of apprehensions for conservatives about the potential direction of a Harris-Walz administration. While personal faults and moral lapses are acknowledged across the political spectrum, the focus remains on the platforms and policies that would be advanced by a Harris-Walz administration, which reflect a radical agenda prioritizing progressive ideology over traditional values, religious freedom, and competent governance.