CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
as Prayer Fails pointed out, MSNBC is Ultra Left Wing propaganda.
I used to like CNN a lot, but lately they have been pissing me off. It's not their commentators, it's their reporters. Lately, their reporters have not only been out rightly pushing a left wing agenda but have been getting quite pushy with it, as well. That's when bias is created. Even Anderson Cooper, a well respected journalist, has been blatant about his left wing views and has even made snarky jokes about the Right during his show.
Fuck it, I was gonna post this in "Just the Facts", but nvm.
Yeah, I'm going to have to go with joke debate. People remember where Beck came from... right? Where Dobbs had a show forever? The network that just hired Erick Erickson for crying out loud?
You might get away with saying they lean a little left if you take the sum total of their entire programing schedule... but that's about as far as you can get without tossing sanity out the window.
Listen kid... the child who runs around the site referring to himself in the third person, spamming up the place with asinine debates such as "Come out you ass hat bastards", "Zombie vs. Vampire" and "Insult a CreateDebator"... while engaged in his ongoing quest to draw attention to himself by doing things like creating yet more debates to congratulate themselves for spamming up the site with all the other crap they post ("Congratulations, Terminator!!! 5000 POINTS!!! " and "TERMINATOR: 'A Legend in his Own Time'?" ring a bell?), should probably give a good hard think about saying that someone writing that they think one of their silly debate questions they only created because someone created a similar debate about a different network is a joke rises to the level of a bannable offense, and criticising other people's argument presentation skills.
People always do stuff like this; they overlook all the good debates I've created and the good arguments I've written and attack my lower ones. You are so childish.
"Come out you ass hat bastards"
A response to a personal attack against me.
"Zombie vs. Vampire"
That one had moderate success; I am not the first to create such a debate.
"Congratulations, Terminator!!! 5000 POINTS!!! " and "TERMINATOR: 'A Legend in his Own Time'?" ring a bell?
Have you noticed just how many debates are created about me, but not by me?
So be careful what you wish for moderation-wise.
I'm not the one who incorporates petty insults into every argument.
This is a joke debate...right?
That statement makes all-to-clear the extent of your anti-conservatism. Fox is all propaganda - after all, they are conservative - and CNN is all fact, after all, they are liberal !
1. The fact that you can find some legitimate topics of discussion in the 700+ debate topics you've felt compelled to start in your ongoing quest for attention isn't a ringing endorsement of your seriousness.
2. If people are always attacking "your lower ones", consider taking that as a clue to stop posting them.
3. I read the "ass hat bastards" post. People down-voting something you wrote isn't a "personal attack".
4. The fact that a silly pointless debate generated a lot of traffic isn't actually a vindication of it.
5. What a shock people end up creating debates about the guy who is constantly setting the tone by making debates about himself.
6. Asking if your debate is a joke isn't a "petty insult".
7. If you had read my post in the first place, you'd know I hardly consider CNN to be liberal. But that might have been asking too much.
1. The fact that you can find some legitimate topics of discussion in the 700+ debate topics you've felt compelled to start in your ongoing quest for attention isn't a ringing endorsement of your seriousness.
You are theorizing here, and not doing a good job at it.
I have not done this in a quest for attention; I am a recluse, the last thing that I want is attention.
2. If people are always attacking "your lower ones", consider taking that as a clue to stop posting them.
Have you had a good look around this site? There is an 'entertainment' debate category, as well as a 'comedy' category. Also, I am not the only one; indeed, I make less then others.
3. I read the "ass hat bastards" post. People down-voting something you wrote isn't a "personal attack".
It is when they create multiple accounts and down-vote at will. There was absolutely no reason for 'Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation' to be down-voted twice in the time-span of five minutes after posting it. I was answering a legitimate question with an equally legitimate answer.
4. The fact that a silly pointless debate generated a lot of traffic isn't actually a vindication of it.
The fact that I am not the first one to create such a debate - nor am I the most frequent maker of said debate - does exculpate me.
5. What a shock people end up creating debates about the guy who is constantly setting the tone by making debates about himself.
Constantly? I'd say two or three isn't 'constantly'; also, I am certain that I am not the first to create a debate about a user. If you wish for another excuse, I'll have you know that such debates are common on www.essembly.com, the site from which I gained a fair amount of my 'internet chat' experience.
6. Asking if your debate is a joke isn't a "petty insult".
You frequently criticize me - possibly others, as well - for participating on this site in a way you deem to be inferior; however, it is you who riddles their arguments with off-color humor and insults and crudities.
7. If you had read my post in the first place, you'd know I hardly consider CNN to be liberal.
I have not done this in a quest for attention; I am a recluse, the last thing that I want is attention.
Woo, funny stuff. That was a good one. I mean, this coming from the author of all of the following self-referential debate topics that pretty much exist only to draw attention to himself:
"A note regarding TERMINATOR's immediate future use of this site. (PLEASE READ!)"
"Should I, TERMINATOR, leave CreateDebate?"
"Congratulations, Terminator!!! 5000 POINTS!!!"
"TERMINATOR: 'A Legend in his Own Time'?"
"Who/What is TERMINATOR?"
...just in the last three months. You're hands down the most blatantly attention seeking individual on the entire site.
"Recluse"... heeheehee.
As for the rest, whatever you say. People are out to get you by maliciously down voting your star trek data, and other people make silly pointless debates tooooo!
And FYI, you disagreeing with me on the liberal bent of CNN doesn't actually make any difference to the fact that you tried to imply that I thought they only posted the facts because they were liberal. For one thing, I don't think they get anywhere near "just the facts" status and certainly never posted anything that suggested I did, but SOMEONE decided to list that as the alternative tag to the even more laughably inaccurate "Ultra left wing propaganda" in their very grown up and mature definitely-not-a-joke debate. And for another, as I pointed out the first time around, they're not particularly liberal.
