you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

See that part where Psaki says: "Alright, thanks everyone"?

That's when she leaves.

The OANN jerk wants to create drama. The White House Press core know that OANN is nothing more than full-time disinformation propaganda, as is Fox "News". I am surprised they have press passes. They aren't journalists.

[–]filbs111 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's probably true that the circle back lady was leaving already, rather than leaving in response to that question, as the title might lead people to believe. However, it seems like a valid question, and one which wouldn't get through official vetting. The state's pretence of being open to questions , put forth by an honest media who attempt to convey what's on the mind of the general public, is highly objectionable. This kind of clickbait is also objectionable, but since they can't actually get an answer from the state, seems relatable.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes - if the OANN lady's question was not permitted, or if she was avoided earlier because of questions like that, I agree that is not appropriate. Regarding the question, it seems to be in the traditional category of 'leading' or 'loaded' questions that are meant to make an accusation that appears to be a question. Like: why do you beat your wife? Right-wing propaganda has been using the "free speech", "my freedom", "it's a free country", "human rights", &c arguments to set up leading questions that include logical fallacies to which the answers are often: 'not answerable - because that's a false premise for a question' (unless the person really does beat his wife). In this case, the rights of women, their free speech, their freedom, their human rights are all abused by the recent Texas law that permits any person to accuse a women of abortion after 6 weeks, and thus cost her thousands in legal bills, her reputation, potentially her job, and much more. It's a serious attack on and abuse of women in the name of Church dogma, which the 1st amendment prohibits (in the separation of church and state clause). Does OANN care about this, with their question about women's rights? This doesn't fully respond to your points, but offers more information, because I appreciate that you wrote your comment.

[–]filbs111 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You are thinking of the question "have you stopped beating your wife", which is quite a neat example because if answered accurately with the word "no" by someone who has never beat their wife, is interpreted by the casual listener as an admission of wife beating.

I'm not sure to what extent her question qualifies as a leading question. Certainly it implies an opinion on the part of an asker, and failing to answer it at all conveys something to the listener!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In answer to this I would have to repeat much of my response about the role of her leading question. The human rights of others are NOT constrained by the wearing of masks or taking vaccines - or by opting out and - taking tests. Indeed, their human rights are constrained by those who continue to spread COVID19 because of the incredibly selfish, brainwashed MAGAtards freaking about solely for reasons unrelated to reducing the spread of COVID19. They're actively trying to cause problems, and don't have the knowledge, intelligence, or human decency to exist in a normal society. They drink too much Brawndo.