Drug legalization topic
Wed Mar 29 11:46:09 CST 2000
Yes not in this country i don't think our presidential election process is
the best either. BUt that is how it happens looots of other places. I
knew some smart person would call me on the civic on that. I passed mr
matoon's 8th grade class i know.
At 11:19 AM 03/29/2000 -0600, you wrote:
>Ummm...seems to me people should read the US Constitution also.
>The Electoral College as a "run-off"...wow...
>> No the evil intent there is that we don't want that "unworthy" topic
>> detracting from the votes that the other topics would get. (You conceed
>> this argument later) That is wrong tooo. I understand that vote getting
>> can be a problem. They don't stop presidential elections and say man tooo
>> many parties are in the election we shouldn't do away with all of the
>> candidates but 4. They have a general election. If noone gets a majority
>> then their is a run-off. I think that this would be the most egalitarian
>> way to decide the process. I will be writing an amendment that proposes
>> this, and many other, changes to the process.
Director of Debate
University of Richmond
Richmond, VA 23173
jstone at richmond.edu
(804) 289-8269 - office
(804) 287-6884 - debate forum
(804) 287-6496 - fax
>From Wed Mar 29 12:43:03 2000
Received: from LIST.UVM.EDU by LIST.UVM.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with
spool id 75103 for EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:43:44
Received: from imo26.mx.aol.com (imo26.mx.aol.com [18.104.22.168]) by
list.uvm.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA30798 for
<eDebate at list.uvm.edu>; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:43:40 -0500
Received: from MWBRYANT at aol.com by imo26.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v25.3.) id
w.5f.32ad744 (4561); Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:43:03 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 67
Message-ID: <5f.32ad744.26139aa7 at aol.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:43:03 EST
Reply-To: MWBRYANT at AOL.COM
To: Team Topic Debating in America <EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Michael Bear Bryant <MWBRYANT at AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: and it gets even more pathetic when...
Comments: To: jef229f at mail.smsu.edu
In a message dated 3/29/00 10:15:08 AM Mountain Standard Time,
jef229f at MAIL.SMSU.EDU writes:
> So...when should the topic papers have been announced and discussed???
> Seems to me the papers were put out in November...and if everyone was too
> busy to give the committee feedback in the last 4 and a half months, then
> are just too busy.
Allow three weeks of focused discussion after NDT and then make the
selections. Some of these papers weren't there in November to discuss, Jeff.
Frankly, who submits the paper seems far more important to the committee than
does the actual contents of the paper. This doesn't have to be done while
people are blocking out for their first round of CEDA Nats.
More information about the Mailman