Read the following excerpt from Nixon's "Checker's" speech: Which logical fallacy or fallacies would you say he used and why? Ex

Question

2 years ago

13

Read the following excerpt from Nixon's "Checker's" speech: Which logical fallacy or fallacies would you say he used and why? Ex

plain your answer.
"I have a theory, too, that the best and only answer to a smear or to an honest misunderstanding of the facts is to tell the truth. And that's why I'm here tonight. I want to tell you my side of the case. I'm sure that you have read the charge, and you've heard it, that I, Senator Nixon, took 18,000 dollars from a group of my supporters.
Now, was that wrong? And let me say that it was wrong. I'm saying, incidentally, that it was wrong, not just illegal, because it isn't a question of whether it was legal or illegal, that isn't enough. The question is, was it morally wrong? I say that it was morally wrong -- if any of that 18,000 dollars went to Senator Nixon, for my personal use. I say that it was morally wrong if it was secretly given and secretly handled. And I say that it was morally wrong if any of the contributors got special favors for the contributions that they made."

English

1 answer:

Gre4nikov [31] · Answer 1 · 2022-09-29T02:57:02+03:00

Answer:

Explanation:

What is he actually saying? Is he saying that he took 18000 dollars and that is not only legally or morally wrong? Is he saying that he took 18000 dollars and that it was secretly given and secretly handled and that in return, he granted special favors to the people who gave him the money? Is he actually admitted doing that?

From this part of the speech, we don't know. Nixon was so slimy that you need the rest of the speech to know what he did and what he's admitting to. But what he is saying is that if he could buy a new GM product with the money and not declare what he had done, then he was wrong both morally and legally.

So what's wrong? The problem is if his next statement is that it was for expenses occurred and he can flap a receipt in the face of his accusers, he has shown them to be rats and much worse than he is.

And if he actually did take the 18000 for personal reasons, then he is on his way to getting the sympathy he needs to beat the charge. And the Democrats loose even if they are right. He shows himself to be a decent honorable man no matter which answer is true.