- 07 Nov 2013 17:28
#14326796
Your quote is from a campaign brochure. He chose his words carefully. In truth, on multiple occaisions, Goldwater publically advocated "strengthening" Social Security by making it voluntary. Even Rand Paul and Paul Ryan didn't go that far. Goldwater was a politician who, like all politicians, tried to balance his convictions against political reality. Privately, I doubt very much that Goldwater would have opposed ending Social Security altogether.
And you're lecturing me on Strawmen? Those were Barry Goldwater's words. I quoted them to illustrate his beliefs and nothing else. Holy shit Keso, learn to follow the discussion.
I am just as opposed to logical fallacies as you, friend. You still have not answered my question. Supposing Goldwater's claim was a strawman, so what? The point under discussion was what Goldwater believed. Whether or not he attacked a strawman in expressing that belief is irrelevant. Furthermore, attributing his fallacy or his alleged misunderstanding of the tax system to me is a transparent attempt to win some phantom debate club points.
I think this is probably a fair characterization, however I might add that we need to put his foreign policy beliefs in context. A lot of people holding Libertarian foreign policy stances today might have been far more hawkish in the 1960's.
Drlee wrote:By todays standards Goldwater was a moderate. Here is what he said about Social Security:
Your quote is from a campaign brochure. He chose his words carefully. In truth, on multiple occaisions, Goldwater publically advocated "strengthening" Social Security by making it voluntary. Even Rand Paul and Paul Ryan didn't go that far. Goldwater was a politician who, like all politicians, tried to balance his convictions against political reality. Privately, I doubt very much that Goldwater would have opposed ending Social Security altogether.
Keso wrote:No, the funny thing is, is that you think that a 90% tax rate means that a person who earns 100k pays 90k.
And you're lecturing me on Strawmen? Those were Barry Goldwater's words. I quoted them to illustrate his beliefs and nothing else. Holy shit Keso, learn to follow the discussion.
Keso wrote:It sounds like you need some basic knowledge of how to discuss things, and just what the problem with a strawman argumentation can be.
I am just as opposed to logical fallacies as you, friend. You still have not answered my question. Supposing Goldwater's claim was a strawman, so what? The point under discussion was what Goldwater believed. Whether or not he attacked a strawman in expressing that belief is irrelevant. Furthermore, attributing his fallacy or his alleged misunderstanding of the tax system to me is a transparent attempt to win some phantom debate club points.
Knucklepunch wrote:He wasn't a doctrinaire libertarian, but actually a bit closer to Rudy Giuliani, fiscally conservative, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, but very anti-crime, and hawkish on foreign policy.
I think this is probably a fair characterization, however I might add that we need to put his foreign policy beliefs in context. A lot of people holding Libertarian foreign policy stances today might have been far more hawkish in the 1960's.