LMS Debate: mryounggun vs Preach2Teach: Should Washington, DC become the 51st state of the USA?

mryounggun wrote: »

I have a confession to make, ladies and gentlemen: I’ve been forced to abandon my strategy before the debate even started. I had a bulletproof plan to win this debate using the ‘8-Mile’ approach: preemptively present and tear apart my opponents arguments against me before he can even make them. Then I discovered something starting…


…there actually are NO logical, fair arguments for not making Washington DC a state.

Imagine my disappointment.

So let’s just start with the most obvious, bulletproof argument for making DC a state. It’s an old argument, one that has existed for since before this great nation was founded. In fact, it’s a large part of WHY this country was founded. I’ll give you the short version:

While still only colonies under British rule, residents of the 13 colonies were subjected to taxes for EVERYTHING. Spices, tea, paper, everything. Now there is nothing inherently wrong with being taxed. But when you are taxed, you should receive some sort of compensation for that taxation. Traditionally, that compensation comes in the form of voting rights. If you pay money to the federal government, you should have some say on how that money is used. The British denied the colonists these voting rights. And so the slogan for the American Revolution was born:

NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION

I say all that to say this: The residents of Washington DC are required - like every other citizen of the country - to pay federal taxes, but have no representation in Congress or the Senate. That means there is no one representing their interests when it comes time to approve the federal budget, ratify federal laws, etc. They are being subjected to taxation and being given no representation, in return. There are very few things that I can think of that are more unamerican than that.

Now my opponent, being the foreign con artist that he is - will certainly try to convince you otherwise using some fallacious, straw-man argument. But before he even bombards you with that diarrhea of the mouth that he calls an argument, consider this:

Do you really wanna hear ANY argument about D.C.'s statehood - for or against - made by a man who until 20 minutes ago didn't even know that D.C. wasn't a state?

Preach2Teach wrote: »

This ? has caught me off guard I thought D.C was one of the states, I have some homework to do!

The floor is yours, Ivan Drago.

Preach2Teach wrote: »

Yo I never even agreed to this ? debate topic this ? was just dropped on my head lol I will ride with it tho I ain't gonna back down especially after reading that ? opening statement @mryounggun




So your argument is that Washington DC has nobody to represent the people of DC when it comes to spending tax budgets? since when did the people have any say in how America spends it's tax money? you will get another corrupt ? in a fancy suit talking that ? to make people think they have a voice or some kind of power, it's all for the most part an illusion.


I have just been reading some ? and I think I have my first point that will knock this ? out of the park! and that reason is the FEDS! the federal government! I don't even live in America and I am scared of them ? , they have a reputation for not playing fair and ruining countless lives with their underhanded and unfair ways (that's a whole other topic tho) the reason Washington DC was not granted statehood in the first place was to keep the dictating snakes at bay, the expression "never put all your eggs in one basket" springs to mind, The feds are not to be trusted and handing over more power to these people will not do America any good, these are the people that will promote alcohol all over the T.V for the kids to see, then they raid a weed dispensary in California even tho the STATE LAW says they are breaking no laws, Washington DC is the strongest defense America has against a potential corrupt dictatorship happening in America so why mess with that? now more than ever America needs it's defenses!! that is all for now,I just wrote this ? without having much knowledge of the whole topic @mryounggun imagine what I will do to you if I actually researched this ? ?

Preach2Teach wrote: »

mryounggun wrote: »

Preach2Teach wrote: »

Yo I never even agreed to this ? debate topic this ? was just dropped on my head lol I will ride with it tho I ain't gonna back down especially after reading that ? opening statement, @mryounggun .




So your argument is that Washington DC has nobody to represent the people of DC when it comes to spending tax budgets? ince when did the people have any say in how America spends it's tax money? you will get another corrupt ? in a fancy suit talking that ? to make people think they have a voice or some kind of power, it's all for the most part an illusion.


I have just been reading some ? and I think I have my first point that will knock this ? out of the park! and that reason is the FEDS! the federal government! I don't even live in America and I am scared of them ? , they have a reputation for not playing fair and ruining countless lives with their underhanded and unfair ways (that's a whole other topic tho) the reason Washington DC was not granted statehood in the first place was to keep the dictating snakes at bay, the expression "never put all your eggs in one basket" springs to mind, The feds are not to be trusted and handing over more power to these people will not do America any good, these are the people that will promote alcohol all over the T.V for the kids to see, then they raid a weed dispensary in California even tho the STATE LAW says they are breaking no laws, Washington DC is the strongest defense America has against a potential corrupt dictatorship happening in America so why mess with that? now more than ever America needs it's defenses!! that is all for now,I just wrote this ? without having much knowledge of the whole topic @mryounggun imagine what I will do to you if I actually researched this ? ?

