Your turn.

So, I am going to refute your arguments in ascending order.

Firstly, that is legitimately how I talk, just because most people don't use vocabularies that reflect an understanding of the English language does not mean that some of us choose to actually employ words that show at least a slight sense of intelligence.

Your fourth segment was a bit difficult to understand, and it seemed like you were just trying to insult me, so I'm simply going to skip that part, but if you wish to clarify, please do.

Secondly, I'm not a big fan of political corruption either. I feel that there should be more effort put into selecting a legislative body from a pool consisting of more average people is needed, and that the current members of Congress have in fact began to separate themselves from the American people. The thought of the electoral college even pisses me off, because it means that the decisions made by the voting populace are not being taken into account, but rather the decision making is made by a few individuals, who may or may not vote on behalf of the people they represent. I would give you a list of the minorities that I would gladly support, but I'm running out of characters.

Lastly, the rights that I refer to are entailed in the United States Constitution, i.e. "freedom of speech" "right to keep and bear arms" etc. Some taxes are necessary, but mandating that the populace buy a particular item, regardless of what that item is, is not justified, because it is not something that is entailed in protecting the general populace, which is my whole objection to the current health care plan.

And, because I was running out of characters again, I will also add, that from the nature of your arguments and your choice of words, it has become quite apparent to me that you are somewhat of a radical anti-establishment type, and so your arrogant attitude fails to phase me in the least, just in case you were wondering. As a young conservative, I am almost always in arguments with people of your particular views, and so your condescending attitudes are something that I have grown quite accustomed to.

I'm sure that someday, when you mature just a little bit, you will look back on your anti-establishment days with a kind of amusement, wondering what the hell you were thinking.

You really are an arrogant, narrow minded son of a bitch, aren't you?

GIF unrelated, but it's still pretty damn funny.

Alright, first of all, you meant to say "you're" when you actually said "your" on two occasions that I identified. I wouldn't have pointed it out if you hadn't been so blatantly and unnecessarily rude.

The comment regarding the electoral college was a broad comment in reference to the evident disconnect between politicians and the voting populace, not an argument regarding corruption.

The corruption bit was based off of your argument about the obscenely rich using their money to swing polls in their favor.

In fact, the oil subsidies do preside withing the Constitution, under the regulation of commerce, because it is in relation to foreign trade. The national Government has the authority to regulate tariffs under the Constitution, in case you didn't know. Secondly, the military exists to protect the people, without the military, there would be no United States of America, plain and simple, and so, with the intention of protecting the people, Congress is justified in taxing for the benefit of the military.

I can see that you are becoming frustrated, and I find your frail attempts at condescension to be quite amusing.

My objection to the current health care plan is on the grounds that it gives the government too much authority over the everyday lives and decisions of the American people. It is my opinion that when a government begins to intrude on the decisions of the people in their personal matters, then that government has become abusive of its responsibility to protect the liberties of its people. It is my belief that the current health care mandate is yet another step towards making the citizens of the United States subjects to the government. A government should always fear its people.

I absolutely knew that you would bring abortion and gay rights into this. So, to get rid of your pitiful attempt at sidetracking me from the actual argument here, I'm going to let you know, that I honestly don't care what people do with their sex lives, they can do whatever they want, gays can get married, I don't care. As for abortion, I only see it as justified when a woman has been raped, just because having to carry around the baby and then deliver it adds insult to injury. If somebody seeks an abortion because they forgot the whole rule of "no glove no love" then they need to learn a good hard lesson in how the world works.

I don't like the patriot act either, its not something that I feel is necessary, and there are countless other methods of determining whether or not somebody poses a threat to national security without intruding on them.

I support social security, because I get most of it back in the future, of course, if the government doesn't spend all of it. Welfare should be regulated, people who need benefits should work for those benefits. If people want to sit around on their asses all day, they shouldn't get a penny for it.

I'm not going to get into an argument with a democrat about the necessity of the military, I've tried, and you simply cannot accept that in order for a free society to exist, people must fight for it.

Thomas Jefferson was one of the founders of the line of political parties that eventually became the current Democratic party, and he once said, "Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." He realized the necessity of a military, and so should you.

You spend so much time waving around your supposed superior arguments, but honestly, your arguments have been incredibly lacking, and are comprised vastly of feeble insults, if any arguments here are poorly put together, they belong to you. And about the insults, please, for God's sake, grow up.

I'm not saying that abortion should be mandatory for women who have been raped, but I'm saying that the option should be available to them if they so choose.

You're the one that brought up the amount of money being spent on the military, and so its really kind of of you that I made a rebuttal to your statement.

I'm not entirely sure what human rights violation you seem to think that I support, but I can assure you, I do not support things that are cruel in any way to innocent people. I would ask for clarification to your statement, but because I will be logging off soon, it really doesn't matter. I do not support a lie, but rather I support a form of government that exists to protect its people, rather than subjugate them, but if you disagree with that, then so be it.

I do not agree with you, but I do realize that your opinions are your own. It was a good debate, and likewise, you are one of the more intelligent people to debate with here, even if you were a bit rude.

I will be logging off after posting this comment, because it is late, and I need to work tomorrow, so take care.

Pic unrelated, though that is a badass kiwi.