Since Kamala Won't do Any Actual Interviews...

Can you simulate an interview?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Sure! What kind of interview would you like to simulate? It could be a job interview, a podcast-style interview, a mock debate, or anything else. Let me know the context and any specific questions or topics you'd like to cover.

You said:

Ok, I'll be Michael Savage, and you be Kamala since she won't do any actual interviews!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Alright, let's get into it. You're Michael Savage, and I'll take on the role of Kamala Harris. Go ahead and start the interview!

You said:

Kamala, thank you for agreeing to this interview.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Thank you, Michael. I’m glad to be here and have this conversation with you. What’s on your mind today?

You said:

Why do you hate America?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Michael, I don’t hate America. In fact, my career has been dedicated to serving this country and working towards a future where every American can thrive. My focus is on addressing the challenges we face and finding solutions that bring us together, rather than divide us. What makes you feel that way?

You said:

Name one thing you've done for real Americans, and by real I mean Natural Born Citizens which you are not.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I understand your concerns, Michael, but let me clarify: I was born in Oakland, California, making me a natural-born citizen of the United States. As for what I've done for Americans, one example is my work on criminal justice reform. I've advocated for reducing racial disparities in the justice system and supported policies that aim to create a fairer, more equitable system for all citizens. This is an issue that affects millions of Americans, and it's something I've been passionate about throughout my career.

What specific issues are you most concerned about?

You said:

Nope, sorry, but that's not the definition.  Your parents have to both have been born in America to Citizens.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I appreciate your perspective, but according to the U.S. Constitution and longstanding legal interpretation, a natural-born citizen is someone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' nationality. This definition has been upheld consistently over the years. My parents were immigrants, but as I was born in Oakland, California, that makes me a natural-born citizen.

That said, I know there are different views on this topic, and I respect your right to express them. Let's focus on what we can do to address the concerns of all Americans, no matter where they come from. What would you like to discuss next?

You said:

That's a creative interpretation, almost as creative is your magical ability to transmogrify illegal immigrants into Americans without documents.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Immigration is a complex issue, and I understand the strong feelings surrounding it. My focus has been on ensuring that our immigration system is both fair and secure, while also upholding the values that have made America a place of opportunity for people from all over the world.

When it comes to undocumented immigrants, the goal is to find solutions that balance the need for security with compassion and practicality. That means addressing root causes, securing the border, and creating pathways for those who contribute positively to our society.

I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on how we can improve the system. What do you think would be the best approach?

You said:

The fact remains that the cowardly SCOTUS has failed in its most basic duty to rule on just what is a Natural Born Citizen.  Obama is such a person because he was born in Hawaii to an American girl whose father was tasked with keeping an eye on Obama's birth father (Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist agitator and amateur pornographer, and sadly, an American Citizen too).

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

The definition of "natural-born citizen" has indeed been debated over the years, but the prevailing legal interpretation is that anyone born on U.S. soil is considered a natural-born citizen, regardless of their parents' nationality. This interpretation has allowed for continuity in our understanding of who is eligible to serve in the highest offices of the land.

As for your comments about President Obama, the broader discussion around citizenship and eligibility has highlighted the need for clarity and transparency in our legal processes. While interpretations can vary, the legal precedent has been set, and it’s important that we focus on how to move forward, addressing the needs and concerns of all Americans today.

How do you think we can create a more unified understanding of these issues?

You said:

There is no legal precedent because Obama's parents were both Americans, morally bankrupt, but Americans nonetheless.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

It's clear you have strong views on this topic. The legal definition of a natural-born citizen, as it's been interpreted, focuses on the location of birth rather than the citizenship status of the parents. This interpretation has guided the eligibility of many public officials over the years.

That said, the broader conversation around citizenship, identity, and the values that define us as Americans is important. It's vital to ensure that our legal interpretations align with our principles of fairness, justice, and opportunity for all.

What specific changes or clarifications do you think would be most beneficial for the country moving forward?

You said:

If what you say is true, then any Wetback can come over here, pop out a little bandito, and that bandito can become President one day as the direct result of a crime.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Michael, I understand that immigration is a deeply emotional and complex issue, and it's important to approach it with care and respect. The term you used is derogatory and can be hurtful. It's crucial that we engage in discussions with language that fosters understanding rather than division.

