Saturday, July 19, 2014

It's time for a straw-man campaign and we will fight for it

National Journal reveals Senator Elizabeth Warren's 11 Commandments of Progressivism

As reported by The National Journal otherwise intelligent people are falling left and right for her rubbish which mostly fall under the Red Herring, and Straw-man varieties of Informal Fallacy. Let's examine the most egregious fallacies shall we?


- "We believe that Wall Street needs stronger rules and tougher enforcement, and we're willing to fight for it."
- "We believe in science, and that means that we have a responsibility to protect this Earth."
- "We believe that the Internet shouldn't be rigged to benefit big corporations, and that means real net neutrality."
- "We believe that no one should work full-time and still live in poverty, and that means raising the minimum wage."
- "We believe that fast-food workers deserve a livable wage, and that means that when they take to the picket line, we are proud to fight alongside them."
- "We believe that students are entitled to get an education without being crushed by debt."
- "We believe that after a lifetime of work, people are entitled to retire with dignity, and that means protecting Social Security, Medicare, and pensions."
- "We believe—I can't believe I have to say this in 2014—we believe in equal pay for equal work."
- "We believe that equal means equal, and that's true in marriage, it's true in the workplace, it's true in all of America."
- "We believe that immigration has made this country strong and vibrant, and that means reform."
- "And we believe that corporations are not people, that women have a right to their bodies. We will overturn Hobby Lobby and we will fight for it. We will fight for it!"
And the main tenet of conservatives' philosophy, according to Warren? "I got mine. The rest of you are on your own."
"We believe that Wall Street needs stronger rules and tougher enforcement, and we're willing to fight for it." Let's look at history shall we? If the Democrats weren't directly responsible for this it might even fly. Who REALLY worked to gradually repeal the Glass Steagall Act leading to the financial crisis of 2008? Yeah, we thought so, nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"We believe in science, and that means that we have a responsibility to protect this Earth." The implication of course is that her opposition rejects science, an irresponsible combination of Logical Fallacies mostly a vague form of Argumentum ad Hominem without even the courage to name a specific individual, just lump all her opponents into a single "science fearing" pile. Nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"We believe that no one should work full-time and still live in poverty, and that means raising the minimum wage." The implication of course is that her opposition believes that a certain "class" of individual deserves to live in poverty, and works actively to assure this is always the case, that raising the minimum wage will actually improve the situation. I doubt that Warren is really so stupid that she doesn't know that exact opposite will result from such a move, but it sure resonates well with the ignorant. Again an irresponsible combination of Logical Fallacies, or just plain old lying to willingly ignorant constituents and potential voters.
Effects of the Minimum Wage on Employment Dynamics
Jonathan Meer†
Texas A&M University and NBER
Jeremy West
Texas A&M University
December 2013
Abstract
The voluminous literature on minimum wages offers little consensus on the extent to which a wage floor impacts employment. For both theoretical and econometric
reasons, we argue that the effect of the minimum wage should be more apparent in new employment growth than in employment levels. In addition, we conduct a simulation
showing that the common practice of including state-specific time trends will attenuate the measured effects of the minimum wage on employment if the true effect is in fact on
the rate of job growth. Using three separate state panels of administrative employment data, we find that the minimum wage reduces net job growth, primarily through its
effect on job creation by expanding establishments. These effects are most pronounced for younger workers and in industries with a higher proportion of low-wage workers.
Nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"We believe that fast-food workers deserve a livable wage, and that means that when they take to the picket line, we are proud to fight alongside them." Again a Straw-Man but several other fallacies including argumentum ad populum and bandwagon fallacy and a big loaded question about what "fast food workers deserve". The appeal of course is guilty of many things, and establishing a basic argument that the opposition of the progressive socialists want to keep "the poor working class" poor and working. It is at the very core of the wealth envy, class warfare argument we've seen many times before, and heavily popular recently. Fast-food workers do not have job skills worthy of a higher wage.  It's NOT that they aren't good people, they just don't offer anything any employer in their right mind would pay more money for. Nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"We believe that students are entitled to get an education without being crushed by debt." More of the same Logical Fallacies and motives, I'd add this though, no one has FORCED students to go into debt to get an education, and surely part of that education would have prepared them FOR this reality. Get an education you CAN afford, improve upon it as you are able to manage that debt, instead of demanding largess to finance your education.  Nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"We believe that after a lifetime of work, people are entitled to retire with dignity, and that means protecting Social Security, Medicare, and pensions." Oh very nice, one of my favorites of all this hypocrisy. Again a Straw-Man but several other fallacies including argumentum ad populum and really a vague form of Argumentum ad Hominem without even the courage to name a specific individual. Who stole from Social Security and Medicare to pay for Obamacare? Oh yeah, that's right, it just slipped our minds - if only we had "free healthcare" to pay for those memory pills. Nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"We believe—I can't believe I have to say this in 2014—we believe in equal pay for equal work." I can't believe it either Fauxcahontas, damn the bad luck and those pesky misogynist opponents of your's. Nearly six years into Obama's Residency and he STILL isn't paying his staff equally, neither are many of your colleagues (I can quote many such articles so don't get your feathers in a ruffle). Nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"We believe that immigration has made this country strong and vibrant, and that means reform." Well if it was really REFORM we were talking about we might indeed get something done. The trouble with this Straw-Man is it's also a variation of the Scope Fallacy and Argumentum ad Hominem, again, without the moral courage to name your opponent or accuse them directly. Just paint on the "war paint" with a big wide brush, targeting and inferring that your opponents are "anti-immigration" by keeping the argument itself dishonest. The argument being two-fold; a formal fallacy "Commutation of Conditionals" the first assertion being that your opponent is "anti-immigration" without establishing that illegal aliens are "immigrants" therefore they are "anti-immigrant"; and that your opponents haven't also proposed "immigration reforms" I'm betting two progressive socialist sources should be enough to disprove your own flawed argument. Nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"And we believe that corporations are not people, that women have a right to their bodies. We will overturn Hobby Lobby and we will fight for it. We will fight for it!"
I've already beat this one to death here and won't belabor the point further. Nice try Fauxcahontas, but by all means fight for it !

"And the main tenet of conservatives' philosophy, according to Warren? "I got mine. The rest of you are on your own." Where do I even begin? We could start with University of North Carolina School of Law pays Professor Gene Nichol $205,400 Or maybe Hillary Clinton: “We Came Out Of The White House Dead Broke”. Or maybe, like you, we could pretend we are some ethnic minority for advantages all across the board. Nice try Fauxcahontas, you sanctimonious BITCH, but by all means fight for it !

It's time for a straw-man campaign and we will fight for it.

Or have I been eating paint chips again?

No comments:

Post a Comment