I'm gonna be 100% transparent and admit that I expected more from you, @Preach2Teach. You were so aggressively confident in the other thread, that I thought 'Ok cool. This might might be a cool little challenge. Surely dude has some sort of debate skills since he's talking so reckless.'.

I was wrong once back in like 2007 and I here I am again being proved wrong.

To answer your poorly worded question about tax money, American's have ALWAYS had some sort of say in how their federal tax money was spent. Both Congress and Senate vote on federal budgets. Elections are held BY THE PEOPLE to elect their congressmen and Senators. DC has no voting members of congress or Senate. Therefore...the residents of DC have no one representing them when it comes time to decide how their tax dollars are spent.

^^^^^Do you see that? That is how you argue a point. First you verbalize that point and then you explain that point, how it relates to the topic and how that relationship strengthens your argument. You don't just say a bunch of words. With that being said, please explain to me and everyone else what the ? the first bolded part even means. Please tell me, in plain English, what ACTUAL REASON you have provided to bolster your argument. You have made some vague reference to the federal government being the reason should not be admitted as a state. You then resorted to spouting random turns of phrase like 'all your eggs in one basket'. You then moved to fear-mongering based on selling liquor to children and finished by sprinkling some dictatorship on top. I would love nothing more than to tear apart your round 1 argument, but you haven't even made one. I'm sure you mother is proud.

But don't worry. I know you guys paid your hard-earned money and I'd hate for you to leave this debate feeling like those people at the Kanye show, so Iet me pick up this ? boy's slack and give you an even more convincing argument. Not only do the people of D.C. have no real federal representation in the most important matters, they also are not even allowed to govern their OWN city in lots of instances. All matters voted on and approved by the local city government MUST ALSO BE APPROVED BY CONGRESS, as dictated by the Home Rule act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_home_rule). This is not true for any other city, state or local body except Washington D.C.. A city - a historically black city - where 68% of the residents are under age 55, have pretty much every politically-affected part of their daily lives voted on by a group of 535 members of congress: 80% of whom are white males with an average age of 57. So as a country, we have not only decided that these people don't deserve to have a voice at the federal level, but we have also decided that they cannot be trusted to govern themselves. This hardly seems like something that can exist simultaneously with the democracy for which this country has historically been known for.

^^^^Again, do you see that, @Preach2Teach? This is what a coherent argument looks like. I presented a point, then gave supporting information in the form of statistics and documentation related to the point, and then folded that point back into the central theme so that everyone could easily understand how THIS relates to THAT.

You're welcome.

And to the audience, I again ask the pivotal question: Do you REALLY want to listen to a man who, by his own admission, 'just wrote this ? without having much knowledge of the whole topic.'?

Ball is in your court, Clubber Lang.

Also @HundredEyes, watch your mouth, son. I can illustrate my point just as effectively in either 500 words or 50 words. And if my arguments are so full of holes...feel free to request that you and I be matched up at some point here in the near future, be it this debate or next.

Let's skip all the slick talk and just step in the ring.

Standing by...

You ain't really saying ? but a bunch of words trying to come off as being smarter than you really are, I see you stated that Washington is "a historically black city" trying to sway the black vote? you should really try actually getting into politics the sneaky ? , OK I will play along with it, how exactly would joining the other 50 states help black people? do we need to take a look at the other 50 states and see if they are living any better? then you went on the say "You then moved to fear-mongering based on selling liquor to children and finished by sprinkling some dictatorship on top" firstly I was not fear mongering I was stating the facts (something your debate lacks) and lol at "sprinkling some dictatorship on top" you just try to roll over a very valid part of my whole point like it was nothing in the middle off all of them pointless words, notice how I don't type as much as you, that's because I like to go the quality over quantity rout, go and check on your trainer Micky he's not looking too good in the dressing room, I will see you in the ring Rocky!

mryounggun wrote: »

Seriously, what the ? is this dog ? ?^^^^^^^

Is this your 3rd round entry?

OK. For kicks and giggle, I'll keep my reply as short as yours. Even shorter.