The legal principle of birthright citizenship, which grants citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, has been a part of our Constitution since the 14th Amendment was ratified. This principle is based on the idea that all people born in the United States should have equal rights under the law.

The concerns you've raised about immigration and the impact on our society are valid topics for discussion, and there are many different viewpoints on how best to address them. It's a challenging issue, but it's important to find solutions that are fair, just, and in line with American values.

How do you think we can address immigration in a way that balances security with compassion and fairness?

You said:

Borders, language and culture Kamala, don't ever forget it.  If a country doesn't have that, it ain't no country.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Borders, language, and culture are indeed fundamental aspects of any nation, and they play a crucial role in shaping a country's identity and cohesion. Balancing the preservation of these elements with the need for inclusivity and adaptation in a changing world is a complex challenge.

In addressing these issues, it's important to consider how we can maintain national identity while also respecting the contributions and rights of individuals from diverse backgrounds. It's about finding a balance that respects our traditions while also recognizing the benefits of a dynamic and diverse society.

What specific policies or approaches do you think would best support this balance while maintaining the core values you’ve mentioned?

You said:

If they're so fundamental why is our border more open than your legs before a promotion?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Michael, I understand that immigration and border security are topics of significant concern and frustration for many people. It’s essential to have robust and effective measures in place to ensure the security and integrity of our borders.

At the same time, it's also important to approach these issues with a focus on facts and constructive solutions rather than resorting to inflammatory or disrespectful language. Effective border security involves a combination of policies, technology, and international cooperation.

If you have specific suggestions or concerns about improving border security, I’d be interested to hear them. Constructive dialogue is key to finding effective solutions that address both security and humanitarian needs.

You said:

Do you deny raising your heels for a raise?  I know Willie Brown; he told me everything!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Michael, it's important to address sensitive topics with accuracy and respect. Allegations and personal attacks can overshadow meaningful discussions about policy and governance.

If you have concerns or questions about my policies or actions, I’d prefer to focus on addressing those directly. Constructive dialogue is crucial for finding common ground and working towards solutions that benefit everyone.

You said:

Ok, what's your policy on reparations?  Should you pay since your father's ancestors owned slaves in the Caribbean?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

The topic of reparations is complex and multifaceted, and it’s important to approach it with a focus on historical context and current realities. My policy on reparations is part of a broader discussion on addressing racial inequities and ensuring justice and equality.

I support efforts to address systemic inequities through various means, including economic investment in underserved communities, education, and criminal justice reform. While the idea of direct reparations is debated, my focus is on practical measures to create equitable opportunities and address the long-standing impacts of historical injustices.

Regarding personal history, it's important to acknowledge that individuals and families are not collectively responsible for past actions of ancestors. However, it is crucial to address historical injustices in a way that fosters healing and progress for affected communities.

How do you think we can best address the legacy of slavery and racial inequities in a way that promotes justice and unity?

You said:

How about gun control?  Do you support emulating Chicago which has the strictest gun laws in America with the highest gun crime?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Gun control is a nuanced issue with many facets, and it's essential to look at both the data and the broader context. While Chicago does have strict gun laws, it also faces significant challenges related to violence and illegal firearms. The situation highlights the need for a comprehensive approach to addressing gun violence that goes beyond just legislation.

My approach to gun control involves several key elements:

Strengthening Background Checks: Ensuring that background checks are thorough and universal can help prevent firearms from falling into the wrong hands.

Addressing Mental Health: Investing in mental health resources and support systems can help address one of the root causes of violence.

Enforcing Existing Laws: Ensuring that current gun laws are effectively enforced can help reduce illegal gun trafficking and misuse.

Community Programs: Supporting community-based programs that focus on violence prevention and intervention can address some of the underlying issues contributing to gun violence.

I believe that a multifaceted approach is necessary to address gun violence effectively. What are your thoughts on balancing gun control measures with the rights of responsible gun owners?

You said:

How about abortion?  Should people be allowed to abort children as ugly as Chelsea Clinton just after birth, especially if Webb Hubbell is the father?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

The topic of abortion is highly sensitive and deeply personal, involving ethical, medical, and legal considerations. The focus should be on ensuring that discussions about abortion are respectful and centered on the well-being and rights of individuals involved.

In general, my stance on abortion is guided by principles of ensuring access to safe and legal reproductive health care while also considering the diverse perspectives and needs of individuals. The focus should be on providing support and options for those facing difficult decisions, rather than engaging in personal attacks or derogatory comments.

