Regarding the letter "Partisan Politics must end": Not only was U.S. Rep. Candice Miller against President Obama's jobs plan, but so were Republican members of Congress, as well as a significant number of congressional Democrats who also refused to vote for passage, including Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader.
That's why the jobs bill failed to pass.
The statement that "one party would rather see America fail than allow our president succeed" is totally false.
Obama was elected by a majority that included Republicans, Democrats and independents. Nobody wants America to fail.
Some examples of Obama's accomplishments in just under three years include:
The highest debt of nearly $15 trillion.
Unemployment averaging 9.4 percent and a credit rating drop from triple-A to double-A+, the first time in history the rating has ever been downgraded.
The housing market has gone from record breaking sales to record-low mortgage failures and repossessions. Combined unemployment and mortgage failures contributed to the U.S. experiencing the highest poverty rate in history.
I simply don't understand why anyone, Democrat or Republican, would want to re-elect any president with Obama's economic failures.
Any economist will tell you that raising taxes during a recession will do more damage than benefit to small businesses trying to start up or expand. Raising taxes on those who create jobs will simply prevent growth.
what logical fallacies is there
http://writingcenter.unc.edu/resources/handouts-demos/writing-the-paper/fallacies
Study the different types of fallacies and let us know what you think.
i think there is slippery slop and appeal to athuroity, straw man, and red herring
is my answer right??????????
Yes, and I think there's some generalizing going on, too!
In the given passage, there are a few logical fallacies and flawed arguments. Let's analyze them one by one:
1. False Dichotomy: The statement "one party would rather see America fail than allow our president succeed" presents a false dichotomy by suggesting that there are only two options - either wanting America to fail or wanting the president to succeed. It oversimplifies a complex situation and ignores the possibility that some politicians may have genuine policy disagreements without wanting the failure of the country.
2. Ad Hominem: The passage includes a subtle ad hominem attack by implying that President Obama's economic failures invalidate his accomplishments and imply that no one should re-elect him. This fallacy distracts from the actual arguments by attacking the character or qualities of the person rather than addressing the merits of their ideas or actions.
3. Cherry Picking: The author selectively presents negative statistics and fails to provide a balanced view of the situation. By focusing only on the highest debt, unemployment rate, credit rating drop, and other negative aspects, they ignore any positive accomplishments or broader economic trends during Obama's presidency. This fallacy involves picking only the evidence that supports their argument while disregarding any contradictory or mitigating evidence.
4. Appeal to Authority: The author claims that "any economist will tell you" that raising taxes during a recession will do more harm than benefit. This is an appeal to an authority figure rather than presenting a reasoned argument or empirical evidence. It assumes that the opinion of any economist automatically represents a universal truth, which may not always be the case in a field with diverse perspectives.
5. Slippery Slope: The argument that raising taxes on those who create jobs will prevent growth relies on a slippery slope fallacy. It assumes that any tax increase on job creators will lead to the prevention of growth, without considering the potential benefits of tax revenue for public investments, infrastructure, or social programs.
It's important to critically evaluate arguments and identify logical fallacies to ensure a more informed and reasoned discussion.