The Instigator
Solarman1969
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
FunkeeMonk91
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

I figured out why Barack Obama is so Cool- he is HAWAIIAN!

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/29/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,381 times Debate No: 2288
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (35)
Votes (9)

 

Solarman1969

Pro

THis is why he is multicultural, cool under pressure, nice, and articulate!

I figured it out

he grew up in Hawaii and went to the best private school- Punahou in Honolulu

anyone who has lived there long enough picks up ALOHA- and that is his secret

I figured it out

He is NO typical black Chicago pol -

and he will beat the HILDEBEEST
FunkeeMonk91

Con

I can basically debunk your whole argument with one statement: The location of one's birthplace/hometown does not dictate whether someone is "cool under pressure, nice, and articulate."

If he was born in Puerto Rico, he would not be much different. His world views might change, but his rhetoric skills and his affability were given to him during conception; it's genetic. His hometown has no factor in deciding genetic traits, such as those you mentioned.
Debate Round No. 1
Solarman1969

Pro

Oh I completely disagree

the CORE of ones adult personality is determined in ones teenage and high school years

where one grows up is CRITICAL in determining personality

for example, although I have spent my entire ADULT life in California, I am still at my core a PHILLY BOY , having grown up in suburban Philadelphia

Thus, the reason why Barack is SO different and REFRESHING (although hopelessly liberal) is EXACTLY becuase

(a) he grew up in Honolulu , in a nice period of time (the 1970s) and went to the BEST private school in the whole of the pacific (Punahou school)

he lived with his WHITE grandparents, and went to a school where over 70% of the population is non white mixed race (hawaiian , japanese , Chinese, polynesian, etc)

It is a VERY good school which the ELITE of the island send their kids

thus his CORE personality is HAWAIIAN in nature

that makes him

* cool under pressure
* nice and affable

thus , that is why barack is so cool

he is HAWAIIAN!

ALOHA
FunkeeMonk91

Con

The key word is personality. Just like I mentioned with world views, those change all the time, even when we stay in the same place. But, like I said, genetic characteristics, such as intelligence, athletic ability, and creativity, cannot be changed by moving. Mind you, all of those things can be honed or neglected, but that ability to be great in a particular area will always be there. Obama would be just as smart, friendly, and eloquent if he had grown up in Chicago, New York, or even Arizona.

In other words, personality is much different than genetic disposition. Personalities are like opinions and can change rather quickly. Genetic traits live with you forever.

The fact that you loved your hometown, and therefore are a "PHILLY BOY," is not the same thing as saying, "Moving to California made me so much more athletic, and articulate."

Now to break down your specific arguments:

I don't know for sure about his schooling, but it probably was a prestigious institution. However, schools do not make people smarter or more charismatic. Those things are born with you and they can't be taught or assimilated.

Your next statement about race is completely irrelevant and, frankly, stupid. I know that racists, like you, claim that minorities can't raise good kids, but keep in mind that our arguments should be based on facts and logic. Your contention that only white families can be good parents is just blind ignorance.

"thus his CORE personality is HAWAIIAN in nature

that makes him

* cool under pressure
* nice and affable"

How can you decide what personalities belong to which ethnicities? It is true that there are trends, which is where stereotypes come from, but to simply say something like, "That guy is good at math because he's Asian," has no merit, especially in a debate like this. The fact that Barack is from Hawaii does not make him automatically fit those stereotypes (even though I've never heard this one before).

One's hometown doesn't not dictate what you say it does. Let me ask you this, do you think Barack would not be "cool" if he were born and raised in San Jose?
Debate Round No. 2
Solarman1969

Pro

Oh and now we see your CHILDISH nature- so TYPICAL for the kids here on debate.org

first of all you are so young , you dont even have a clue what your talking about

next you sink down to your lowness

" I know that racists, like you, claim that minorities can't raise good kids"

Uhm - Where did I say that?

once again, you are LOSING the debate on the FACTS , which you DONT KNOW , and then you have to INSULT me because you cant win the debate

wait until YOU are in your 30s and 40s and then maybe you will have a clue what im talking about

Having LIVED in Hawaii for 5 years , I know exactly what Im talking about

Having TUTORED kids from where Barack went to school, I furthermore know what Im talking about

and IF Barack WAS raised in the HOOD in OAKTOWN, he would likely NOT be the man that he is , but would be much more like a Sharpton or Jackson type democrat

And , little boy, you can try and call me racist all you want- all my black friends would laugh in your face

Once again, I know why Barack is so cool- he is HAWAIIAN IN NATURE

HAWAII IS THE COOLEST PLACE and the ONLY PLACE OF ALOHA

thats it - I have found the secret!
FunkeeMonk91

Con

First of all, I'm not just a random kid who debates about ponies and the unfairness of doing 12 page term papers. If it wasn't for the age posted on my profile, you probably wouldn't have even known I was still in high school.