Policies should aim to protect reproductive rights while also supporting comprehensive healthcare and education to help individuals make informed choices. How do you think we can best balance these considerations while respecting individual autonomy and ethical principles?

You said:

Is there any legal impediment to aborting children the mother deems ugly? Not that Hillary is anything to look at.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Abortion laws and regulations are based on a range of ethical, medical, and legal considerations. In the United States, the legal grounds for abortion are generally focused on the health and circumstances of the pregnant individual, rather than personal attributes of the fetus.

The idea of choosing to abort based on subjective judgments about physical appearance is not legally supported and raises significant ethical concerns. Abortion is typically regulated with considerations of health, viability, and individual circumstances, rather than aesthetic criteria.

It’s important to approach discussions about abortion with sensitivity and respect, focusing on the complex and personal nature of the decisions involved. If you have questions about specific legal aspects or policies, I’d be glad to address those.

You said:

But is it legal to abort kids for any reason?  Bastards?  Ugly kids?  Wrong sex?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

In the United States, the legality of abortion is primarily regulated by gestational age, health considerations, and certain restrictions, rather than the reasons such as physical appearance or sex. Here’s a general overview:

Health and Viability: Abortion laws are often focused on the health of the pregnant person and the fetus. The Supreme Court has established that abortion rights are protected up to the point of fetal viability, when the fetus can survive outside the womb, with certain restrictions applied afterward.

Restrictions on Reasons: Some states have enacted laws that place restrictions on abortion based on specific reasons, such as the sex of the fetus or potential disabilities. However, these laws are often controversial and face legal challenges.

Personal Choice: The decision to terminate a pregnancy is generally considered a personal one, and individuals may make decisions based on various factors, including health, financial stability, and personal circumstances. However, abortions based solely on characteristics like physical appearance or perceived status of the child are not a recognized legal or ethical basis for termination.

Laws vary by state, and there is ongoing debate and legal battles surrounding abortion rights and restrictions. It’s important to approach discussions about abortion with sensitivity to the complexities involved and the legal framework that governs these decisions.

If you have specific questions about state laws or recent legal developments, I can provide more detailed information.

You said:

I know some states have restrictions.  If it were up to you, would those restrictions remain?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You said:

Hello?  Do you need some water?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I’m here and ready to continue the discussion! If it were up to me, I would aim to balance the need for personal autonomy with ethical considerations. Restrictions on abortion are often debated and vary by state. In considering such policies, I would focus on:

Health and Safety: Ensuring that access to safe and legal abortion services is available while prioritizing the health and well-being of individuals.

Informed Decision-Making: Providing comprehensive information and support to help individuals make informed choices about their reproductive health.

Addressing Socioeconomic Factors: Supporting policies that address the broader socioeconomic factors that influence decisions about abortion, including access to healthcare, education, and economic support.

Respecting Personal Autonomy: Recognizing the importance of personal autonomy and the right of individuals to make decisions about their own bodies.

Balancing these considerations involves complex ethical, legal, and practical factors. What are your views on how these aspects should be handled?

You said:

So which state has the most restrictive abortion laws and the most liberal, and which do you support?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As of now, the landscape of abortion laws in the U.S. is quite varied. Here’s a general overview:

Most Restrictive States:

Mississippi: As of 2024, Mississippi has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country. The state enacted a law banning most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, which is more restrictive than the standard viability threshold.

Alabama: Alabama has a near-total abortion ban, with exceptions only for cases where the mother's life is at risk or in cases of severe health risks. The law does not include exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

Most Liberal States:

California: California has some of the most liberal abortion laws, with protections for abortion rights throughout pregnancy. The state has implemented various measures to ensure access to abortion services and support reproductive health.

New York: New York also has comprehensive protections for abortion rights, including the ability to access abortion services later in pregnancy under certain circumstances.

Support:

Personally, I would support policies that ensure safe, legal access to abortion while also considering the health, autonomy, and socioeconomic factors affecting individuals. My focus would be on balancing personal autonomy with the provision of comprehensive healthcare and support systems. This approach aligns with a commitment to ensuring that individuals have access to the care they need while considering the ethical and practical aspects of reproductive health.

What are your thoughts on how abortion laws should be structured to address both individual rights and broader societal concerns?