I highlighted a portion of what you wrote and asked you to point out to me what actual REASONING you provided for DC not being a state. That question has still not been answered. I will give you another opportunity. Please explain to me and everyone listening your exact reasoning for feeling that DC should NOT be a state. Please do it as clearly as I have laid out my 2 arguments so far as to why DC SHOULD be a state. Thus far you have not done so. I'm going to go out on a limb and say you have no gotdamn idea how the United States government works, do you? You admittedly have no knowledge on the subject and did not know that DC was not a state. I suspect your ignorance also extends to pretty much everything dealing with how the US government is structured.

So again, why should DC NOT become a state?

Tell me a reason why, then explain that reason and then relate that back to the actual theme of the debate. Don't just tell these people 'the FEDS...will promote alcohol to kids'.

If not, just do us all a favor and tag in @HundredEyes. I'm certain he would at least compete.

Preach2Teach wrote: »

mryounggun wrote: »

Naw, no rounds off. I'm legit curious as to what this ? argument is. Someone tell me. Please. And don't tell me what you assume his argument is. Tell me what you got from his actual post what his argument is.

Man ? you and your American cheerleaders, gonna reload and come back with that knockout blow, your only argument so far has been "DC will get to choose how it spends tax money" when was the last time you signed off on a new road being built? your argument is ? the government will spend that money however it wants and the people will follow suit or ? and moan like in every other city!



You also ? up when you said people in DC have no federal representation to change laws or enact them. That's not entirely true, they are allowed to vote in federal elections (The Presidency) and can vote for a representative, but the Representative has limited powers, he or she can introduce bills into the house but is not allowed to vote on them (conflict of interest)



Originally they wouldn't make DC a state because the founders didn't want the place where laws were decided to have such great power and be a tyrant to itself and possibly the nation. It's actually in the constitution.

Preach2Teach wrote: »

My argument is clear -- The founders didn't want to give congress the power to exercise executive control and at the same time decide the fate of the nation because of potential conflict of interest. The District of Colombia can't be a state onto itself, given that the rule of the Nation per the Constitution has to be measured with the rule of the State. If the state of DC were to have both state and national rights, how could a congress and executive branch not be held to the Constitution ? In giving them all that power you're potentially giving lobbyists direct influence to affect state affairs and executive legislation. That is why DC today is NOT a state and won't become one. You need to define "no representation" better in your arguments. It shouldn't become a state because it doesn't need to be and it gives tremendous power to lobbyists, and government officials, I think as broken as politics appear to be in America, the last thing to do would be to give officials even more power by making DC a state. That's how and why it's founders did that. By your logic, the capitol of every place should be a province and or state.


Tax dollars aren't a sole reason to make a capital a state because taxes are paid regardless and will be allocated to DC. You said people have no representation to vote or enact bills - that was false they can vote and elect officials just those officials are limited in power. DC can still enjoy all the perks a state would without actually giving officials more power than they need. It's set forth in the constitution. Why would you arm an already broken congress with even more power the likes of which it can use to eradicate cities, minority groups and people they think are a threat to the status quo ? How is arming your officials with that much more power going to help the plight of minorities (black people, Latinos, women, ? and lesbians) who are the future of the nation ? Especially for the next 4 years with Trump and the white supremacists that follow him and occupy all 3 branches of government ? It's not just about people it's about the big picture. For a DC native I'm not sure if you're aware of the ramifications and you're from there. Can you tell the audience and judges WHY DC wasn't made a state and what are the ramifications of it becoming one ?? You talk a lot of smack well the loudest one in the room is the weakest so you can be Ivan Drago, that movie ended with him as the loser and disgrace to his homeland and the foreigner being the one to overcome a country's ignorance with dignity, love and respect.

Preach2Teach wrote: »

OK I am gonna wrap this up and keep it short, there is no need for me to try and impress you all with some ? sentences full of fancy words, I prefer to just strip this debate of all the ? and stick with the facts of the issue, Washington DC is already well represented in congress, are we forgetting that Washington DC is the capital of The United States Of America? I have already stated the most important reasons why DC should NOT become the 51st state I will not be repeating that it is already clear for the judges to read, and finally if DC was to be made the 51st state then that would be a direct violation of the constitution, the same constitution that is set in place to protect the American people, You really wanna just let them start chipping away at the constitution? once them floodgates are opened they will only begin to amend more constitutional rights, Furthermore, D.C. residents are represented by a second body, the Council of the District of Columbia, With the passage of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act in 1973, Congress ceded a portion of its authority to govern local affairs to a city council.




All this “Taxation Without Representation" talk is just a lie, it's clear to see that there is a shitload of valid reasons why DC should not be named the 51st state of America, only the simple minded fall for slogans like “Taxation Without Representation" without actually looking at the bigger picture, I will leave it at that, good luck @mryounggun