Yes. And a person who was good at their job of asking questions would ask good questions.
You are terrible at your job.
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2026
112 points (99.1% liked)
politics
31271 readers
2189 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
So your job isn't to call someone a "dirtbag" based on your own inability to understand the facts in front of you?
On such a stage, never ask a question you don't already know the answer to.
What do they teach in law school?
Don't ask a question you don't already know the answer to.
"Missed that question, huh? Well, you're still good enough to be a dirtbag Republican AG or senator from Missouri."
"Mr. Smith, are you aware that you are a stupid and moronic little bug, barely capable of comprehending my immense intelligence?"
"Uh...no?"
"Perjury! You are fully aware of how insignificant and worthless you are, from the day you were born!"
My job is to ask questions*
*based on misunderstood information, in an inflammatory manner, and then accuse the one answering my question of perjury when they answer truthfully, and then finish the whole thing off my calling them a scumbag for doing their job, and never admitting I was wrong or mistaken in any form or degree.
Schmitthead called Jack Smith a dirtbag, said Jack Smith is the villain (again, this is a prosecutor we are talking about, who was looking into donnie's crimes), makes him want to throw up, etc.
but again, Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) is a accurate representation of the average person in my old stomping grounds.
Just saw this on YouTube and thought you would appreciate it: Senator Schmitt for brains.
Nice. You could sell a "Schmitt for brains" t-shirt to both sides with just a few tweaks to font and graphics.
We could finally be united by a different understanding instead of being divided by a comman language.
"My job is to ask questions... Not questions that make any fucking sense or have any basis in reality, but questions nonetheless."
Uh huh. And that's exactly what Katie Britt thought you were doing, too. Right? 🙃
Whoever he said this to should have immediately asked "even stupid questions?".
And here I thought his job was to legislate.
That requires reading
...like...
...the Constitution.
Also, I'd like to point out the Mr. Piece of Schmitt is also so concerned about women's sports and trans women, he didn't even know about, much less consider, the women's NCAA game.
Planned. They have nothing and they know right wing media will edit the fuck out of that.
This guy is such a loser. That picture of him hiding on Jan 6th is a perfect metaphor for his life.
Ooh, I got a question: Is Schmitt in the Epstein documents? How could we prove that he is not?
TIL Eric Schmitt is a world class moron.
And just a reminder of the moron from Missouri and his quick draw poster board that probably matches his Republican Christian sexual prowess.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWjh_T7508A
And also honorable mention of Katie Britt's look of devastation on Schmitt's gets dunked on and she knows her coordinated plan just went into the shitter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ux2fkM8VD50
Republicans would be such a joke if they weren't so stupidly dangerous.
Usually when people say things like "their look of devastation" it's an exaggeration and it could be seen as something else. Not in this case though! That is one of the most amazing looks I've ever seen. It looks like her brain just shut off.
You'd think if that's his job he'd ask more questions before running with the least reasonable conclusion.
The way cons seem to do "logic" is to sweep up a bunch of facts, do some rough pattern-matching for something that has the whiff of some circumstantial connection, and then throw that at the wall and demand that it sticks.
Note that there is virtually no way to distinguish this line of "reasoning" from the way conspiracy theorists do it. Because it's usually the exact same picture with the same players in it.
For reference, see how they do Covid denialism, climate change denialism, vaccine denialism, evolution denialism etc....
I had a covid conspiracy theorist sibling argue to my face against what I was observing personally while working in a hospital during that time. It was frustrating and I now assume this person doesn't work with actual evidence or logic, just vibes. They are a mom's basement goblin and managed to get covid while I didn't, and I had way more exposure opportunities.
Yeah. Denialists of all sorts tend to be a real chore to be around IRL.
The heel turn the hard right did into covid denialism so early on surprised even me. They just had to politicize even a goddamned pandemic. Couldn't even fucking be bothered to put in the very least amount of effort, because "woke" or something.
I just recently listened to If Books Could Kill podcasts on "In Covid's Wake" (parts I and II) and "The Lab Leak Goes Mainstream" and it brought back a lot of memories dealing with dumbfuckery from denialists.
Now you're going to tell me that a reasonable person would expect someone to want to watch women's sports.
j/k I don't really watch any sports, regardless of the gender of the people playing.
I feel like there are countless teams playing at any given time and assuming you picked the only correct one is a stupid decision. And he's not alone! A team of idiots worked together to make these nothing texts look suspicious and none will lose their jobs for it.
I feel like it would be embarrassing to say stuff like there were pro games or men's college games, which sounds incredibly sexist and dismissive (unlike my earlier comment, which is just dismissive of sports), but I suspect that will just earn him points with his base.
His job is to do quality investigations before asking questions.
Professional sealion. Pathetic.
That's his fallback. He wanted to be a gotcha artist.
A conservative's only job is to be a fascist. It's the only thing a conservative is able to do. In fact, it is impossible for a conservative to not be a fascist.
It's time to end conservatism.
If he plays this right, people will be sending him Hawks tickets of all kinds, for the rest of his (hopefully) short political career.
He shoulda asked some questions sooner.
Like "what's a hawkeye"?
“Did you check the metadata on the messages? You’re sure they were in Atlanta? Do you have any travel records?”
He's pretty much right that his job is to ask questions, specifically his job is to ask questions that imply the answer that gets him votes for elections. It's one of the issues of democracy (which I largely prefer to most alternatives). His job isn't to do the best thing possible. It's to get re-elected. It doesn't matter that his question was incredibly stupid because his potential voters will mostly only see the part of him asking the question, not the followup that made him look really incompetent.