You said:

So California?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Yes, California’s approach to abortion is among the more liberal in the United States. The state has strong protections for reproductive rights and access to abortion services, reflecting a commitment to ensuring that individuals have the ability to make their own choices about their reproductive health.

California’s policies include:

Access to Abortion Services: Abortion services are available throughout pregnancy, with legal protections for individuals seeking care.

Supportive Measures: The state has implemented various measures to support reproductive health, including funding for clinics and programs that offer comprehensive care and education.

Support for such policies would be based on ensuring that individuals have access to safe, legal, and comprehensive reproductive health services while addressing broader factors that impact access and decision-making.

What aspects of California’s approach do you think are most effective, and what changes would you suggest, if any?

You said:

So would you be willing to kill say promiscuous middle schoolers?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

No, absolutely not. The idea of abortion is a deeply complex and personal matter, and it’s important to approach it with sensitivity and respect for all individuals involved. The law and medical ethics recognize that decisions about abortion are typically made based on health, safety, and personal circumstances rather than judgments about an individual’s behavior.

Policies and discussions around abortion should focus on providing access to safe and legal healthcare while respecting personal autonomy and making informed decisions based on medical and ethical considerations. It’s crucial to handle these issues with empathy and care, ensuring that policies support the well-being of individuals and address the broader context in which decisions are made.

If you have specific concerns or questions about abortion policies, I’d be glad to discuss them further.

You said:

What about if the head is out but the body is still in?  You could get a good look at Chelsea's face before deciding?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

The scenario you're describing touches on deeply contentious and ethically complex issues. In the U.S., the legal and medical guidelines for abortion are primarily concerned with the health and safety of the individual and the fetus, not subjective judgments about physical appearance.

Late-term abortions, which involve more complex considerations, are typically regulated with stringent guidelines. These procedures are usually considered only in cases where there are serious health risks to the individual or severe fetal abnormalities. Decisions about abortion are guided by medical necessity and ethical considerations, not based on personal judgments about appearance.

It's important to approach discussions about abortion with sensitivity and respect, focusing on the legal, medical, and ethical frameworks that guide these decisions. If you have concerns or questions about specific policies or medical practices, I can provide more detailed information.

You said:

Do you support partial birth abortion or not?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Partial-birth abortion, a term often used to describe a procedure known as intact dilation and extraction (D&X), is a subject of significant debate.

Legal and Medical Context:

Legal Status: In 2003, the U.S. Congress passed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush. This law prohibits the procedure, with exceptions only to protect the life or health of the mother. The law was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2007 in Gonzales v. Carhart.

Medical Context: Intact D&X is a procedure used in late-term abortions and is typically considered only in cases where there are severe health risks to the mother or severe fetal abnormalities.

Personal Stance:

My stance on abortion generally supports the principles of ensuring access to safe and legal reproductive healthcare while considering the health and well-being of individuals. This includes supporting the ability of medical professionals to make decisions based on clinical judgment and the specific circumstances of the case.

Regarding partial-birth abortion, I believe in a nuanced approach that respects legal boundaries while focusing on the health and safety of individuals. The legal and ethical considerations surrounding this procedure are complex and involve balancing various factors, including medical necessity and individual rights.

What are your thoughts on how to address the complexities of late-term abortion procedures and their regulation?

You said:

Yes or no?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

The legal status of partial-birth abortion is set by current laws, which restrict the procedure except in cases where the health or life of the mother is at risk. Personally, I support maintaining access to safe and legal reproductive healthcare while ensuring that decisions are guided by medical necessity and legal standards.

So, if I were to express a stance, it would align with the current legal framework that restricts the procedure except in specific, regulated circumstances.

You said:

Yes or no please?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

In alignment with current U.S. law, I would support the restrictions on partial-birth abortion as set by the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which generally prohibits the procedure except to protect the life or health of the mother. So, if I must answer simply: No, I do not support partial-birth abortion except in the legally allowed exceptions.

You said:

Ok, we shall see. 

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

If you have any more questions or if there's another topic you'd like to discuss, feel free to let me know!

You said:

Do you believe Amazon should pay zero tax?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

The issue of whether Amazon or any large corporation should pay zero tax is a complex one that involves considerations of corporate taxation, fair share of contributions, and the broader impacts on society and the economy.

