CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS C1stLtAlexP

Reward Points:44
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
96%
Arguments:22
Debates:6
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

I hope you do realize that the situation in Russia is actually getting pretty grim right now. What the law says and what the Russian government are doing are very different things. Gays are being beaten by mobs, attacked by police, thrown in jail for holding their partner's hands, some are being straight up murdered for loving who they love. What Russia has done is, basically, make it a crime to be gay.

1 point

There have been many attempts at anarchism throughout history, including in communities within the United States from time to time, but ultimately all of them have failed, although there are a large number of reasons why each attempt has failed, ranging from lack of a military, to lack of funding, to (and I swear to god I'm not making this up) a division between a community over whether skinny dipping should be allowed in public. Each community has failed, though, even though there are a large variety of causes as to why.

2 points

There is a very large difference between socialism and communism. In communism, the state controls everything, and I mean everything. All land, all jobs, the market, the people, everything. Socialism is the philosophy of individuals working towards the greater good; the state is not as heavily involved as it is in communism, and forms of capitalism and socialism can work together very well, unlike communism and capitalism. Think I'm wrong? Look at the United States. Our paved roads and highway systems? Socialism. Police and fire department? Socialism. Medicare and Social Security? Socialism. Taxes? Socialism. Anything that uses taxpayer money to create something that benefits everybody is socialism, or at least the American version of it. Notice how not only do we still have a free-market capitalist economy, but the government doesn't control everything. And that is the difference between socialism and communism.

C1stLtAlexP(44) Clarified
1 point

And immediately I find this: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/General-Ham-Fired.htm#.UZaeRUokSVo

To summarize, the general retired for personal reasons, he was not fired for refusing to stand down during Benghazi. Here's what the Department of Defense said about it: "General Ham is doing an exceptional job leading Africa Command. He has the full confidence of the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. His decision to retire has been an entirely personal decision to move on. People retire at certain stages of their career and that’s what’s happening in this case. There’s been a lot of rumor and speculation, particularly in the blogosphere, about General Ham, and that speculation and those rumors are absolutely, categorically false.”

1 point

Actually, no, not really, because that's only talking about the general. To be fair, though, I had not heard about that, and I thank you for sharing it with me. I'll have to do some further research of my own into this.

1 point

Well, I don't want to sound like I think all conservatives are hypocrites all the time, because I don't. I do think that conservative politicians, and the people that just mindlessly parrot back what is told to them by FOX "News" and said politicians, are hypocrites a large amount of the time. Usually, it's just because of the issues they support (or not, depending on the situation), like "smaller government is what is needed......except when we need the government to tell these people who we don't like what they can and can't do (gays and women who want abortions and, sometimes, anyone who isn't Christian). Or "Religion should be allowed in the educational system......and by religion, I mean my own personal religion, and not Islam or anything else." Or "welfare is destroying our nation, and people who get it must be mooching off the government and are up to no good......except when we need it, and then it's part of the American way." And I could keep going, but right now, the biggest issue of hypocrisy, the whole Benghazi thing, is just ridiculous. Like I've already pointed out in this debate, Regan had 241 Marines and soldiers die under his watch at Beirut, and Bush had not only 9/11 but 64 additional deaths at American embassies/consulates under his presidency. Was there any outrage towards those two administrations, investigation after investigation, with people using terms like "murderer" and "traitor" and "terrorist" towards the President? Of course not, because they were both Republican. But as soon as a Democrat has something like that happen under their watch, these conservative politicians start forming a lynch mob. They're trying to impeach Obama for this, for Christ's sake. It's disgusting.

1 point

Well then why aren't you providing any links as proof? You can't just cite something that happened, (especially the media: they cover a lot of things that are bogus), and use that as proof.

1 point

Show me proof. That's all I have to say. Show me proof that he fired those people; and if you can't find any, admit you're wrong.

1 point

But then you missed the point of one of the quotes I used, and left it deliberately out of your massive quote from the article: Yancey's poll was a just that, a poll about, and I can't stress this enough, HYPOTHETICAL bias. Everyone has plenty of hypothetical bias. It becomes real bias when it is put into practice. And without Yancy's poll, the last few paragraphs is just the opinions of several people, and opinions don't count for much as evidence.

1 point

Oh, he did now? You see, I've been hearing claims like that for months, and no one has been able to find me proof. And while you're at it, get me proof that he sat there and watched people die. Also, I find it interesting that you had no rebuttal against the accusation of hypocrisy, and no defense of previous conservative presidents who had events like this, but on a larger scale, happen under their watch, yet you continue to throw around regurgitated right-wing propaganda. Hypocrite.

Displaying 6 most recent debates.

Winning Position: What is your opinion on gay marriage in the United States?
Winning Position: Such a douche
Winning Position: Yes, there should.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here