[eDebate] Challenge to the Community

Josh Hoe jbhdb8
Wed Apr 4 23:12:47 CDT 2007


See the message sent before that one, the opposition of the citizens of
Michigan to Affirmative Action has effectively prohibited us from doing all
the things we WERE actively doing.  However, we still try very hard to
change our community through persuasion on a daily basis.  I sat outside a
polling place during the election trying to persuade people not to vote
against aff action (and our county was one of the only counties that
supported aff action - although not suprising given the nature of Ann Arbor)
as I handed out buttons and tried to persuade people not to vote against the
anti gay amendment in 2004....What exactly is it you want done?  We actually
had affirmative action and had it stripped...persuasion is what we have now,

Josh


On 4/5/07, Andy Ellis <andy.edebate at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> nope persuasion is cool, though clearly not enough...how do you make the
> measures to increase access,particpation, and graduation while persuasion is
> taking its course.....
>
> On 4/5/07, Josh Hoe <jbhdb8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Oh and first, we keep trying to convince people who are against
> > Affirmative Action why they are wrong until enough of them vote FOR
> > affirmative action policies...I try to do that basically with every person I
> > meet who I find out is against Affirmative Action.  Or were you wanting
> > something more radical than persuasion?
> >
> > Josh
> >
> >
> >  On 4/4/07, Andy Ellis <andy.edebate at gmail.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > so if not the law then how?
> > >
> > > On 4/4/07, Jim Hanson <hansonjb at whitman.edu > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  unfortunately no, I don't.
> > > >
> > > > many states have passed laws banning public funding for policies
> > > > that give what I call "equalizing" treatment to those who are not white.
> > > >
> > > > with o'connor leaving the supreme court, there is now a majority
> > > > highly likely ready to get rid of the weak affirmative action policies
> > > > endorsed by the court since baake. that means, as I understand it, school
> > > > (as well as other institution) policies providing "equalizing" treatment (eg
> > > > financial aid targeted specifcally for ethnic minorities) is going to be
> > > > illegal. private schools like whitman will be able to get away with it
> > > > (unless the court takes up public funding support to such schools) and
> > > > public schools can play games like california has where the top 10% in each
> > > > school get entrance into the uc system (which assures some but not enough
> > > > diversity).
> > > >
> > > > in a nutshell, the law cannot help, as practiced by the
> > > > reagan-bush-bush appointees. indeed, it will hurt and we're about to see
> > > > that very clearly.
> > > >
> > > > law as advocated by most affs in debate rounds would help--I
> > > > absolutely disagree with characterizations that overruling milliken would do
> > > > nothing just as i disagreed with claims that the civil rights act didn't
> > > > help/change anything--it did. it ain't perfect but it is part of needed
> > > > change.
> > > >
> > > > law as handled by more carter-clinton type appointees would also
> > > > help. that depends on the results of the 2008 election.
> > > >
> > > > in my ideal world, justices brennan and marshall would hold sway in
> > > > the courts--those of you opposed to the use of the law as an instrument of
> > > > the man/the state might enjoy some of their opinions rejecting the death
> > > > penalty, payment of any amount of money to vote, among others. law as
> > > > practiced from that perspective would make a dramatic difference.
> > > >
> > > > jim :)
> > > > hansonjb at whitman.edu
> > > > ----- Original Message ----- *From:* Andy Ellis
> > > > <andy.edebate at gmail.com>
> > > > *To:* Jim Hanson <hansonjb at whitman.edu>
> > > > *Cc:* edebate at ndtceda.com
> > > >  *Sent:* Wednesday, April 04, 2007 7:13 PM
> > > > *Subject:* Re: [eDebate] Challenge to the Community
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Does that mean you think that institutions that dont meet those
> > > > criteria, that legal action could be a good strategy?
> > > >
> > > > On 4/4/07, Jim Hanson < hansonjb at whitman.edu> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >  not really at least for whitman.
> > > > >
> > > > > whitman provides a lot of financial aid.
> > > > >
> > > > > the barrier to getting into whitman is good grades/good sat scores
> > > > > (which excludes all kinds of students) and that ethnic minorities frequently
> > > > > aren't all that plused about coming to southeast washington small town. some
> > > > > of that barrier may be defacto racial exclusion but I kind of doubt it--the
> > > > > school is very proactive in seeking more ethnic diversity including
> > > > > providing quite a bit of ethnic diversity based financial aid. again, it is
> > > > > not perfect by any means but this is a pretty liberal school and there have
> > > > > been complaints that too much financial aid is given to ethnically diverse
> > > > > individuals (at the expense of upper middle and middle income white
> > > > > students). I obviously don't agree with those complaints but they are
> > > > > indicative of why legal action is not necessary against whitman (nor would
> > > > > it have a chance of winning).
> > > > >
> > > > > jim :)
> > > > > hansonjb at whitman.edu
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message ----- *From:* Andy Ellis
> > > > > <andy.edebate at gmail.com>
> > > > > *To:* Josh Hoe <jbhdb8 at gmail.com>
