Queen Elizabeth II could out-debate anybody on this site.

How are those two quotations fallacious? The two are merely remarking upon her wisdom and integrity. In fact, by the account of Sampson, she believed that the briefings were too simple and 'elimentary'. She wished them to be more thorough and inclusive. Something slightly more in-depth, so as to completely grasp the state of affairs. I doubt that too many of you ever ask for thing to be more thorough and complicated, do you? I have, but that does not mean I would be so egotistical to think i could take on the Queen, who's knowledge, authority and influence is unbounded. Frankly, my opposition has not offered any reason why the Queen could not debate, except that she is old and possibly senile, which, from her still frequent activities, does not seem to be true, as of yet. He ignores the fact that is perpetually witnessing and participating in Parliamentary debates on a regular basis. He doesn't realize that the Queen has personally signed Constitutions of entire countries (after comprehending them) or the role she plays, and how it is extensive in relation to debates. She does have such access, but it is not the research so much as the intake of it that substantiates her wisdom, and, hence, ability of debate. Let us look at this site... http://www.encyclopedia.com... According to this article, a speech of the Queen's ignited a movement regarding anti-terrorism. Debate is rampant and the Queen in the heart of it all. You claim that she has never debated when she has. What does it actually take to be a good debater? A thesaurus? The Queen is highly educated and doesn't rely on one. Sources? Always good. The Queen has access to the very best. Public speaking? Not on here. But she has it, anyway. She's a very seasoned and accomplished public speaker. We can know nothing about any member here. Maybe some of us wouldn't even apply to the school debate club for various reasons. Perhaps some of us stammer through our grammar. Perhaps some of us are uncertain. The Queen is not. She is anything but uncertain of the actions she makes. She is composed and cool; she has a reputation for it. Throughout all of the Crisis of the Royal Family, it appears that the Queen maintained her composure. Just remember, debating on here and in real is a very different thing. I take my cap off to any who actually belong to a 'real life' debate club (as I do), but I still doubt that one could beat the Queen. Our amount of debate and public speaking is like a coin in a treasury compared to hers. The Queen has been a mother. She is a thoroughly religious woman whom is sound in theology. She could most likely provide a debate well worth listening to (if simply to see her win) on any matter regarding her philosophys and theology. I can't theorize as to how she would perform regarding certain cases, such as abortion or euthanasia, but I can tell you that her moral standpoint is strong and that she will utilize all of her seasons and skill in the debate, coupled with her wisdom, philosophy, skill at semantics and medical study to defeat the opponent. Her emotions will not affect her arguments, and her stern and calm composure will clearly win out.