After being handed her party's presidential nomination without any votes in an inside job a month ago followed by a pre-taped CNN August 29 interview along with her emotional support chaperone and vice president pick Tim Walz, Kamala Harris has yet to reveal why informed voters might wish to choose her to lead the nation and free world.
Moreover, there is little evidence that the CNN event format nor host Dana Bash had any real intentions to explain contradictions between previous Kamala policy statements and recent gauzy campaign positions attributed to staff ahead of rapidly approaching November balloting.
Instead, the one-on-two discussion arrangement including Walz left virtually no time available for follow-up questions and responses that would expose currently failed, radically far-left domestic and international positions of a prospective Harris-Walz White House.
The closest Bash came to pinning down the vice president on anything beyond her empty campaign mantra about "helping the middle class" with "a new way forward" was on whether she still favors a ban on fracking for oil and gas. In 2019 while running in the Democratic presidential primary, Harris said, "There's no question I'm in favor of banning fracking."
Her response to Bash's query was: "No, and I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020 — that I would not ban fracking. As vice president, I did not ban fracking. As president, I will not ban fracking."
When Bash asked again if Harris changed her mind on fracking after the campaign ended in December 2019, she replied: "In 2020, I made very clear where I stand. We are in 2024, and I've not changed that position, nor will I going forward."
Nevertheless, even CNN has subsequently pointed out that Harris never explicitly stated a personal position on fracking during that debate, but said only that "Joe Biden, the head of the Democratic ticket at the time, would not ban fracking if he was elected president."
The vice president went to great lengths to play to popular views of moderate voters through vague responses while simultaneously signaling to her left-flank handlers that their socialist agendas would continue to prevail.
When asked why so many of her 2019 presidential candidate policy positions have recently changed, Kamala repeatedly responded, "My values have not changed."
After all, while she knew that an outright plan to ban fracking would play poorly in critical swing state Pennsylvania, she is notably disinclined to disavow any of the Biden-Harris administration's myriad costly, economically disastrous green mandates, regulations, and subsidies.
When Bash asked Vice President Harris if she regards Bidenomics to be successful, she swerved and skidded around the muddy question with misleading talking point braggadocio that inflation is "under 3%." Again, there was no follow-up asking why inflation rose from 1.4% when Biden-Harris took office in January 2021 to a 9.1% 40-year high by June 2022 under a 2021 Biden-Harris government spending binge.
There was also no follow-up question regarding economic cost, inflationary, and tax consequences of Kamala's recent proposal to impose housing and grocery price controls.
Harris said during a speech in the battleground state of North Carolina that her plan to "build up the middle class" will include a federal ban on price gouging by food producers and grocers, $25,000 in down payment assistance for certain first-time homebuyers, and tax incentives for builders of starter homes.
As pointed out by Wall Street Journal editors, paying for all the tax credits, subsidies, and new entitlements listed in "The Democratic Party's Project 2025" will impose higher taxes on productive capital.
Following the "successful" Bidenomics plan, if Kamala gets her way — and especially if Democrats win control of Congress — voters will get is a build-out of Biden's fiscal 2025 budget proposal that would spend nearly 25% of the entire U.S. economic output.
And the open border disaster where many millions of illegal immigrants were previously to be decriminalized? Now they are merely subject to unidentified civil violation penalties, with no follow-up questions on what this means either.
Nor was there any CNN interview follow-up on attempting to air both sides.
This served to underscore messaging about the Israel-Hamas conflict when Kamala disrespectfully snubbed attending Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's July 25 address to a joint session of Congress. She then followed up on a private meeting, publicly criticizing the Israeli prime minister's failure to provide adequate humanitarian aid to Israel's Gaza victims.
So far, the legacy media has proven content to give their coronated candidate a free campaign pass to circumvent probing issues voters truly need and deserve to know about rather than echoing empty promises and platitudes of "joy."
Little has apparently changed from the time Joe Biden was allowed to hide in his basement and avoid tough questioning during his campaign of 2020, offering saliently sobering reminders regarding how that turned out.
Meanwhile, we're urged to forget that while Kamala and Joe were joined at the hip over policy priorities and disasters over the past four years, we should nevertheless expect a better outcome this time.
Following Joe Biden's debate disaster with Donald Trump, which revealed him as an empty suit, fully expect a shadowy cartel of Democrat apparatchiks and media elites to do their darndest to keep the real Kamala hidden from view behind their teleprompted messaging and to rig the planned Sept. 10 ABC debate format to protect Kamala from similar exposure.
Don't let them get away with it.
Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture and the graduate space architecture program. His latest of 12 books is "Architectures Beyond Boxes and Boundaries: My Life By Design" (2022). Read Larry Bell's Reports — More Here.
© 2024 Newsmax. All rights reserved.