Woo, funny stuff. That was a good one. I mean, this coming from the author of all of the following self-referential debate topics that pretty much exist only to draw attention to himself:
Perhaps I've a different reason that the one which you so aptly applied to me?
I frequently get messages from people complimenting me. Rather than receiving all these messages, I created the 'legend in his own time' debate. I was tired of the messages.
Your tunnel-vision deceives you.
People are out to get you by maliciously down voting your star trek data
It was a response to a question !
You'll note, also, that the person responsible for the latest TERMINATOR debate is the person who down-voted me all those times. I've also been harassed by hmicciche and Hadrian, both of whom down-voted me many hundreds of times in the period of a couple of weeks. I do not take kindly to such attacks.
Says the guy who is so attached to continuing what he calls a "petty squabble" that he felt compelled to post his SECOND response to my last post 15 hours after writing his first response to it...
Did the lack of me paying attention to you for an entire half a day and a bit become too much to bear or something?
Oh no... wait... you're a recluse and don't like attention, right? I totally forgot.
You have got to be the most contemptible person I've ever had the dishonor of engaging in discourse with.
I have absolutely no reason to lie about my reclusiveness. Recluses are viewed as being strange people, how could I benefit from being labeled as such?
The purpose for the second response: I thought of something else to add. The reason it was added fifteen hours later: I was asleep for the first half of that time, and I was busy for the rest.
You are so idiotic - in an atheistic liberal sort of way - that you cannot conceive of your highly faulty assumptions being erroneous.
And I really have no idea why you're lying about not being an attention seeker. But you are. Because here you are... seeking attention... like I see you doing constantly on this board. If you wanted to avoid attention then when I stopped paying attention to you for less than a single DAY you wouldn't have become so botherred by the fact that you did the online equivalent of stamping your feet and waving your arms saying "LOOK AT ME!! PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!!"... which is posting a completely redundant contentless second response to an already respoded to post for no purpose other than to get me to react to what you're doing.
If all you wanted was to say your peice and go and then be left alone and NOT paid attention to... you would have.
You didn't.
And please... you "thought of something else to add"? You called me ludicrous and then claimed that me continuing the squabble... which I rather conspicuously WASN'T doing at the time, proved I was ludicrous. Yeah, I can see why you just had to make sure to get that last deeply insightful observation in, and it was so very important that it overcame your true desire to be all reclusive. Sure. That makes perfect sense.
Feel free to respond with more bolded profanity.... while of course continuing to hold the opinion that the moderation standards here are ever so lax because I haven't been banned for posting things you don't like the tone of.
And I really have no idea why you're lying about not being an attention seeker.
The empiricist is claiming his conjecture is fact.
But you are.
I am not.
If you wanted to avoid attention then when I stopped paying attention to you for less than a single DAY you wouldn't have become so botherred by the fact that you did the online equivalent of stamping your feet and waving your arms saying "LOOK AT ME!! PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!!"
I was telling the truth regarding why I posted a second argument.
which is posting a completely redundant contentless second response to an already respoded to post for no purpose other than to get me to react to what you're doing.
Actually, I wanted you to fuck off.
If all you wanted was to say your peice and go and then be left alone and NOT paid attention to... you would have.
Also, I wanted to get a final insult in there.
which I rather conspicuously WASN'T doing at the time,
Yet I accurately foresaw that you would.
Are you ever going to learn that it isn't so 'black and white' or 'cut and dry' with me?
and it was so very important that it overcame your true desire to be all reclusive.
My reclusive tendencies are solely in 'real life'. I am entirely different on the computer.
Sure. That makes perfect sense.
It does.
It means that, in person, I am one of the most introverted persons you'd ever come across; yet I utilize the internet to it's fullest so that I may debate.
Feel free to respond with more bolded profanity
Nah.
while of course continuing to hold the opinion that the moderation standards here are ever so lax because I haven't been banned for posting things you don't like the tone of.
I stated that other sites would have banned you because of your contemptible behavior.
It isn't the first time that another user and I went from debating to tossing around petty insults. If that is what an argument comes down to, then I'll ban the person involved.
I have no problem with insults; however, very rarely do I start with them. Only when somebody perturbs me to the extent as gcomeau. He is contemptible, nearly everything he writes in insulting.
If I reply to an insult with an insult, then so be it.
If I reply to an insult with an insult, then so be it.
Or you banned him because he insulted you?
He is contemptible
Or was it because he is despicable, you went from quite a few reasons as to why you banned him. Changing the reason as I delved further into the problem I had with the ban in the first place.
All I am saying is you banned a man in total hypocrisy, and then proceeded to make a rebuttal on a post he can't rebut. Which to me is extremely annoying.
To call them "Ultra Left Wing Propaganda" is taking it a bit too far. Overall they favor the left, but at least they don't worship them.
Fox worships Conservatives, ABC basically runs whatever the White House tells them to run, and MSNBC sucks Obama's cock. So, when it comes to being balanced CNN wins... pretty much by default seeing as they are the only station that at least tries to be nonpartisan, they rest are unapologetically biased.
Well, the problem is there is no such thing as ultra left wing propaganda in mainstream media at all.
Ultra left wing for instance would be ban all guns except for officers and military, ban hunting, ban forrestry, salary caps of CEO's, a foreign policy similar to Switzerland, etc.
This "Ultra" left wing, is really a figment of the Ultra right wing Fox's imagination.
In reality, if the scale is 1 - 10 with Ghandi being 1 and Michael Savage being 10
Fox would be 9
MSNBC would be 4
CNN would be 5 - but just really really bad at the news for some reason.
