The Instigator
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
MattHarrison
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Are the recent incedents regarding the IRS, Fox News, Verizon, etc examples of government overreach?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,487 times Debate No: 34652
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (3)

 

NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN

Pro

Here are the rules for the debate. Breaking of these means a forfeit.

1)No Swearing
2)No Name Calling
3)No forfeiting a round.
4)No continuing argument in the comment sections
5) First round is acceptance only.

Thank you and look forward to it.
MattHarrison

Con

I accepted this debate, although I whole-hearted lay agree with pro, only to break all the rules that Pro has set in the first round.

I am going against you pro, because the Red Sox are SH*T!!!!!!!!!! You are an a*s hole for liking them.
(Two rules down, three to go)

Now I will continue...
Debate Round No. 1
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN

Pro

Ok, so you are accepting a debate just to mess up a debate. No one will vote for you.

Vote PRO!
MattHarrison

Con

I may forfeit the next round, or maybe the round after that, or after that. The world will never know.

In case you are confused, look in the f*ckin comments section for the rest of my round 1 argument.

The Red Sox suck!!!!!
Debate Round No. 2
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN

Pro

Vote Pro!!!!!
MattHarrison

Con

MattHarrison forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN

Pro

Vote Pro!!!
MattHarrison

Con

MattHarrison forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN

Pro

Voters, please do not let those who have nothing good to say, say it. Put an end to this. Vote Pro.
MattHarrison

Con

If you did not make a list of rules at the beginning, you would not have had a joke debate.

The more you know
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by orioleking1 3 years ago
orioleking1
well you just have
Posted by MattHarrison 3 years ago
MattHarrison
I don't think I've ever seen the words dude and foolish in the same sentence. Ever.
Posted by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
There are 90 examples of Tea Party groups being targeted by the IRS, and three cases where leftist groups were examined. http://www.washingtonpost.com... One of the three leftist groups was actually denied tax-exempt status, which implies that the did something egregious to attract attention. "Targeting" means singled out for unfair treatment, not having laws properly enforced. The IRS harassed the Tea Party groups by neither approving or denying the applications for long periods, costing contributions from donors, and then demanding hundreds of pages of documentation in 30 days, with many of the demands illegal. Suppose 90 cars with Black drivers are stopped and three cars with white drivers are also stopped, ... can you figure out who's being targeted?

The Supreme Court ruling was that 401C(4) status can go to groups that advocate for issues, but not for advocating candidates or specific legislation. That's an easy requirement to meet.

Too bad the debate was spiked.
Posted by orioleking1 3 years ago
orioleking1
Yup. You got a problem with it?
Posted by MattHarrison 3 years ago
MattHarrison
Foolish? Really? Out of the hundreds of thousands of words in the English language, foolish is the one you used?
Posted by orioleking1 3 years ago
orioleking1
Dude, that was a very foolish plan
Posted by orioleking1 3 years ago
orioleking1
I can't vote, but if I could, I would give all my points to Redsox fan.
Posted by MattHarrison 3 years ago
MattHarrison
...to argue in the comments because that is another really stupid rule that you have.
(3)

Wait until my master plan, of rule breaking because I am such a bad a*s, unfolds before everyone's eyes!!!!!!!
Posted by Magic8000 3 years ago
Magic8000
"There are no known examples of liberal groups being targeted by the IRS."

http://www.sltrib.com...
http://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.salon.com...
http://www.dailykos.com...#
Posted by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
Of course, when they started has no bearing on whether they are overreach or not.

There are no known examples of liberal groups being targeted by the IRS. At least 78 Tea Party groups were targeted. Some of the Tea Party groups have not received a yes or no to their 501C applications to this day.

The NSA thing is in two parts: Verizon and the PRISM program. Verizon is probably not overreach, since it was Court approved and did not collect any names of individuals or messages. PRISM is debatable.

The Fox News scandal involves Attorney General Holder testifying to Congress that he had no knowledge of journalists being targeted by the Justice Department in Leak investigations. It was then revealed that he signed a warrant to get the phone records of Fox journalist James Rosen under suspicion that Rosen was conspiring to commit espionage.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FANMattHarrisonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Killing a debate topic with trash and forfeits is the worst of bad conduct.
Vote Placed by TULIP 3 years ago
TULIP
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FANMattHarrisonTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did not follow with Pros rules. Instead trolled throughout the debate and forfeited. Pro was polite and patient with Con so Pro gets the points for conduct.
Vote Placed by Buddamoose 3 years ago
Buddamoose
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FANMattHarrisonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit