Reposted by Bret Baier
The statement discusses a public issue related to the rules of a political debate, which is a matter of public concern and thus constitutes public discourse. The tone of the statement is somewhat speculative and implies a strategic motive behind Kamala Harris's acceptance of the debate rules.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but the speculative nature could be seen as subtly undermining Harris's integrity.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does speculate on Harris's intentions, which could be seen as disrespectful. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion; it is more focused on political strategy. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it makes a speculative comment that could be seen as a subtle personal attack. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement upholds the principle of free speech but could be seen as using the platform irresponsibly by speculating on motives without evidence. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.