[eDebate] Topic Framing methods and vegatable throwers!

Jean-Paul Lacy lacyjp
Thu May 4 10:33:54 CDT 2006


I admire simple things. (Example: My mind.) I like the elegance of that 
resolution.

But, is there any way to narrow that topic down? (Other than the 4 areas 
you mentioned?)

Maybe this is all a reason to work hard on developing a good presidential 
powers wording.

--JP



At 10:11 AM 5/4/2006, debate at ou.edu wrote:
>Yeah really
>
>number one could be modified such as
>
>Resolved: The USSC should reverse a past decision utilizing one of the 
>cases currently on the docket.
>
>keep it simple stupid is what i say
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jean-Paul Lacy <lacyjp at wfu.edu>
>Date: Thursday, May 4, 2006 9:05 am
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] Topic Framing methods and vegatable throwers!
>
> >
> > >Resolved:  The United States Supreme Court should reverse its
> > decision
> > >based upon one of the cases
> > >currently on the docket.
> > >
> > >Resolved: The USFG should reverse a United States Supreme Court
> > decision
> > >in one of the following areas:
> > >Environment, civil liberties, copyright and seperation of powers.
> > >
> > >These are only examples, and did not involve an extensive amount
> > of thought,
> >
> >
> > Really....
> >





More information about the Mailman mailing list