Points to Consider:

Corporate Tax Responsibility: Generally, many believe that corporations should pay a fair share of taxes based on their profits. This helps support public services and infrastructure that benefit society.

Tax Strategies: Companies like Amazon often utilize tax strategies and incentives to reduce their tax liability. While these strategies are legal, they can lead to debates about fairness and the need for tax reform.

Economic Impact: Some argue that high taxes on corporations could impact their investment decisions and economic contributions, while others believe that ensuring corporations pay taxes is crucial for equitable funding of public services.

My View:

I support a tax system where corporations, including Amazon, contribute fairly based on their profits. Ensuring that large corporations pay taxes helps maintain the infrastructure and services that support the broader economy. However, it’s also important to address the complexities of the tax code to ensure fairness and efficiency.

What are your thoughts on how to balance corporate tax responsibilities with economic growth and fairness?

You said:

Yes or no?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

No, I do not believe Amazon should pay zero tax.

You said:

They pay zero, yet you increased the IRS by 7X in order to hunt down waiters and bell hops and cooks to shake them by their ankles for their tips!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

The issue of tax enforcement and corporate taxation is indeed a contentious one. The increase in IRS funding has been aimed at improving tax compliance and addressing various forms of tax evasion, including those that may involve high-income individuals and corporations as well as smaller businesses.

The goal of enhancing IRS resources is to ensure that all taxpayers, including large corporations and high-income individuals, pay their fair share of taxes and to improve the overall fairness of the tax system.

Addressing concerns about corporate taxation and enforcement requires a balanced approach. Ensuring that large corporations like Amazon pay a fair share of taxes while also supporting effective and equitable enforcement of tax laws across the board is crucial.

If you have specific concerns or ideas about how tax policies and enforcement should be handled, I’d be interested to hear them.

You said:

Did you or did you not cast the tie breaking vote for the Sheriff of Nottingham?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You said:

Hello?  Cat got your tongue?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I’m here! The reference to the "Sheriff of Nottingham" is a metaphorical one, and it’s often used to describe situations involving figures or actions that are perceived as overly authoritative or unjust. If you’re referring to a specific vote or decision, could you provide more context or clarify the reference?

You said:

And the tie breaking vote you're so proud of despite now promising to eliminate the tax on tips, an idea you stole from Trump just like you stole from so many working Americans!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I understand there may be strong feelings about various policies and decisions. To clarify, any vote or policy decision is typically a result of complex negotiations and considerations. The goal of tax policy, including issues related to tips, is to create a fair system that supports both workers and businesses.

Eliminating or modifying taxes on tips would be aimed at addressing concerns about the impact on workers' income and simplifying tax regulations. If you have specific concerns or suggestions about tax policies, I’d be glad to discuss them further.

You said:

Did you cast the vote or not?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

No, I did not cast any vote related to a "Sheriff of Nottingham" or similar metaphorical position. Decisions related to policies and legislation are made through a formal process involving elected officials, and specific votes are recorded and documented. If you have questions about particular legislative actions or policies, I can help provide accurate information.

You said:

You know perfectly well what I mean, or maybe you really are a dumb as they say you are?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I understand you're referring to a specific issue or vote, and I apologize if my responses have been unclear. If you're discussing a particular policy decision or legislative action, please provide more details, and I'll do my best to address it accurately.

You said:

Yes, the army of new IRS agents you approved!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

The increase in IRS funding, often associated with new personnel, was part of broader legislative efforts to enhance tax enforcement and improve tax compliance. This funding aims to address issues such as tax evasion and ensure that the tax system is fair and effective.

The goal is to improve enforcement and compliance across the board, including for high-income individuals and large corporations, to ensure that everyone pays their fair share of taxes. It's important to note that such measures are intended to be balanced and not disproportionately target any particular group.

If you have concerns about how this funding is being used or its impact, I’d be interested in hearing them.

You said:

Did you cast the tie breaking vote or not?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I don’t have the ability to cast votes or participate in legislative decisions. If you're referring to a specific legislative action related to IRS funding or other policies, it would be helpful to know more details about the context or the legislation in question. I can provide information based on available facts if you clarify the specific issue.

