When I hear newscaster use “the science” as a dismissive way to end an argument I get so damn angry –because I am sure none of them have any science background and so they parrot the phrase in order to act as if they have the moral high ground.
Sorkin went on to say “The difference between a big box retailer, and a restaurant – or frankly, a church – are so different it’s unbelievable.“
An incredulous Santelli shot back: “500 people in a Lowes aren’t any safer than 150 people in a restaurant that holds 600…and I live in an area with a lot of restaurants that have fought back…and they’re open.”
After some more screaming back and forth, Sorkin accused Santelli of avocating for people to go “packing into restaurants”, which is not what he said.
Santelli interjected: “I think our viewers are smart enough to make those decisions on their own!”
Sorkin continued to insist that he was merely trying to educate viewers about “the science” of COVID-19. Then CNBC economics correspondent Steve Liesman joined in, smugly asking about the numbers of the dead and said “how’s that working out for you, Rick?”
“Just fine,” Santelli replied, before trying to explain that while he feels for every family that has lost a loved one to COVID-19, that simply exploring alternatives that might help keep everybody safe while also protecting small businesses and workers would be a wise move.
Before he could continue, Becky Quick jumped in to stop the fight, politely asking her three male colleagues to drop it, positing that they could shout at each other all morning and still wouldn’t get anywhere.
Post comments (0)