[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Re: No speed, though.

Who said the particular congress person or policy makers involved would 
be watching the final rounds at any of the national tournaments?  For 
that matter, why watch a tournament round at all?  We would be perfectly 
able to set up a debate between (perhaps, the national champions of each 
tournament) anyone for those involved and slow it down.  No, I don't mean 
talking down to them, good debates are extremely possible if we remove 
the speed and the jargon, and just debate the plans and the claims of 
each other's evidence.  I think Scott just meant that he would offer us a 
chance to display our persuasive skills in front of those who (1) 
understand the issue and (2) have the capacity to make a difference.   
You ever had to debate for a state senator, or even your school's 
administration?  Same thing, only more complex issues that they are 
perfectly capable of understanding.
steve donald




On Thu, 1 May 1997, Michelin Christopher Massey wrote:

> Although this is an interesting issue, I think one of the smallest
> disadvantages to this would be the fact that there would be no speed in
> the final round at either the CEDA or NDT national tournaments.  I think
> that this significantly hurts the activity.
> 
> Besides, the impact to Civil Rights outweighs (and will outweigh ALL DAY,
> just like the Bulls will own anyone in the West :) CFR.  Not just once or
> twice, but every damn time
> 
> Michelin Massey.
> 
> On Thu, 1 May 1997, Steven Donald wrote:
> 
> > Well, if this doesn't sway you from jumping into support for the cfr
> > topic, than nothing will.  I've taken a hiatus from proving all of your
> > arguments wrong for the next few days so I can, oh, I don't know, pass a
> > class or two, but now maybe I won't have to worry about defending this
> > good, but misunderstood topic.
> > 
> > This should be a particular importance to the civil rights supporters;
> > if you think you can acheive real change with your topic, top this:
> > 
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 22:16:36 -0500 (EST)
> > From: Scott Segal <SEGASH@PO1%0006253657@mcimail.com>
> > To: Steven Donald <sd0924@broncho.ucok.edu>
> > Subject: CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM IS THE BEST TOPIC EVER -Reply
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Steven:
> > 
> > Thanks for the support.  I had just about given up on anybody seriously
> > discussing the CFR topic.  Actually, I wrote the topic paper.
> > 
> > I am a partner in a DC law firm, and I mkae you this pledge:  IF CFR IS
> > CHOSEN, I WILL DO MY BEST TO HOOK COLLEGE DEBATE UP WITH
> > REAL POLICY MAKERS ON THE TOPIC.  Possibly a year-end debate in
> > front of real policy makers!!
> > 
> > Scott Segal
> > Bracewell & Patterson, LLP
> > 2000 K Street, NW SUite 500
> > Washington, DC 20006
> > (202) 828-5845
> > 
> > PS:  I'm also an adjunct at UMD and was Director at Texas from 87 to 89.
> > ALso, feel free to post this if you wish!
> > --------
> > 
> > Steven Donald
> > 
> > P.S. Before any of you scoff, remember, this is perhaps our first chance
> > to actually make a real world impact.  Whatever the probability, its the
> > ONLY one that could  receive direct attention by some people
> > who can make a difference.
> > 
> > And if you are worried that watching just one debate won't sway them, I
> > suggested to Scott that he should keep those he has ties to abreast of the
> > evolution of
> > the topic, and which cases win most, etc.  It should give us more of an
> > incentive to work harder, and engage in better debates.
> > 
> 
>
Follow-Ups: References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page