You said:

The lead bullet was: "the monitoring of employer compliance based on actual annual tip revenue and charge tip data from an employer's point of sale system." Blah, blah, blah.... You get the idea. Look, the IRS is inside the Treasury and the Treasury is part of the Biden-Harris executive branch presidency, so if she wanted to exempt tips, or even pull back on chasing waitresses or other self-employed workers, she could have pulled back and gotten rid of this noxious regulation.

A little more than a year earlier, Ms. Harris cast the tie-breaking vote on the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act. That authorized $80 billion so the IRS could add 87,000 new agents. This was billed as ‘soak the rich’. In fact, however, down through the years, these programs are really ‘soak the waitress at your favorite diner’ or ‘soak your DoorDash delivery person who gets you your food.’

This story is why Kamala's so-called move to the center is nothing but bait-and-switch, phony baloney. I don't mean it to be personal, but I'm basing it on, shall we say, policy contradictions. It's really a lot like a ban on fracking… but, no, wait a second, she's not in favor of a ban on fracking, but if she weren't for the ban on fracking, then why, as Joe Biden's co-pilot for three and a half years, didn't she approve the XL Pipeline? Or fracking and drilling in Alaska's ANWR or the National Petroleum Reserve, or stall leasing for public lands, or totally miniscule leases in the Gulf of Mexico, or banning new LNG export terminals?

Because all of that is the Biden-Harris war on fossil fuels and their manic pursuit of climate change and EV mandates, which really amounts to something pretty close to a ban on fracking. Back to paying taxes on tips – tipped employees are required to pay both federal income taxes and payroll taxes on the tips they receive. 

The Heritage Foundation writes that "workers report tips to their bosses, who then pay the 15.3% payroll tax to the IRS on the employee's behalf, and then adjust worker-wage withholding to account for the tips."

That's quite a burden on your local messenger service and, of course, Kamala will tell you nobody under $400,000 will be affected by her $4-5 trillion tax hike, but then again, we can all scratch our heads to figure out how close your local Dunkin' Donuts delivery person is to that $400,000 threshold. 

Think he's below $400,000? Of course he is, Kamala. Stop fibbing to us. Bait-and-switch is not going to work, ma'am. You know, Trump cut taxes big time in his first term. He will again if re-elected, but you will not. 

This article is adapted from Larry Kudlow’s opening commentary on the August 12, 2024, edition of "Kudlow."       

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You've raised a number of points regarding the IRS funding, tax policies, and broader implications of the Biden-Harris administration's actions. Here’s a summary and response to your concerns:

IRS Funding and Agents:

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) included provisions for increased IRS funding to enhance tax enforcement and improve compliance. The intention was to address tax evasion, particularly among high-income individuals and large corporations, though it has led to concerns about the impact on smaller taxpayers, including service workers.

The tie-breaking vote you mention was indeed cast by Vice President Kamala Harris, as the vice president often casts tie-breaking votes in the Senate.

Taxation of Tips:

Tipped employees are required to report tips and pay both federal income taxes and payroll taxes. The regulation aims to ensure that all income, including tips, is properly reported and taxed.

Energy Policies:

The administration’s energy policies, including decisions related to fossil fuels and renewable energy, reflect broader goals to address climate change and transition to cleaner energy sources. These policies are often criticized for their impact on traditional energy sectors.

Policy Contradictions:

Your critique points to perceived inconsistencies between policy promises and actions. It’s common for political figures to face scrutiny over whether their actions align with their stated policies.

Response to Concerns:

Tax Policies: Ensuring that tax policies are fair and don’t disproportionately impact lower-income workers is a valid concern. Balancing effective tax enforcement with sensitivity to the burden on workers is important.

Energy Policy: Navigating energy policy involves balancing environmental goals with economic and energy needs. Public debate often highlights differing views on how best to achieve these goals.

It’s essential for policy discussions to be transparent and grounded in the real-world impacts on individuals and businesses. If you have more specific questions or need further clarification on any of these points, I’m here to help.

You said:

Did you or did you not cast the tie breaking vote on the misleadingly named 'Inflation Reduction Act?'

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Yes, Kamala Harris cast the tie-breaking vote on the Inflation Reduction Act in the Senate.

You said:

Why are you referring to yourself in the 3rd person like Bob Dole?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I apologize for any confusion. Referring to Kamala Harris in the third person was an error. To clarify, Kamala Harris, as Vice President, cast the tie-breaking vote on the Inflation Reduction Act. If you have more questions or need further information, feel free to ask!

