I’ve written before about Barack Obama’s penchant for creating strawman arguments, in which Obama presents an exaggerated and misleading characterization of Republican proposals in order to make Obama’s own policy seem like the only reasonable choice.
Most typically, Obama will frame the sentence beginning with words similar to “some people say we should do nothing ….” Obama then presents his policy as the only alternative to “doing nothing.”
The quote below from Barack Obama (h/t Gabriel Malor) may be the most extreme strawman argument Obama has made to date, and is all the more inflammatory because it was made in connection with the “deal” Obama struck with Republicans to extent all the current marginal tax rates regardless of income.
Speaking of the extension of current tax rates for people earning over $250,000, Obama stated (emphasis mine):
“When they expire in two years, I will fight to end them,” Obama said. “Just as I suspect the Republican Party may fight to end the middle-class tax cuts that I’ve championed and that they’ve opposed.”
For Obama to state that the Republican Party “opposed” the “middle-class tax cuts” simply is false. The Republican Party wanted current tax rates extended for everyone, and never, ever argued that the Bush middle class tax cuts should be eliminated.
Obama’s frequent use of strawman arguments reflects someone schooled in the ways of agitation, not argumentation.
——————————————–
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
"Obama's frequent use of strawman arguments reflects someone schooled in the ways of agitation, not argumentation."
Yes. The 'Won' is steeped in the ways of Alinsky, and making these types of statements appeal to the lowest common denominator; that is, the incurious and the dependent.
Obama's frequent use of strawman arguments reflects someone schooled in the ways of agitation, not argumentation.
Alinsky's star pupil.
It's simply called being a bullshitter. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
No, it's called being a liar.
Why should Obama be honest in his arguments? He never has been. Just relied on catchy phrases to make people think he was rooting for them.
Hope? For what?
Change? What kind?
Well, now we know. And I find it sad that 54% of the American voter was fooled by a campaign slogan that had no more meaning than "I Like Ike."
Obama was/is an empty suit. And we all see how that whole "transparency" thing is working out with him. But then, we understand that it was more important to send a batallion of reporters to Wasilla, Alaska than to delve into the background and history of He Who Would Be King.
And ask the Seniors how that whole Obama thing is working out as they face another year without a SS raise while those who work for the government in D.C. are getting COL raises.
"I find it sad that 54% of the American voter was fooled by a campaign slogan that had no more meaning than "I Like Ike.'"
At least with Ike there was something there to like.
" Obama's frequent use of strawman arguments reflects someone schooled in the ways of agitation, not argumentation. "
===============
Just call him President Agit-Prop.
1. Most typically, Obama will frame the sentence beginning with words similar to "some people say we should do nothing …." Obama then presents his policy as the only alternative to "doing nothing."
There's also the use of 'we' to denote the government.
2. As it happens, if the choices are to do nothing, raise taxes, or borrow money from the Chinese, I'm for doing nothing.
3. I'm with the guy who says we should freeze spending and taxes. In principle, such an action is too simplistic; in practice, the ruling class would pervert anything more complicated to its own parasitical ends.