“news”<\/em> network asks a 7 year old about the political implications of a presidential speech, you know they are either reaching in desperation for a new angle from which to attack a political foe, or they are conceding that their audience isn’t capable of understanding anything above the level of child.<\/p>\nEven so, Clara’s answer affirmed that she required help to build her business, contradicting the premise of Kilmeade’s question. The only parties whom she credited were her family, but, as a 7 year old, she can be forgiven for having neglected to give credit to the government entities that provided the sidewalk where she located her business, the water she used in her product, the streets her customers used to drive to her stand, the safety provided by law enforcement, and the deduction she represented on her parents tax returns.<\/p>\n
Expecting a child to grasp the complexities of a political argument may be a little much to ask. That’s particularly true when the adult asking the question has deliberately lied in his presentation. No doubt the case being made by Fox was eagerly assimilated by their audience who probably can’t comprehend at a level much beyond that of young Clara, but the attempt to corral a child into a partisan debate is disgusting and exploitative. But what’s really sad is that it is not surprising that Fox News would sink to such despicable depths.<\/p>\n
Update:<\/strong> Added video.<\/p>\n
![\"Fox](\"\/Pix\/Caps\/foxnews-lemonade.jpg\")
<\/center>