Posted on 01/27/2016 2:17:04 PM PST by don-o
Hannity just got on my last nerve (again). He's talking to a Trump son about "unfair questions". Hannity says he hears unfair questions from the media. He says he never asks unfair questions.
But, I never hear, "What exactly is an unfair question"?
What makes a question unfair?
*LOL* Nah...Most people just say, “Hey, you old fart!!!”
Personally, I can deal with it. There are far more important things than "winning" these kinds of arguments. As far as I am concerned it is the nature of the forces we fight - but unfortunately, my own personal reaction is not the only thing affected. The kind of questioning we commonly see now biases political thinking, belittles Human dignity, trivialises serious issues, and, ultimately, discredits the entire political process. That is affecting other people, specifically the entire body politic, and for that reason, if nothing else, it should be opposed.
But it might equally well be the other way round. It could be that life IS fundamentally fair, but that by Human action (or inaction) we have collectively made it unfair. You may slur the "innate natural reaction" an emotional neurotic issue, but the fact is that it IS innate, and innate in all Humans, (unless, as you say, they are psychotic).
Actually that is very true. Ultimately everything we ever experience is the result of our own actions. That's karma. But when we try to isolate one event from another with an expectation that we should be treated fairly in it because it appears that we have no prior contact with the people or things in it we're going to be disappointed since karma can come to fruition from past events that have no apparent connection to the present circumstances. That expectation is neurotic and it is no slur to recognize that it is. It's just reality.
That is the reality of things. The rules are artifices so not everyone plays by them.
The kind of questioning we commonly see now biases political thinking, belittles Human dignity, trivialises serious issues, and, ultimately, discredits the entire political process. That is affecting other people, specifically the entire body politic, and for that reason, if nothing else, it should be opposed.
Having seen some political writings from previous centuries I don't think that is anything new. I take the risk of presuming that anyone who values truth would oppose intellectual dishonesty in politics and media.
It doesnt really matter (to the original question) if fairness is fundamental or a Human construct, it is still a socially accepted code of behavior, which everyone in a debate, the debators, the questioners, the adjudicators and to some extent the audience, have all contracted into to. Therefore I think its perfectly reasonable for them to have an expectation of being treated according to those set rules.
Oh I'm quite sure you're right. Doesn't mean it shouldnt be opposed though.
The impression I get from history is that these things are cyclical in nature. We go through periods where reason, rationality and logic rule debates, and then it oscillates back to emotion and insult and abuse. We seem to be living in an age where we are racing to the bottom, as your tagline implies.
Let’s get some discussion on the current buzz word.
_________________
It depends upon the purpose of the interview. Presidential Debate questions are supposed to inform voters as to the policies or character of the candidate.
In a deposition on the other hand, we ask questions to try to build a foundation to prove a fact.
The problem with a multi candidate debate platform is not just the fairness of a question to each candidate, but also the distribution of “tough” questions among them. That is where the bias comes in to play.
Equally tough or equally softball for all or a mix that is equal across all candidates.
The Nuclear Triad question was a very unusual in its specificity compared to other questions presented by a moderator. On a standardized test, the question would have been thrown out.
It is the equivalent of asking a set of candidates “Who was Chester C. Arthur’s vice president?” knowing that only one of eight candidates is a presidential scholar. That would be considered a set up for the rest of the field.
Some people say that you cheat. What do you say to that?
Can you prove you don't hate mohammedans?
Everybody knows that immigration is an act of love. Why are you against love?
You have thirty seconds to answer.
Do those rise to the level of trick questions? They are absurd on the face.
There have also been some inane questions...fantasy football (that the dumbbell Bush actually fumbled out an answer).
I think you nailed it right there. Very good.
1. Mr. Cruz, wasn't your wife over the top in securing you campaign loans, and then purposefully hiding them the way you did?
2. Secretary Clinton, weren't you thrilled when the maker of that scurrilous video was finally brought to justice?
This, as well, adds clarity.
To return to my OP, Hannity and the other talkers could really help if they would omit the 14th repetition of the same old, same old, and delve into such have we have here on this little thread.
Heard from God lately?
I cannot do that until you and I have an agreed upon set of facts.
If you do, then your vanity is truly silly.
I am too dumb to wrap my mind around what you are driving at. Sorry.
Please tell.
When you feigned ignorance of my second question (nice dodge), I figured your vanity was silly, or perhaps even dishonest in its intent.
Enjoy the rest of your thread, and have a nice day.
1. Mr. Cruz, wasn't your wife over the top in securing you campaign loans, and then purposefully hiding them the way you did?
1. "Over the top" is a vague, undefined term.
2. Presumes facts not in evidence.
2. Secretary Clinton, weren't you thrilled when the maker of that scurrilous video was finally brought to justice?
The language is clunky, but I see no unfairness.
Sec Clinton, the maker of a video that you described as "scurrilous" has been brought to justice. Are you pleased at this outcome?
Of course, I am assuming that there was actual illegality involved. That is why I asked for a set of facts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.