Kamala acculturates Kellogg’s Rice Krispies

“Acculturation” is a process by which traits are borrowed from another culture. While Kellogg’s has marketed Rice Krispies cereal for decades using the cartoon mascots of “Snap, Crackle and Pop,” the political career and presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris, continuing on through her devastating failure to capture the Oval Office, suggests she may have subtly acculturated the traits reflected by the mascots.

Let us consider “Snap.”

As vice president, Harris did not have a good reputation for being a pleasant person for whom to work. This was evidenced by the incredibly high turnover rate her office experienced, with 92% of her staff departing under her leadership. Those who left noted she was notorious for blaming others for her own shortcomings. For example, she reportedly would be given briefing books on issues she was scheduled to address but inevitably failed to read them. As a result, she would suffer public embarrassment when she was unable to provide a rational response to a question posed by the press. Upon returning to her office, Harris would snap at staff members, blaming them for the ignorance her own laziness created.

Moving on to mascot “Crackle” and making a minor letter change to the name, we modify it to “Cackle.”

Rare indeed was the occasion that Harris could put sentences together without inexplicably feeling a need to cackle. Listening to it often proved cringe-worthy to audiences who could not understand what prompted her to do so. The habit was most likely a reflection of nervousness typical of one lacking confidence about a subject matter. Thus, for Harris, this was understandable due to her failure to read her briefing materials.

And, finally, we move on to “Pop.”

For Kamala, Pop arrived late on election day. It came when the bubble of the dream Democratic liberals held, that a Biden/Harris administration would be followed by a Harris/Walz one, popped. But it was not only the pop that came as a surprise to Harris supporters, it was its magnitude on the political Richter scale as well. When all votes were counted, Donald Trump had won an electoral vote landslide, with a majority of the popular vote that claimed all seven key battleground states, while earning control of both the House and Senate. It was the pop “heard ’round the world.”

In trying to understand how their candidate lost so horrendously, Harris supporters are now examining her performance with increased scrutiny. Such scrutiny flowed freely after she announced her plans to possibly run for president in 2028 or for governor of California.

But Harris will have new issues with which to deal in any future run for office. The fact that she ran through more than $1 billion in donations – spent outrageously on celebrity endorsements, building interview sets, etc. – leaving a $20 million debt, while not accepting responsibility for it, is irresponsible. Lindy Li – a member of the DNC National Finance Committee – was shocked over Harris’ failure to accept responsibility for her campaign’s lavish spending.

Hypocritically, while failing to accept accountability for her overspending, Harris has already gone out to supporters soliciting donations as “there is nothing more important than making sure we can fight back and hold him (Trump) accountable.” Democratic strategist Jon Reinish noted that, “Getting fundraising requests after any candidate has lost, when they admit that they are still millions of dollars in debt, having blown through over a billion dollars … is especially galling. … Quite frankly I thought it was insulting.”

Among Harris supporters questioning her future viability as a presidential candidate is Democratic megadonor John Morgan who suggested her irresponsible campaign spending and poor showing after running twice for president should mark the end of her political career. He said, “I think this disqualifies her forever. Forever. If you can’t run a campaign, you can’t run America.”

Other Harris supporters, such as Democratic strategist Theryn Bond agreed saying, “Kamala Harris should never consider another presidential run.” Historically, those losing a presidential election are, politically, one and done – although Trump disproved it.

It remains to be seen whether Harris retakes the spotlight by jockeying for another political campaign or whether she opts to follow the example of Hillary Clinton after her devastating 2016 presidential loss, taking her time to stay behind in the shadows before re-emerging again.

Discussions have also entailed the possibility of Harris being nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court. As one whose eloquence as a speaker is nonexistent, her propensity to serve nonsensical word salads would mandate a translator be assigned to work with her at the Court to explain what her rulings mean.

As far as Harris’ future and the best interests of the country are concerned, we should encourage Kellogg’s to retire Crackle, paving the way for Harris to officially become “Cackle” and sparing the nation any further embarrassment. Kellogg’s certainly could market the cereal as “New,” although it would obviously have some issues trying to add the words “and Improved.”