Philosophy: John Mccain and Barack Obama Essay

Submitted By ruthieee93
Words: 1008
Pages: 5

16 April 2012
Fallacy Paper

McCain and Obama: Presidential Election Debate The debate between John McCain and Barack Obama was long and extensive but the portion of it for the analysis was to be discussing foreign policy. With “back & forth” debates, the centralized argument resulted in talking about the economy and the war. Obama made claims that McCain behaved as if the war started yesterday as opposed to occurring for years.
His premise argues that McCain is ignorant and without knowledge on the affairs in the Middle East which leads to the conclusion that he is unfit for the presidency. John McCain argued that his experience in the Vietnam War gives him a better understanding, in actuality, compared to Barack Obama. His expertise in global affairs leads him to the premise that Obama has no concern over the war and therefore the conclusion makes him unfit for the presidency.
The fallacy noticed was used by Obama and was considered hasty generalization. At one point in the clip, Obama’s rebuttal towards McCain included him repeatedly stating an action or thought McCain had made and following it by saying, “You were wrong!” After a few times of doing this, he made the claim that John McCain is always wrong thus giving the audience the false belief that McCain is always wrong based on the mistakes he had made.
Instead, Obama could have left out the statements of John McCain being constantly
Flores 2 wrong and further explained what he himself has done right.

Proposition 8 Debate The debate mediated by Anderson Cooper was between Tony Perkins, the president of Family Research Council and Lisa Bloom, an anchor who was in session. The two carried out opposing sides trying to prove and refute whether or not Prop 8 should be passed or not. The proposition up for vote will allow gay people to marry each other, if it is not passed, or keep it illegal if it is passed. The issue at hand is whether it is acceptable. Perkins argues that gay marriage should not be legalized. His premise is that historical traditions should be restored so that the conclusion would be that children would grow up in a conventional atmosphere. Bloom refutes the claim by stating that single parents deal with the issue because that is not conventional so there should be no difference with gay people. Her premise is that if gay people are treated differently, the conclusion is that they should not be expected of the same things such as taxes. One fallacy noticed is by Lisa Bloom with her appeal to pity. She speaks with an effort to make listeners feel bad for treating gay people differently by comparing gay marriages to the likeness of interracial ones, which were once banned as well. Guilt is placed on a listener for the mistake made years ago when an African-American could not marry a White person. The issue of same-sex cannot be compared to that of different skin color and background and therefore is considered a fallacy. For Bloom to have a better and more credible fight, she could further her argument on
Flores 3 how most couples and families are unconventional either way, yet my belief in keeping gay marriage banned limits my ability to think of reasons why it should be legalized.

North County Times Letters: March 25, 2012 The letters sent in with opposing views or advice to writers vary and argue different things. One reply to the country’s faith is that America should not favor Christianity because it is believed that America was not founded upon it. Adrienne Doll from Oceanside shares that the U.S. is a collective country with several faiths and beliefs. Her premise that the country is a