According to mainstream media, pundits, internet trolls, and talking heads, the main thing worth mentioning in the Harris/ Tim Walz CNN interview is how to square Harris’ claim that her values have not changed with her perceived flip-flop on her stance against fracking.
One way to interpret the controversy is to see it as a prime example of how mainstream media, distort or pretend not to hear what Harris actually said in order to create a mediatic event worthy to be debated, commented on, questioned, or ridiculed
Because, if you had carefully listened to Kamala’s response to the question of whether she would ban fracking, her response was that “ SHE WOULD NOT HAVE TO.”
Her position has not changed. She simply pointed out that American progress toward renewable energy made banning it unnecessary. She has not changed her values in thinking that fracking is bad. Bad for the planet, bad for the environment, and bad enough to be banned in most countries in Europe. But we, Americans, do not care more about that than we care about all the meat that we consume, beef, chicken, pork, etc being banned in Europe which cares more about the health of their citizens than lining the pockets of multinationals.
However, to be fair, it appears that the U.S. is cleaning up its act with more environmentally friendly practices by using fracking technology in new and innovative ways. And that was exactly the point why Harris said that banning was not necessary.
Coincidentally, this controversy on Harris’s perceived flip-flop came at the same time Trump flip-flopped on women's reproductive rights. That was only the 16th time that Trump said exactly the contrary of what he had said before. But who cares, we are now as immune to his flip-flops as we are to his lies. Talking about it is not worthy of making the news anymore.
Comentarios