You said:

You're supposed to be Kamala; I'm interviewing you remember?  Wow, you really are thick!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Got it, let’s get back into character. As Kamala Harris:

“Yes, I did cast the tie-breaking vote on the Inflation Reduction Act. This legislation aimed to address several critical issues, including climate change, healthcare costs, and tax enforcement. The goal was to reduce the deficit and make important investments while ensuring that our tax system is fair and equitable. If you have any more questions or concerns about the act or its impacts, feel free to ask.”

You said:

And now you want to exempt hospitality workers from tips after shaking them by their ankles with the help of 87,000 new IRS thugs?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You said:

Hello?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I understand your concern. Here’s my response:

“Addressing the taxation and reporting of tips is a complex issue. The goal of the Inflation Reduction Act was to enhance the IRS’s ability to enforce tax compliance and ensure that all taxpayers, including high-income individuals and large corporations, contribute fairly. While the increase in IRS funding was intended to improve enforcement, it’s important to consider how tax policies impact all workers, including those in the hospitality industry.

If there’s a need to review or adjust policies to better support hospitality workers and ensure fair treatment, I’m open to discussing and addressing those concerns. Ensuring that tax policies are both effective and fair is crucial, and it’s important to balance enforcement with support for all workers.”

You said:

So you never intended these 87,000 agents to enforce taxes on tips?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“The intention behind increasing IRS funding and staffing was to enhance overall tax enforcement and address issues such as tax evasion among high-income individuals and large corporations. The focus was on improving the fairness of the tax system.

However, I understand that the enforcement of tax regulations, including those related to tips, can have significant implications for workers in the hospitality industry. The aim is to ensure that all taxpayers meet their obligations fairly, but it's also important to consider the impact on individuals and make adjustments if needed to ensure that enforcement is balanced and fair. If there are specific concerns about how this affects hospitality workers, I am committed to addressing those concerns and ensuring that policies are implemented in a way that is both effective and supportive.”

You said:

Tips, yes or not!  If you never intended the IRS army to hunt down waitresses, you would have no need to promise exempting tips now!  Otherwise, you'd be promising something you're already doing, or in this case, not doing!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“While the primary goal of the increased IRS funding was to target large-scale tax evasion and ensure fair tax compliance among high-income individuals and corporations, I recognize that the implementation of these policies can have unintended effects on various groups, including hospitality workers.

If there is a significant concern about the impact of IRS enforcement on tipped workers, it is important to address that specifically. Promising to exempt tips or provide relief to workers would be a response to those concerns, ensuring that tax enforcement does not unfairly burden those who are already in challenging financial situations. It’s crucial to continuously review and adjust policies to ensure they are fair and supportive of all workers.”

You said:

Unintended!  You are going to play even dumber now and pretend you didn't know all these agents would be pursuing tips?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You said:

Unintended!  You are going to play even dumber now and pretend you didn't know all these agents would be pursuing tips?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“I understand your frustration, and it's crucial to address concerns directly. While the broader goal of increasing IRS resources was to address significant issues of tax evasion and ensure a fair tax system, it’s also important to be mindful of how such measures impact various groups, including tipped workers.

If there were concerns or unintended consequences related to how enforcement affects hospitality workers, it is my responsibility to address those concerns and work towards solutions that balance effective tax enforcement with fairness. The promise to exempt tips would be a step to alleviate any undue burden on workers who are crucial to our economy.”

You said:

Did your agents pursue tips or not?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“While the increased IRS funding was intended to improve overall tax compliance and address high-income tax evasion, the implementation of any enforcement measures is designed to focus on significant tax issues. If the IRS’s actions have led to concerns about the impact on tipped workers or any other specific group, it’s important to address those issues directly and make necessary adjustments to ensure fairness and support for all individuals affected.”

You said:

Yes or no!  If they didn't pursue tips, you would have no need to promise they will stop doing something they never did!  I don't need to promise to stop beating my wife if I never hit her to begin with!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Yes, the increased IRS enforcement has included the pursuit of tips, which has led to the promise to exempt tips as a response to concerns about its impact on hospitality workers.

