Off the Cuff: Taylor Swift Is a Great Performer!
We learned something new about Taylor Swift on September 10, the day she officially endorsed Kamala Harris for POTUS. To wit, Swift may be creative and talented, but she’s not a critical thinker…at least her endorsement revealed nothing of the sort. Read it and find out for yourself:
“I will be casting my vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz in the 2024 Presidential Election. I’m voting for @kamalaharris because she fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them. I think she is a steady-handed, gifted leader and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos. I was so heartened and impressed by her selection of running mate @timwalz, who has been standing up for LGBTQ+ rights, IVF, and a woman’s right to her own body for decades.”
For anyone to call Kamala a “steady-handed, gifted leader” is puzzling, given that she has never demonstrated any leadership skills whatsoever. She’s obviously a puppet of people on the radical left who do, in fact, possess true leadership skills. She’s been told not to express any views that might reveal what she is going to sign off on if and when she takes possession of the phone and the pen.
Did she demonstrate admirable leadership qualities during her stint as Border Czar? No. Quite the contrary, in fact. She says she supported and still supports the disastrous, traitorous way her boss pulled us out of Afghanistan. Was that an example of leadership? No. She has said she supports Biden’s economic policies, which have been, again, a disaster. Leadership? No again. Does she possess what it takes to be Commander-in-Chief? No. I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: If Kamala wins, the four happiest people in the world will be Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un, and Ali Khomeini.
Taylor Swift says her most important concerns are LGBTQ+ rights, women having access to in-vitro fertilization, and women having ownership of their bodies (???). She believes it’s important that POTUS be calm and obviously believes frequent nervous laughter is a sign of calm. She is impressed by Tim Walz because he has a history of standing up for LGBTQ+ people and supports women being able to own their bodies.
I am not trying to be sarcastic. That’s Bill Maher’s forte. I’m merely repeating what Taylor Swift says are her reasons for endorsing Harris. Have I misrepresented Swift? No. Have I purposefully made fun of her? Not really, but I’m aware that my analysis of Swift’s endorsement sounds like I’m making fun of her. Truth is, I don’t know how NOT to make said endorsement sound ludicrous because, let’s face it, folks…IT IS PATENTLY LUDICROUS.
Let’s be real. The upcoming election is not about which candidate is more calm or less likely to try and snatch ownership of their bodies from women. As for the never-ending LGBTQ+ tempest in a teapot, I’m not aware of any rights those folks are being denied. Are you? No, you’re not because there ain’t none. And I don’t care, and neither should anyone, which candidate is more compassionate toward women who want IVF.
We’re talking about voting for the person who is best qualified to LEAD this country through the challenges America is certainly going to face in the next four years. Hear me clearly: IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THAT PERSON MEETS TAYLOR SWIFT’S RATHER NAÏVE LIST OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE JOB! LET’S ALL SAY HIS NAME: DONALD TRUMP!
Donald Trump has already demonstrated he has what it takes to LEAD! During his four years as POTUS, the bad actors in the world laid low. Trump presided over a great economic revival. He picked good advisors…generally. He selected Supreme Court judges who are committed to preserving the Constitution. His “yes” means “yes,” and his “no” means “no.” Does he lack a functional filter between his brain and his mouth? Duh! Let me go on the record as quoting Rhett Butler: “I don’t give a damn!” (I sometimes cringe too, by the way.)
Kamala Harris is a will-o’-the-wisp, an empty pantsuit. We’re seven weeks from Election Day and she has yet to answer a tough question or tell us, in no uncertain terms, what her intentions are concerning the economy, national defense, Israel, Ukraine, China’s takeover in the South China Sea, the fact that Iran is about a day away from possessing a nuclear weapon, or the fact that Kim may already possess a nuclear weapon.
The only thing she’s openly touting is her intention to see to it that 3 million new homes will be built, homes that low- to middle-income people will be able to afford. That sounds good and certainly in keeping with the American Dream, but history tells us that Democrats don’t do anything for one group without riding roughshod over the rights of people in another group. The YIMBY (Yes, In My Back Yard!) movement has already broadcast its intention to overturn zoning laws and HOA regulations, meaning that during a Kamala Harris administration, someone with a home valued at $450,000 may wake up one morning to the sounds of heavy equipment clearing the lot next door for a $125,000 home that will effectively cut their equity in half.
Her endorsement made perfectly clear Taylor Swift’s lack of critical thinking skills. The excitement that followed her endorsement made perfectly clear that too many Americans are woefully ignorant of the issues that define the upcoming election. That’s bad. Really, really bad.
Copyright 2024, John K. Rosemond
The fact that any American would vote based on an entertainer’s opinion blows my mind. Taylor Swift doesn’t worry about food, gas or healthcare costs. She has no kids and will never worry about what they are being taught. She never has to worry about her safety with her team of security. She’ll never have to worry about illegals setting up camp near her gated community. She could care less how her fans live. You know…the ones that made her rich.
People who don't have the credit, the income, or the desire to own a great-big home in a single-family suburb with an HOA shouldn't be priced out of housing by the people who do. NIMBY's "rights" ride roughshod over the wishes of the aforementioned for affordable housing. Law-fare eliminating competition, like single-family zoning does, so you can take more of people's money when you sell your house is greed and anti-social.