A Quote by Armie Hammer

Not sure of my place in the world (still up for debate) and not sure what I wanted to do with my life (not really up for debate). — © Armie Hammer
Not sure of my place in the world (still up for debate) and not sure what I wanted to do with my life (not really up for debate).
The truth about the climate crisis is still inconvenient to the large carbon polluters. And so they want to bob and weave and dodge the truth, and pretend like it's still a big controversy, and it's not. They want to pretend that this is up for debate. Like, whether or not the world is round is up for debate, or whether the moon landing really took place.
When a politician says the debate is over, you can be sure of two things; the debate is raging; and he's losing it.
I also want to make sure that when we debate these things [hackers attacks], that we actually have the facts that are very clear in front of us to have this debate.
When a politician says, concerning an issue involving science, that the debate is over, you may be sure the debate is rolling on and not going swimmingly for his side.
There's some debate as to whether you need to awaken from them because there are some patients who are actually starting to say, "I had these horrible nightmares, but I never woke up from them." But they can still recall them when they get up in the morning. So there's still some debate in the field.
The debate [in Undeniable] was nominally about creationism as a "viable" explanation for what we observe around us. For my side, the debate went very well; I'm not sure what I would change, although I can imagine shortening my answers during the rebuttals, perhaps.
As was demonstrated back in 2012, [Barack] Obama was thought to be in big trouble after that first debate, and he wasn't, was he? That first debate didn't end up hurting Barack Obama at all, did it? I know he had incumbancy on his side, but still. He was horrible that first debate. It didn't matter because there were two more, and there are two more here.
During the debate, Bush was asked by a lady to name three mistakes he's made. And Bush responded, this debate, the last debate and the next debate.
...the debate among the scientists if over. There is no more debate. We face a planetary emergency. There is no more scientific debate among serious people who've looked at the science...Well, I guess in some quarters, there's still a debate over whether the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona, or whether the Earth is flat instead of round.
Remember the first debate between [Mitt] Romney and [Barack] Obama? Let's revisit it for a second. It's interesting to note the way the Drive-Bys played it. The first Romney-Obama debate, there was real concern after that debate that Obama didn't show up.
They had to debate whether Joe Frazier should be in the Boxing Hall of Fame or not. I'm making sure that it would be a felony to sit down and debate whether or not Bernard Hopkins deserves to be in the hall of fame.
Whether someone else would have played Superman better or worse would be up for a lot of debate on the internet forums, I'm sure.
I was distressed by the poor quality of the debate surrounding energy. I was also noticing so much green wash from politicians and big business. I was tired of the debate - the extremism, the nimbyism, the hair shirt. We need a constructive conversation about energy, not a Punch and Judy show. I just wanted to try to reboot the whole debate.
Mitt Romney and I know the difference between protecting a program, and raiding it. Ladies and gentlemen, our nation needs this debate. We want this debate. We will win this debate.
We pretend that the debate about genetically modified crops is a debate about science when the reality is, actually, that the science is very clear. It is really a debate about values.
We still write too many stories that are "state of the race" stories that are informed almost solely by what the polling shows and by what we're then deducing about who's up, who's down, and I'm just not sure that's very helpful to readers, it certainly doesn't elevate the debate and, and the problem is if you, if you cover these things, and I don't think the Times is particularly culpable, I think other news organizations are worse, if you cover them in an entirely "who's up, who's down" horse race way.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!