4 ms·
This is argumentum ad verecundiam, an appeal to authority (a logical fallacy that in no way backs up what you are saying), and not a very good one.
by ionised 8y ago
This is argumentum ad verecundiam, an appeal to authority (a logical fallacy that in no way backs up what you are saying), and not a very good one.
- huffmsa 8y agoYour opinion on if it's good or not is inconsequental. It's been good enough to get FISA warrants for surveillance and executions. We might see that it's obviously flawed, but the people we've elected disagree.
- huffmsa 8y agoAs well, contrary to what your debate 101 professor might have taught you, appealing to authority is not always a fallacy. If I had said "Mr Obama and Mr Holder think the border is dangerous" then sure. But what I said was that a US president and attorney general have previously used the loose writing of the 2001 AUMF to expand the "War on Terror" to new theaters. Therefore it is likely a similar case can be made to expand the theater to the southern border.