Big Sister: Kamala Harris’ Long War on Free Speech

Kamala Harris has a definite view of the concept of free speech.

So definite, in fact, that she doesn’t even believe in it for herself.

Her “pop-up” campaign has been mostly marked by the muzzle she has agreed to wear after humiliatingly genuflecting to the campaign strategy of  “shutting up” foisted upon her by her staff.  

She’s even extended the Cone of Silence to her running mate. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

But this is not new for Harris, who for years has expressed her disdain for the concept of free speech and free thought.  And – from her actions as California attorney general and then senator – it’s very on the record.

As AG, in 2016 Harris pushed forward with enforcing a law that forced religious-based pregnancy counseling services to give their clients information offering state-funded abortions.

The courts said no, you’re wrong.

She then tried to force conservative nonprofits in California to release their donors’ names, an effort the Supreme Court ruled was an unconstitutional intimidation of donors that violated their First Amendment rights (this move even terrified her progressive backers, those who spend billions on politics and do everything they can to make their involvement untraceable.)

As a senator/presidential candidate in 2019, she explicitly – even before it was “cool” to do so –  called for Donald Trump to be removed from social media platforms.  Here’s the clip (note – this is when she was allowed to talk to press):

And before that, she told a Democratic fund raising event that “We will hold social media platforms accountable for the hate infiltrating their platforms, because they have a responsibility to help fight against this threat to our democracy.”

Going even further, her current deputy campaign chief is a guy named Rob Flaherty, the man at the center of the current administration’s efforts to force social media platforms to censor information and opinions it did not like.

Interestingly, in Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg’s recent “um, censorship really happened and we screwed up by saying yes to the government” letter to the House of Representatives Government Oversight letter, he specifically references not the “Biden administration” but the “Biden-Harris administration.”  

Until a few weeks ago, Harris was portrayed in the media as an incompetent bumblepuppy – now she is a transformative genius, the best thing since curry and waffles. Zuckerberg – unnecessarily –  putting her name in the letter speaks volumes and is a specific attempt to highlight her – and Flaherty’s – role in government censorship efforts.

Her choice of Walz as her running mate should also terrify anyone who has even a passing familiarity with the First Amendment.  During the pandemic response, he literally set up a “snitch line” so people could rat out their neighbors who may have decided to take the dog for a walk without wearing a mask.

Even further, Walz told MSNBC (of course) that “There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.”

Wrong, provable wrong, already decided that it’s wrong.  

The political culture Harris grew up in is also infused with the desire to censor.  Besides being a way to remain in power, the groupthink intimidation keeps its own people in line.

Erstwhile political ally Gov. Gavin Newsom (he really really does not want her to win – he can’t wait another eight years) set up the CA. Vs. Hate website  to encourage people to report politically deviant behavior to the state.

As noted in a previous Globe story: 

CA vs Hate is the state’s first-ever multilingual statewide hotline and online portal that provides a safe, anonymous reporting option for victims and witnesses of hate acts,” the press announcement said. “CA vs Hate is one key piece of a statewide coordinated and strategic response to directly address hate in California, which in recent years reached its highest reported levels since 2001 — increasing more than 20% from 2021 to 2022.”

The annual report for The Commission on the State of Hate reports that the Commission receives an annual appropriation of $1.8 million through fiscal year 2025-2026 and $900,000 in fiscal year 2026-2027. But they sure can spend money if the $91 million in grants is any indicator.

“The Commission’s vision is for California to be free of hate.”

And since hate is in the eye of the beholder, everyone becomes beholden to the state’s definition.

Towards the tail end of the pandemic response, California passed a law to censor doctors to make sure they didn’t mention things like “vaccine” safety and herd immunity and anything that could hurt either Pfizer’s bottom line or the government propaganda machine.  Like Harris’ efforts to control thought, it failed in court.

And one of the most notable current efforts underway is to muzzle local school boards and force them to comply and not not let teachers tell parents their child has a different identity at school than home.  Kids, it seems, can declare themselves some other gender but still can’t take an aspirin they bring from home on campus.

What all of this adds up to is Harris’ in-bred contempt for the public, its ideas, and its ability to express those ideas freely.

With that whole “protect and defend the constitution” bit in her (potential…shudder) inauguration oath, she’d make a great president, huh?