Next of all, even though I'm not 30, I know racial bias when I see it (I'm from AZ). But here is your quote, that, although not explicitly, but says that white parents are the only ones capable as raising such a success, as Obama is.

"he lived with his WHITE grandparents, and went to a school where over 70% of the population is non white mixed race (hawaiian , japanese , Chinese, polynesian, etc)"

Seriously? You don't think that's just a little questionable? You put "white" in all caps. You were also in the middle of explaining what makes Obama's hometown so great, so emphasizing his white grandparents was a little inappropriate. BUT, I misunderstood the second part of your paragraph. I thought you said "70% is non mixed," so I took that the wrong way. I probably shouldn't have made this personal, and I'm sorry. Hope that doesn't take away from the debate.

But then you say this: "wait until YOU are in your 30s and 40s and then maybe you will have a clue what im talking about." I'm not sure what that is implying, but I don't want to misinterpret again, so I'll leave that one open.

If Barack was raised in the hood of Oaktown, genetically, he would be the same person. He would have the same talents and gifts, but he probably would not have much drive or ambition. Again, genetics don't change with location or hometown.

So, basically the only thing you've said is that since Hawaii is cool, everyone whom has ever lived there is cool. If you cannot see the problems with that logic, then you should reexamine your argument.

Again, my bad for the whole racist thing. I sometimes take these debates too seriously, and I apologize.
Debate Round No. 3
35 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
Here is what the AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE magazine says about Jonah Goldberg's idiotic book: http://www.amconmag.com...

Not without reason was Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism widely expected to be a bad book. As many predicted from the title, Goldberg does not content himself with rebuking those who call anyone who disagrees with them a fascist. Instead, he invents reasons of his own for calling anyone who disagrees with Jonah Goldberg a fascist. Liberal Fascism confirms anew George Orwell's remark—cited by Goldberg without irony—that fascism has no meaning today other than "something not desirable."
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
You think I wouldn't have the guts to speak the truth to a 80-year-old socialist leech? What's he going to do to me? Hit me with his welfare check?

My grandfather was drafted into WWII against his will. It took him away from his family and his vocation. He didn't complain. When he got back from the war, he had a solidly conservative voting record. He supported Ronald Reagan in 1976. He not only voted against the welfare state, HE REFUSED TO ACCEPT WELFARE BENEFITS, even in his old age. It took him falling into dementia before he would accept Medicaid. But the fact of the matter is that real men like my grandfather were few and far between -- 90%+ of WWII veterans were welfare leeches from the moment they came home and voted for more and more socialism. They are the ones who gave us Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, etc. -- all liberal welfare-state inflationists. They destroyed the country and now their spoiled baby-boom children are going to finish the job. They couldn't raise their kids to be anything other than what they were -- parasitic leeches feeding off the fruits of other mens' labor and whining for more and more government hand-outs without end.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
Again, Id love to see you say that to a WWII veterans FACE

you wouldnt have the guts
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
I'll say it to any decrepit and senile old FDR-New Dealer who has burdened me with his debts. They will rot in hell for eternity and that will still not be enough to pay for the damage they've caused to the greatest country in the history of mankind. Death and misery to all liberal Commie welfare statist parasites!

If you think I wouldn't know the right end of a gun to shoot out of, then just try to infringe on my life, liberty, or property. If you do, there will be one less liberal defiling this world. I'm not a liberal idiot who trusts the government to defend my rights -- I understand the Second Amendment, you better believe it. I am 100% against the INITIATION of force, but 110% committed to self defense and the defense of my family. Anyone who tries to infringe on my right to life, liberty, and happiness will find this to be the case.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
you wouldnt know the right end of a gun to shoot out of

and your demeaning of our brave men and women who have served and serve makes you a FAR FAR smaller man that I thought you might have been before

you say about the greatest generation

The "men" who fought in WWII were drafted against their will. When they came back, most were Communists and/or Leftists. They DESTROYED the country and created the welfare state. The WWII generation is a bunch of welfarist parasite liberals who destroyed the country. I can't wait until they are finally all in the grave.

I would LOVE for you to say this to a WWII veterans FACE
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
hahahaha. Who were the "conservatives" interested in "military might" at the time of the Revolution, or in the lead-up to WWI, WWII, etc.? Wilson? FDR? Truman? You are a L.I.B.E.R.A.L.

The "men" who fought in WWII were drafted against their will. When they came back, most were Communists and/or Leftists. They DESTROYED the country and created the welfare state. The WWII generation is a bunch of welfarist parasite liberals who destroyed the country. I can't wait until they are finally all in the grave.

