Fox news republicans wouldn't know a logical argument if it hit them in the face.

[OrByte]

The logic is you only spend what you have. The left wants to keep spending on "Stimulus Packages / Welfare / Excessive handouts & bailouts, Giving money to foreign countries... regardless of being > 14 Trillion in debt.

Can anyone spot the fallacy in this statement?

 

[pcgeek11]

Funny how none of the usual Righties gave a fig about that when RR & Dubya were running things, but it's now the great crusade on the Right...

Heck, the general consensus from that quarter was that cutting taxes and simultaneously engaging in wars of adventure was a wonderful idea.

I've always felt this way. Sorry to blow your theory.

1.) Taxes need to be fair and equal. Regardless of how much you do or don't make.

2.) Social programs and giving money to foreign countries is a waste in most cases. And like such most of it needs to be stopped or cut way back.
Examples: Aid money to China, 99+ weeks of unemployment, Endless food stamps and welfare, Massive amounts of money spend policing the world.

 

[pcgeek11]

Can anyone spot the fallacy in this statement?

Please enlighten us...

 

[Jhhnn]

I've always felt this way. Sorry to blow your theory.

1.) Taxes need to be fair and equal. Regardless of how much you do or don't make.

2.) Social programs and giving money to foreign countries is a waste in most cases. And like such most of it needs to be stopped or cut way back.
Examples: Aid money to China, 99+ weeks of unemployment, Endless food stamps and welfare, Massive amounts of money spend policing the world.

So you're doubling down on what the OP offered, not offering a logical argument, but rather an emotional/ ideological one...

What Aid money to China?

 

[pcgeek11]

So you're doubling down on what the OP offered, not offering a logical argument, but rather an emotional/ ideological one...

What Aid money to China?

I wasn't giving an argument, I was responding to Siddhartha.

Aid to China:

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OTEP400.htm

http://articles.economictimes.india...25_1_foreign-aid-china-expert-donor-countries

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...wing-big-from-china-while-also-giving-it-aid/

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/9535-sens-coburn-webb-question-us-aid-to-china

 

[OrByte]

Please enlighten us...

Lol! And this is why fox news is so effective people



You presented an argument against false reasoning by using a straw man fallacy.

 

[pcgeek11]

Lol! And this is why fox news is so effective people



You presented an argument against false reasoning by using a straw man fallacy.

I guess you are entitled to your " unbiased " opinion. No matter how retarded it is.

 

[ComradeBeck]

I guess you are entitled to your " unbiased " opinion. No matter how retarded it is.

You just literally walked into the thread and proved the OPs rather rambling rant. :thumbsup:

 

[pcgeek11]

You just literally walked into the thread and proved the OPs rather rambling rant. :thumbsup:

I disagree.

 

[PeshakJang]

What Aid money to China?

u that dum???

We literally borrow money from china and send it right back as aid money. This is a statement of well known fact.

 

[Fear No Evil]

u that dum???

We literally borrow money from china and send it right back as aid money. This is a statement of well known fact.

So is Obama stupid or corrupt to allow this to happen?

 

[dank69]

So is Obama stupid or corrupt to allow this to happen?

From pcgeek's first link:

They say since 2001, the U.S. has provided more than $275 million in direct assistance to China, such as for expanding Internet access and improving public transportation.

Damn Obama for sending aid to China since 2001!

 

[Jhhnn]

So is Obama stupid or corrupt to allow this to happen?

We don't really know how this has been happening, now do we? Edit- since 2001!

Nor is it reasonable to think that the POTUS doesn't have anything better to do than piss and moan to Congress about very small line items in the budget he probably doesn't even know about.

As the OP offers, there is no logical argument here, just grandstanding for emotional response.

 

[Atreus21]

Specifically what logical argument are you advancing that eludes us?

 

[dank69]

Specifically what logical argument are you advancing that eludes us?

Specifically, how to spot a logical fallacy.

 

[Atreus21]

Specifically, how to spot a logical fallacy.

Such as?

 

[Fear No Evil]

From pcgeek's first link:

Damn Obama for sending aid to China since 2001!

Oh that's right, Obama is completely void of any responsibility for anything that started before he became President.

Should I rephrase the question so even the libs can understand? Is Obama stupid or corrupt for allowing this to CONTINUE to happen since he took office? Judging by the responses so far I am going to have to assume stupid.

 

[Fear No Evil]

We don't really know how this has been happening, now do we? Edit- since 2001!

Nor is it reasonable to think that the POTUS doesn't have anything better to do than piss and moan to Congress about very small line items in the budget he probably doesn't even know about.

As the OP offers, there is no logical argument here, just grandstanding for emotional response.

So are you honestly suggesting that Obama is too busy to ask the question of why we are sending hundreds of millions of dollars to perhaps our greatest threat in the world? Perhaps he could use the time he would normally use to work on a budget?

 

[dank69]

Such as?

Here, read up:
Logical fallacies

 

[Atreus21]

Here, read up:
Logical fallacies

No, I know what a logical fallacy is. I want to know what logical arguments the OP thinks we wouldn't recognize if it hit us in the head.

 

[OrByte]

Oh that's right, Obama is completely void of any responsibility for anything that started before he became President.

Should I rephrase the question so even the libs can understand? Is Obama stupid or corrupt for allowing this to CONTINUE to happen since he took office? Judging by the responses so far I am going to have to assume stupid.

OOhhh this is a fun thread!!

Can anyone spot the fallacy in this statement!?

 

[dank69]

So is Obama stupid or corrupt to allow this to happen?

From pcgeek's first link:

Damn Obama for sending aid to China since 2001!

Oh that's right, Obama is completely void of any responsibility for anything that started before he became President.

Should I rephrase the question so even the libs can understand? Is Obama stupid or corrupt for allowing this to CONTINUE to happen since he took office? Judging by the responses so far I am going to have to assume stupid.

You are so disingenuous. You specifically blame Obama for a problem because you are too lazy/ignorant to click a simple link and find out it started long before Obama ever took office, I point out your ignorance, and instead of admitting your error you just claim the equivalent of 'But Bush!' Worthless. But everyone already knows this.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You are so disingenuous. You specifically blame Obama for a problem because you are too lazy/ignorant to click a simple link and find out it started long before Obama ever took office, I point out your ignorance, and instead of admitting your error you just claim the equivalent of 'But Bush!' Worthless. But everyone already knows this.

FYI...Bush is no longer in office and can't do anything about it. Obama is currently in office and can do something about it. Let's fix it and move on instead of playing childish blame games. If Obama does nothing then we have one more reason vote his sorry ass out of office.

 

[dank69]

FYI...Bush is no longer in office and can't do anything about it. Obama is currently in office and can do something about it. Let's fix it and move on instead of playing childish blame games. If Obama does nothing then we have one more reason vote his sorry ass out of office.

What, are you FNE's alt account?

FNE: I blame Obama for this!
Dank: This started well before Obama.
DS: Let's not play the blame game!

 

[dank69]

No, I know what a logical fallacy is. I want to know what logical arguments the OP thinks we wouldn't recognize if it hit us in the head.

What type of logical fallacy is listed right in the original post?