Why would who let a biased task force
create a feasibility study?
...The task force also will explore raising about $8 million to $10 million in private money to pay for the rest.
“This is about the soul of [the top 20% of income earners of] our community, about how we are going to feed it to grow and thrive as a 21st century community,” Community Foundation President Walker Sanders told 55 task force members...
“Many people have questioned why we are doing this in this economy,” Sanders added. “This is the right time. We have let this issue fester for way too long and let our differences in the past polarize us to do nothing.”
Straw Man.
There are some who say stealing from a communities children
is wrong,
but we older people have waited too long to have immediate gratification
so taxing the future income of our kids is a good idea
so long as we do something "nessesary"?
...If [city council] decides that it is not feasible, it would explore replacing War Memorial Auditorium in the Greensboro Coliseum complex.
“As you look around this room, and you’ll see a lot of different interests,” Sanders said. “Those who are for a performing arts center, those who are against it. Those who have been for putting it downtown, those who have been for putting it at the War Memorial Auditorium complex ... This task force is bringing all those perspectives.”
Bullshit.
...The group doesn’t have much time to finish its work. It will give its preliminary report to the city council May 15, so that the city council has enough time to take required steps to put it on the November ballot.
Dawn DeCwikiel-Kane
2 comments:
Dear Inquisition:
‘ “Many people have questioned why we are doing this in this economy,” Sanders added. “This is the right time. We have let this issue fester for way too long and let our differences in the past polarize us to do nothing.”
Straw Man.’
Ah yes, the straw man argument.
If one took Sanders’ argument and were to create a formula, the formula might yield:
(1) the implicit assumption is that the proposition Sanders promotes/desires is based upon empirical evidence, however the fact of the matter is that the proposition is a notional proposition,
(2) the notional proposition is magically morphed into the empirical and now put forth as empirical,
(3) the notional proposition is then argued through verbal virtuosity,
(4) opposition is denied legitimacy,
(5) Sanders then vilifies any opponent to the notional proposition,
(6) Sanders’ notional proposition should be implicated supported as it’s a vision of “the way things ought to be”,
(Summary) the end product is to promote a notional proposition as somehow magically being empirical, argue through verbal virtuosity, deny opponents legitimacy and vilify opponents, turn the notional proposition into “the way things ought to be“…..merely ending in Sanders painting the world in Sanders’ own self image.
Ops! #6 Sanders’ notional proposition should be IMPLICITLY supported as it’s a vision of “the way things ought to be”,
Post a Comment