You have been brainwashed by the far left consensus of this country, bought and paid for by the bankers. You are an excellent pawn. Congratulations on serving the liberal elite in its effort to bankrupt the country and enact one-world socialist government. Commie.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
you are clearly confused

Military might, defense and spreading of freedom and liberty are CORE CONSERVATIVE principles

Marxism and communism, the core of the left, are ANTI- liberty and ANTI- democratic

We will have to agree to disagree entirely on WWII

Germany and Japan were worldwide threats and were on the path to take over the world and kill anyone who stood in their way

Fortunately, we had MEN back then who were brave enough to fight and win it, over the objections of people only interested in money , like yourself

there are many many things MUCH more imporant than MONEY, which clearly appears to be the center of your universe

it is a small universe at that

You are AGAINST WAR and OPPOSED to IRAQ and want to bring our troops home immediately, correct?

and afgansistan, correct?

that puts you directly in line with the democrats and left in this country. period. end of sentence

you can try and twist it all you want and make reference to people from 100-200 years ago, but they are irrelevant now

You DONT SEE ISLAMISTS as a threat

I and the CONSERVATIVES of this nation DO.

this is 2008 and those are the political REALITIES

you are free to take the far left anti-war position all you want and only care about "capitailism uber alles"

this is very short sighted and myopic
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
Your ignorance of history again rears its head. The Communist Party was strongly in support of WWII, and it was THEY who labeled the anti-war Right as "fascists" and "Hitler enablers." Communists infiltrated the FDR and Truman administrations. The Communist Party marched proudly down the streets proclaiming that Communism was "20th century Americanism."

Germany and Japan were absolutely no threat to us. The only thin you can do is smear me as "far left" -- despite the fact that EVERYONE on the Right at the time agreed with ME, and the Communists and welfare-state liberals agreed with you. Facts are facts -- there was no threat. What do you think? Germany was going to invade the U.S.? Come on, man. You're insane.

Jonah Goldberg makes SOME good points, but he is a blind neocon. For a TRUE CONSERVATIVE critique of his book, read this: http://www.lewrockwell.com...

Again, the "far-left" accusations, directly after saying I was to the right of Attila the Hun. Which is it? The fact is that EVERYONE on the Right opposed WWI and WWII. And everyone on the Right knew what they were about -- profits for the military-industrial complex and Federal Reserve bankers. It was the Left that established these institutions. Your history is bass ackwards.

Marxists are imperialists. I am the furthest thing from a Marxist on foreign policy. It is YOU who has the Marxist foreign policy. THE NEOCONS ARE ALL FORMER TROTSKYIST COMMIES. They believe in "permanent revolution" and "spreading democracy" -- THESE are Marxist-Leninist views. The traditional conservative foreign policy; the laissez-faire capitalist foreign policy, is what I advocate.

You call me a leftist because I'm a capitalist. . . Are you dizzying yourself with your smears yet? Is my consistent laissez-faire capitalist pro-America, pro-Constitutionalism that confusing to you?
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
you are a complete wingnut and show why your point of view gets about 1% support

(1) Japan and Germany were in no way a threat to us.

This is the basic reason why noone will ever listen to you

(2) You advocate a Hitlerian brand of fascism.

Ok, mr smooth

You really sound exactly like the far left

they are always accusing Bush of being a fascist and Hitler

this is about - hmmmmm - 4th grade logic

you should read Jonah Goldberg's new book

Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning (Hardcover)
by Jonah Goldberg (Author)

and then get back to me

here is a link for you

http://www.amazon.com...

(3) It was only the laissez-faire capitalist conservatives who were fully against Hitler and Mussolini, AND against drafting U.S. men into slavery and death for munition-maker and banker profits.

This is again , I hate to say, a perspective of the FAR LEFT anti war nutcakes

This is actually ver batim- their point of view

ALL WAR IN NECESSARY AND IS JUST GREEDY COROPORATIONS

right?

is that what you are saying?

again, you need to rethink your political perspective and decide who really thinks like you that is on the ballot and then vote for them.

You, sir are FAR LEFT MARXIST in your foreign policy
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
We were developing the atomic bomb during WWII. We had it by the end. Japan and Germany were in no way a threat to us. Yes, I am advocating non-intervention with nuclear consequences for aggressors -- "peace through strength" and "speak softly and carry a big stick." Who said those things?

WWII was a consequence of Wilsonian liberalism. This very war right now, the second most expensive in the history of the nation, is an outgrowth of Wilson's foreign-policy liberalism that you embrace. You advocate a Hitlerian brand of fascism. I don't think you would be leading the charge for war in 1939 -- you would be more interested in joining the fascist movement in Europe. In fact, the liberals who led us into war adopted much of the Hitler/Mussolini program as part of the New Deal and had plenty of nice things to say about Hitler and especially Mussolini prior to Pearl Harbor (which we antagonized Japan into doing, and which FDR knew about). It was only the laissez-faire capitalist conservatives who were fully against Hitler and Mussolini, AND against drafting U.S. men into slavery and death for munition-maker and banker profits.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by padfo0t 8 years ago
padfo0t
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by Cooperman88 9 years ago
Cooperman88
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by liberalconservative 9 years ago
liberalconservative
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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 
Vote Placed by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by FunkeeMonk91 9 years ago
FunkeeMonk91
Solarman1969FunkeeMonk91Tied
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:03