Quotes About Debate

The older you get, the more you realize you cannot win on the Internet.

If you stand on a soapbox and trade rhetoric with a dictator you never win.

Convincing yourself doesn't win an argument.

Today the people from my State of Tennessee would listen to this debate, or even talk about a reference to God on our money or in the Halls of Congress or in our Pledge and say, please, let common sense and logic win the day and prevail versus legal mumbo jumbo.

No matter what the president or anyone tried to do on health care, they never got the headlines, because the Gulf oil spill happened. It seemed like it sucked the wind out of the whole health care debate.

Years ago, I was watching a debate on Fox News, when I thought, 'These guys are basically like pranksters, they bring the people in and wind them up.' I was like, 'That's what I do!'

The people on the far left, they claim to be about free speech and expression. But as soon as you put something out there that offends them, all of a sudden, no - free speech out the window.

Well it's really hard to satisfy the right wing. I can tell you that.

Political talk on TV has degenerated so much. You can say something complex on 'The West Wing' and you will not suffer a screaming interruption by three other panelists.

I'm not specifically attached to anything other than trying to, in my personal life, fight against where I see right wing thinking. Whether it be around my dinner table or on the street or somebody reading the New York Post.

That's what the right-wing is good at: figuring out the left wing.

Who needs enemies when you've got Republican Surrenderists for Obamacare waiting in the wings?

In every debate, whatever the format, whatever the questions, there is one and only one way to identify the winner: Who commands the room? Who drives the narrative? Who is in charge?

The more history I learnt, the less interested I got in winning arguments and the more interested in establishing the truth.

I don't want to be a Michael Moore-style artist, which is not to disparage Michael Moore. But he seems rather unsuccessful at winning people over who don't already agree with him.

He who frames the question wins the debate.

Censoriously asserting one's moral superiority and treating skeptics as imbeciles and deplorables wins few converts.

We should just get somebody from the left and the right and they should all throw bumper stickers at each other and the first one to cover the other one wins.

There has been a lot of talk of the four-day Tests but I like five-days. I don't make the decisions of how it all works out but five-day Tests is what it is all about.

Despite the obvious benefits, many Americans do not like Texas. Some even say they despise Texas, and make no secret of their feelings.

I think it is a good challenge when you have different balls in different countries. Naturally, it is a bit of skill to adapt quicker than the opposition in different conditions. It is an interesting debate, one that is thankfully not in my hands.

The first thing that Black Lives Matter had to do was remind people that racism existed in this country because when we had Obama, people thought we were post-racial. That was the debate. Is racism over? And very quickly, we understood that it was not over.

The way Americans most understand the history of Latinos in this country, a lot of it is being told now through the lens of what's happening with the immigration debate. While that's an important debate that has security and moral implications, in my view, there's also a huge history of Latinos in the United States that's never been told.

The most important event I covered was the Panama Canal debate, which dragged on for months.