[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Re: Mahoney and Research and Lies
In a message dated 4/11/97 2:19:57 PM, JimHaefele wrote:
>In a message dated 97-04-11 13:04:44 EDT, Pacedebate@aol.com writes:
>
>> Pace would
>>like to continue attending both @NDT and @CEDA tournaments but we would
also
>>like to have a realistic chance of researching the majority of cases people
>>will run at those tournaments. A narrow topic would provide us that
>>opportunity.
>
>Tim, you stinking liar. You'll just run your affirmative on the negative;
the
>question is: will it be a counterplan, or plan-plan?
>
>Your REAL concern is that the topic has Randian implications. And I'm
talking
>Ayn, not Big Bill.
>
>See you in June, you big loser.
>
>Jim
I knew with Lemoine gone Jim would need a new whippin' boy I just didn't
figure he'd pick a dinosaur like me.
ALL topics have Randian implications. Look for my topic paper supporting the
resolution "Resolved: that anarchy is more desirable than libertarianism". If
that topic doesn't win look for an update to my judging philosophy. I've
decided that the interventionists were correct all along. From now on
regardless of the topic debaters who expect to get my ballot and/or more than
20 speaker points will debate anarchy vs libertarianism. Government is BAD
and we all know it. The only question is can we tolerate a limited government
in hopes of getting some protection from people like Graham.
Oh yeah, the research stuff. Jim got us dead to rights there. Everybody knows
us folks from the city are too darn lazy to cut any cards. We are just
waiting for TBird to come back in hopes that then we will be able to finally
match the historical tradition of card cutting that Macalaster has.
Who is this Monte guy??????
Tim
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page