I don’t vote for leaders out of sympathy, rather for their vision, ideas and commitment. We must question why Kamala Harris would suddenly try to distance herself from policies and practices of a suddenly “obsolete” Biden-Harris regime. This strategy casts her in the light of a “feel-good,” tag-along politician lacking in real substance and inspiration. Gender symbolism is not a substitute for significant candidate accomplishment, a clear set of objectives, and requisite communication skills. “Beat Trump” is not enough. How embarrassing is it to kick off her campaign with an immediately and widely discredited policy initiative to address inflation by instituting consumer price controls? That decision has two-fold judgmental implications: (1) floating an attention-getting trial balloon without vetting by economists or historians, and (2) doing so immediately before the formal national stage-setting for her party’s election platform. Is there a coach to be fired? She gives every indication of a would-be leader torn between conflicting ideas and movements that force the kind of complex decisions entrusted to Presidents. That’s a lot different than a ‘guilty’ or ‘innocent’ courtroom verdict and largely discretionary sentencing authority. The threatening world situation and domestic socioeconomic tensions call for experienced and authoritative national leadership. America is on the threshold of potential unprecedented conflict and cannot afford reactive or symbolic management. It’s time for expertise and patriotism to supplant experimentation and partisanship. Phil Osifer