We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Vice President Kamala Harris was clobbered for her vague, empty replies during recent interviews where she repeatedly refused to answer questions.

“This week she couldn’t or wouldn’t answer a single question straight, and people could see it. She is an artless dodger,” the Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan penned, claiming that voters currently have a choice between “awful and empty.”

“The race is deadlocked with six weeks to go and if you’re an undecided, unsure, or wavering voter it looks like Awful vs. Empty,” she wrote.

(Video Credit: FOX 5 Washington DC)

(Video Credit: MSNBC)

“She owes us these answers. It is wrong that she can’t or won’t address them. It is disrespectful to the electorate,” Noonan argued, going so far as to contend that side-stepping questions on illegal immigration was “political malpractice.”

Noonan took particular issue with Harris’ rambling answers during an interview with ABC’s Philadelphia station on Tuesday.

One now infamous “answer” has spawned never-ending mockery:

“Well, I’ll start with this: I grew up a middle-class kid. My mother raised my sister and me. She worked very hard. She was able to finally save up enough money to buy our first house when I was a teenager. I grew up in a community of hardworking people, you know, construction workers and nurses and teachers. And I try to explain to some people who may not have had the same experience, you know, if—but a lot of people will relate to this. You know, I grew up in a neighborhood of folks who were very proud of their lawn, you know? And I was raised to believe and to know that all people deserve dignity and that we as Americans have a beautiful character, you know, we have ambitions and aspirations and dreams. But not everyone necessarily has access to the resources that can help them fuel those dreams and ambitions. So when I talk about building an opportunity economy, it is very much with the mind of investing in the ambitions and aspirations and the incredible work ethic of the American people…”

The second answer was almost as bad:

“Focusing on, again, the aspirations and the dreams but also just recognizing that at this moment in time, some of the stuff we could take for granted years ago, we can’t take for granted anymore. And so my approach is about new ideas, new policies that are directed at the current moment, and also to be very honest with you, my focus is very much on what we need to do over the next ten, twenty years. To catch up to the 21st century around, again, capacity but also challenges.”

Noonan gave a blistering summation of the tripe spewed by Harris, “This is word-saying gibberish. Only when speaking of her personal biography does she seem authoritative. Otherwise, she is airy, evasive, nonresponsive.”

Harris was also pulverized by the New York Times’ Todd Purdum, who is a former White House correspondent for the outlet and certainly no fan of former President Trump’s.

“In a campaign in which Donald Trump fills our days with arrant nonsense and dominates the national discussion (and polls show a tight race where Ms. Harris is running behind Joe Biden’s level of support in 2020 with some groups), the vice president can’t afford to stick only to rehearsed answers and stump speeches that might not persuade voters or shape what America is talking about,” Purdum said.

“Writing about politicians for decades has convinced me that direct, succinct answers and explanations from Ms. Harris would go a long way — perhaps longer than she realizes — toward persuading voters that they know enough about her and her plans,” he urged.

Harris has shown no penchant for ever being direct which is bound to leave Purdum disappointed.

While a few on the left such as Purdum want Harris to be coherent and actually answer questions, many want her to be as vague as possible to hide her shortcomings. Among those are former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle.

Still, that sentiment doesn’t sit well with those such as Bret Stephens, who is an anti-Trump New York Times columnist. He wants Harris to answer questions as well and told Ruhle, “I don’t think it’s a lot to ask for her to sit down for a real interview as opposed to a puff piece in which she describes her feelings of growing up in Oakland with nice lawns.”

“It should not be hard for Harris to demonstrate that she can give detailed answers to urgent policy questions. Or to express a sense, beyond a few canned phrases, of how she sees the American interest in a darkening world. Or to articulate a politics of genuine inclusion that reaches out to tens of millions of distrustful voters. Or to prove that she’s more than another factory-settings liberal Democrat whose greatest virtue, like her greatest fault, is that she won’t step too far from the conventional wisdom,” he wrote in a recent column for the New York Times.

Stephens is not alone. ABC’s Selina Wang also smacked Harris for not giving any policy specifics, according to Fox News.

“There were multiple times, though, during this interview where Vice President Harris did not offer a specific answer. Instead, she pivoted and returned to her talking points that she wanted to hit,” Wang asserted.

CNN’s Abby Phillip also chastised Harris over the economy and whether Americans are better off than they were four years ago.

CNN political commentator Scott Jennings took Harris to task as well, pointing out, “Every single policy question she got at the debate, she totally ignored and never answered. Why is it that she believes she does not have to answer to journalists who are asking pretty basic questions of a presidential candidate?”

“Following the interview, Politico reported on Wednesday that Harris refused to ‘veer off script.’ The report said Harris evaded questions about important issues, adding, ‘She did not break much ground or stray far from her talking points,’” Fox News reported.

Latest posts by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton (see all)

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.