Quotes About Debate

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I, therefore, intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt.

The personal things should be left out of platforms at conventions. You can argue yourself blue in the face, and you're not going to change each other's minds. It's a waste of your time and my time.

Men took themselves so seriously and seemed to insist on arguing even the most trivial points.

we probably don't know many of the answers and can't argue cleverly. And yet I suppose there's room for the stupid as well,

It may be taken as axiomatic that any statement of fact about the Middle Ages may (and probably will) be met by a statement of the opposite or a different version.

When the party system regulates, argument addresses the deaf.

Exhaustion and exasperation are frequently the handmaidens of legislative decision.

The best way to support the troops is to not send them off to die in the first place. And the second best way to support them only to send them off to die when you absolutely have to. And the only way to know that you've done that is to talk about it, debate it, examine it, and make damn sure.

That fine line between bravery and stupidity is endlessly debated – the difference really doesn't matter.

I've slipped on occasion into the realm of irresponsible invective, but I try to avoid it and generally recant when I fall short. Because name-calling does nothing to improve understanding or move the political debate forward.

Hear reason, or she'll make you feel her.

The political climate during a campaign is not the best climate for reasonable debate.

Reasonable people can differ on whether or not we should have gone into Iraq.

Reasonable people can debate whether or not social experiments like a Day of Absence are enlightening.

You can only argue with reasonable people.

We urgently need an open and honest debate with the public about what help and support they will be entitled to when they are older, and what it is reasonable for them to contribute in return.

Reasonable people can reasonably disagree on policy.

Logical reasoning is an argument which we have with ourselves and which reproduces internally the features of a real argument.

There is always a multitude of reasons both in favor of doing a thing and against doing it. The art of debate lies in presenting them; the art of life lies in neglecting ninety-nine hundredths of them.

There's no such thing as the contemporary novel. Before I seem the complete reactionary, let me add that I've happily joined in many discussions about 'the contemporary novel' where what that usually, unproblematically means is novels that have appeared recently or may appear soon.

I'm used to politics at an international level: people put together an argument and, even if you vehemently disagree with them, well, you can recognise it's an argument and respond.

I particularly recognize that reasonable people can disagree as to what that proper balance or blend is between privacy and security and safety.

There was endless controversy as to whether the acts of the New Deal did actually move recovery or retard it, and nothing final could ever come of that bitter debate because it is forever impossible to prove what might have happened in place of what did.

The politicians were talking themselves red, white and blue in the face.