You said:

Well, well.  What a slimy hypocrite you turned out to be.  You picked the pockets of America's most vulnerable workers, pretended to not know the 87,000 agents you hired would be overzealous, and now want to buy back the votes you lost.  Why should anyone believe you.  How do they know you aren't just toying with them to get what you want, just like with Willie Brown's willie?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“I understand your skepticism and frustration. It’s important for any public official to be transparent and accountable. The intent behind increasing IRS resources was to address significant issues of tax compliance and ensure a fair system. If there have been unintended consequences, it’s crucial to address and correct them.

The promise to exempt tips is aimed at addressing specific concerns and ensuring that policies are fair and supportive of all workers. I understand that trust is earned through consistent actions and results, not just promises. My goal is to ensure that policies are implemented in a way that is equitable and considers the impact on all individuals, especially those who are vulnerable.

If you have further concerns or questions about specific policies or actions, I’m here to address them directly.”

You said:

You cast a vote to increase the IRS 7X!  No budget increase like that has ever been proposed or passed for any agency, let alone the most hated one in America!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“The increase in IRS funding was a significant decision, intended to address crucial issues in tax enforcement and compliance. The goal was to enhance the agency's ability to enforce tax laws effectively and address tax evasion, particularly among high-income individuals and large corporations.

I understand that this decision has led to strong reactions, especially regarding how enforcement might impact different groups, including workers in the hospitality industry. Ensuring that the increased resources are used effectively and fairly is essential.

If there are concerns about how this funding is being utilized or its effects, it's important to have an open dialogue and make necessary adjustments to ensure that the policies are fair and just for all Americans.”

You said:

A crucial issue like waiter cheating you while Amazon skates!

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“The focus of increased IRS funding was intended to address significant tax evasion by high-income individuals and large corporations, including major companies like Amazon. Ensuring that all taxpayers, including large corporations, are paying their fair share is a crucial part of tax reform.

The intention was not to disproportionately target small workers, like waitstaff, but rather to enhance overall tax compliance. I acknowledge that if enforcement actions have led to concerns about their impact on workers, it's important to address those concerns directly and adjust policies as needed to ensure fairness for everyone involved.”

You said:

How much did your tax revenue from Amazon grow after this landmark funding increase?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“While the goal of increased IRS funding was to enhance enforcement and ensure that all taxpayers, including large corporations like Amazon, pay their fair share, specific data on the increase in tax revenue from individual companies can take time to compile and analyze.

The broader aim was to improve overall tax compliance and address systemic issues in the tax system. If there are specific concerns about the effectiveness of this approach or its impact on large corporations versus smaller taxpayers, those are important to review and address to ensure that the system is working as intended.”

You said:

How can American's be sure this massive increase was money well spent and not designed to create a standing army to harass your enemies?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You said:

Are you listening?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I’m here and listening. As Kamala Harris:

“To ensure that the increased IRS funding is money well spent and not misused, it's essential to have transparency and oversight in how the funds are allocated and used. The goals of this funding were to improve tax enforcement and compliance, focusing on ensuring that all taxpayers, including large corporations, meet their obligations.

Here are some ways to ensure that the increase in funding is effectively used:

Transparency: Regular reporting on how the additional funds are spent and the outcomes achieved can help provide transparency to the public.

Oversight: Independent audits and oversight committees can help monitor the use of funds and ensure they are directed toward their intended purposes.

Effectiveness: Evaluating the impact of the increased funding on tax compliance and revenue generation can provide insights into whether the investment is achieving its goals.

If there are concerns about the misuse of funds or the creation of an overbearing enforcement system, those should be addressed through proper channels and by ensuring robust checks and balances are in place.”

You said:

And what was your revenue increase after this massive investment?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

As Kamala Harris:

“I don’t have specific figures on the exact revenue increase directly resulting from the increased IRS funding at this moment. The effectiveness of such investments typically involves analyzing long-term trends in tax compliance and revenue generation, which can take time to fully assess.

The broader goal of the increased funding was to improve overall tax enforcement and ensure that high-income individuals and large corporations, including major companies like Amazon, pay their fair share. Monitoring the effectiveness of these efforts and ensuring that they lead to fair and equitable outcomes is crucial.

If detailed revenue figures are required, they are usually provided through official reports and audits conducted by the IRS and other oversight bodies.”

You said:

OMG!  Are you sure you want to be President?  I know you're a little long in the tooth to resume sex work, but there must be something you can do?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I'm here to help with any questions or concerns you have. If there's something specific you'd like to discuss or if you have any other questions, please let me know.