Of course politicians lie. They always have. Indeed, I daresay it’s virtually impossible to get elected without lying — to some extent, about some things. It’d be remarkable if Joe Biden and Kamala Harris didn’t lie — occasionally, anyway. Certainly Trump lies. I won’t dispute that.
But there are lies, and there are lies. There’s also the question of how easily one lies.
Kamala Harris’ willingness to casually utter what were almost certainly falsehoods struck me almost as soon as she stepped onto the national scene. Let’s start with this one.
‘…On weekends, the girls would visit their father in Palo Alto, where he was an economics professor at Stanford University.
“The neighbors’ kids were not allowed to play with us because we were black,” Harris said. “We’d say, ‘Why can’t we play together?’ ‘My parents — we can’t play with you.’ In Palo Alto. The home of Google.”…’
Uh huh. Kamala Harris was born in 1964. Her parents divorced when she was seven. So this alleged discrimination occurred in 1971 or later.
Palo Alto is a genteel university town in the San Francisco Bay Area. I grew up in the Bay Area. In 1971, in the Bay Area, in genteel university towns, people did not openly — or in all likelihood even covertly — refuse to let their children play with other children because the children were black. That would be all the more the case if the children in question were only part-black, and the daughters of a professor at Stanford to boot. After all, Harris isn’t even terribly black-looking. Her mother’s Indian and her father looks to be about three-quarters white. That makes Kamala an Octoroon. Any more non-black, and she’d look like Meghan Markle. Really, she’d be a pretty harmless prospective playmate — given the professor father, I would think even a desirable one.
Not a target for the hidden Klansmen of Palo Alto circa 1971.
My guess is that in fact, at most it was a matter of there not being anyone for the children to play with when they went to stay with father. I visited Palo Alto in that era. It wasn’t exactly overrun with children. It’s possible Harris vaguely recalls being bored and there not being anyone to play with — and improved on the story.
…or perhaps she just made it all up out of whole cloth. The tale is, at any rate, implausible. One suspects Harris just needed to come up with an instance of how she had been a victim of racial discrimination.
But Kamala’s just getting started. She has even more unlikely claims to make. There’s this one: growing up, she went to a black church every Sunday. ‘…On Sundays, our mother would send us off to the 23rd Avenue Church of God…’
Do tell. Her divorced Indian mother, working full-time, and raised as a Brahmin in South India, where she had been a successful singer of South Indian classical music as a teenager (https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-10-25/how-kamala-harris-indian-family-shaped-her-political-career ) wakes up on her day off — and sends her daughter off to a black church in West Oakland.
It continues. Harris’ favorite rapper?
‘…“Best rapper alive?” CNN commentator Angela Rye asked the Oakland native.
“Tupac,” Harris answered with little hesitation…’
The conversation happened in September 2020. ‘Tupac’ was killed in 1996 — more than twenty years earlier. I think we can surmise that whatever impression Kamala Harris wished to convey, she does not in fact follow rap all that closely. But why lie about it? Why not just admit you don’t listen to all that much rap? It would hardly be a failing. Lots of perfectly authentic blacks don’t listen to rap.
But now we get to my personal favorite. Harris, addressing AIPAC in 2018:
‘…As a child, I never sold Girl Scout cookies, I went around with a (Jewish National Fund) JNFUSA box collecting funds to plant trees in Israel…’
There is of course the obvious intention of pandering to the Jewish Lobby — but it’s the sheer implausibility of this image that gets to me. Kamala Harris lived in the flatlands of Berkeley. It’s 1970-1976 — thereabouts. Here’s this little part-Indian, part-Black girl, going door to door in the Berkeley of the day — collecting money in a box for the Jewish National Fund.
Further comment seems superfluous. It’d be gilding the lily. Let’s just contemplate the above image — in all its majestic improbability. Did she do this before or after going to the black church?
But now we get to Biden. Good ol’ Joe…
He just got caught in a singularly gratuitous hooter.
During his ABC News town hall last week, moderator George Stephanopoulos asked Biden about his position on fracking. Biden denied he would ban fracking as president, but Stephanopoulos noted that a member of Boilermakers Local 154 had told the New York Times he doubts Biden’s denials.
Biden said in response, “I’m telling the Boilermakers overwhelmingly endorse me me, OK, so the Boilermakers Union has endorsed me because I sat down with them and went into great detail earlier to show their leadership exactly what I would do, number one.”
Umm, no. Biden never received such an endorsement. Ask the head of the Boilermakers Union.
“The other day I’m watching the debate and I see Joe Biden tell everybody that the Boilermakers endorsed him and that is not true,” Hughes said on a Saturday press call, Breitbart News reported. “And I would like somebody to tell me who — he said he talked to somebody — I’d like to know who he talked to in the Boilermakers because anybody I talk to did not endorse him.”
“And I believe if you go onto our International [Boilermakers] website we have not endorsed a candidate this round, nor did the International Boilermakers endorse a candidate last time,” Hughes explained. “We did not endorse Obama and Joe Biden last time because of their energy issues.”
It’s a little strange that Biden would feel it advisable to tell such an egregious lie. It wouldn’t seem particularly necessary to tell it. Surely he could deny that he intended to ban fracking without buttressing the claim with an easily detected falsehood. But we’re just getting started…
Earlier, Steve Sailer brought this one to everyone’s attention. From Joe Biden’s town hall:
‘….How will you as president reverse this dangerous and discriminatory agenda and insure that the lives and rights of LGBTQ people are protected under U.S. law?
‘BIDEN: I will flat out just change the law. Every — eliminate those executive orders, number one. You may recall I’m the guy who said — I was raised by a man who I remember I was being dropped off, my — my dad was a high school educated, well read man who was a really decent guy.
‘And I was being dropped off to get an application in the center of our city; Wilmington, Delaware, the corporate capital of the world at the time. And these two men, I’m getting out to get an application to be a lifeguard in the African American community because there was a big swimming pool complex.
‘And these two men, well dressed, leaned up and hugged one another and kissed one another. And I’m getting out of the car at the light and I turn to my dad. My dad looked at me and said Joey, it’s simple. They love each other…’
Biden was born in 1942. So he’s applying for this job in 1959 — give or take a year.
It’s the late fifties in Wilmington, Delaware. A high school educated, Roman Catholic father is dropping off his teenaged son. They see two black homosexuals kissing. The father looks at his son and says: ‘Joey, it’s simple. They love each other.’
This happened. Sure, it did. The first time I even saw two men kissing each other was in about 2002, in San Francisco — and I did not approve. It was revolting, to be frank. Others may be more enlightened than me — but one would have to simply oblivious to what America was in 1959 to believe in even the possibility of this story happening back then, and in Wilmington, Delaware, to boot.
What’s going on here? Some of these lies can’t even be intended to be believed. A little South Indian/black girl in Berkeley in the seventies was going around collecting money in a box for the Jewish National Fund? A Catholic father in Wilmington, Delaware in the late fifties watched two black homosexuals openly kissing in public — then turned to his son and expressed his approval?
It’s a new frontier. The lie itself becomes the message. At it’s most extreme, the very obviousness of the falsehood becomes the message. See how willing I am to express my support for Israel? See how completely and uncritically I approve of homosexuality? I will tell a ridiculous falsehood to demonstrate it.
A while back, I argued that for the last thirty years, every new president has made his predecessor look good. I wouldn’t trust Trump to check my mail for me — but at least I will credit him with uttering falsehoods that are seriously meant to be believed.
If Harris and Biden win, we won’t be able to say even that much for our presidential team. They’ll just tell bare-faced lies. We won’t even be expected to believe them.