> > > > > *Cc:* Jim Hanson <hansonjb at whitman.edu> ; edebate at ndtceda.com
> > > > > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 04, 2007 7:00 PM
> > > > > *Subject:* Re: [eDebate] Challenge to the Community
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > i will be brief.
> > > > >
> > > > > All of the benefits that jim and josh enumerate to intercolegiate
> > > > > policy debate seem to be material reasons why my case for legal action to
> > > > > access the community makes sense. Material realities are excluding
> > > > > particpation and access to levers of good memeber of community status and
> > > > > graduate school preperation. Thats a material educational  denial based on
> > > > > defacto racial exclusion.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/4/07, Josh Hoe < jbhdb8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Another example, Rachel Saloom works at a major law firm in
> > > > > > Atlanta - but has used her position to get on the recruiting committee and
> > > > > > work to increase race and gender diversity in that law firm......So, at the
> > > > > > same time she uses her debate training to help her be a better lawyer she
> > > > > > also uses things she debated about to improve her law firm.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Josh
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  On 4/4/07, Jim Hanson < hansonjb at whitman.edu > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  if you want a leftist revolution--then, yes, there are better
> > > > > > > uses of the millions spent on debate each year.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > if you want students who become successful, contributing
> > > > > > > members of our community--then debate is one of the most fantastic
> > > > > > > activities I am aware of.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > three alums of our program joined me at the ndt and went on
> > > > > > > and on and on about how much debate had transformed their lives, made them
> > > > > > > successful, and gave them self-fufillment unmatched by any other thing they
> > > > > > > do.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > many of our alumni consider debate hands down the most
> > > > > > > educational "course" they took while at whitman college. several say
> > > > > > > that they learned more from debate than in all their other courses.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and these folks are making changes in the world including
> > > > > > > directly reducing sexual and racial harassment at companies, including
> > > > > > > gay/lesbian perspectives in company planning, outreach to disadvantaged
> > > > > > > youth, environmental planning and activism, etc. and NO they are not all
> > > > > > > white, straight males. they represent a multitude of differing ethnic,
> > > > > > > sexual, gender, income characteristics.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > they are not revolutionizing the world by ending defacto
> > > > > > > segregration.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > but they are making quiet, steady changes that MAKE A
> > > > > > > DIFFERENCE.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > jim :)
> > > > > > > hansonjb at whitman.edu
> > > > > > >  ----- Original Message ----- *From:* Beth Skinner
> > > > > > > <beth.skinner at gmail.com>
> > > > > > > *To:* Steven D'Amico <stevendamico at gmail.com>
> > > > > > > *Cc:* edebate at ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 04, 2007 5:43 PM
> > > > > > > *Subject:* Re: [eDebate] Challenge to the Community
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To me, the larger point is that when we select law-focused,
> > > > > > > USFG-focused resolutions one of the reasons people give is that it will help
> > > > > > > us to be better advocates if we understand the intricacies of government
> > > > > > > action.  If this is a good reason then we SHOULD ask how people are going to
> > > > > > > use a season's worth of education in practical ways.  If the reaction is
> > > > > > > 'well, we really can't accomplish change this way' then why do we keep
> > > > > > > selecting these topics?  How many years does it take to learn the futility
> > > > > > > of activism through state channels?  If the reaction is 'we're too lazy to
> > > > > > > do actually do anything with the knowledge we gain' or 'I just like sounding
> > > > > > > good in rounds when I read cool cards' then that is sad.  Millions of
> > > > > > > dollars are spent each year on college debate.  Maybe there are better uses
> > > > > > > for that money.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Beth
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > p.s. congratulations to Omri on making Andy seem like the
> > > > > > > reasonable one - not a lot of people are capable of that
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 4/4/07, Steven D'Amico < stevendamico at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > does anyone else find this similar to Stalin arguing with
> > > > > > > > Hitler? As an Italian I'll just side with whoever wins.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  On 4/4/07, Andy Ellis < andy.edebate at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thank you Omri, i do indeed feel more informed. But really
> > > > > > > > > this is the last time...so sad...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 4/4/07, Omri Ceren < ceren at usc.edu > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > OK. Now we're going to discuss "tone".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > When I said "seriously", it worked because I made your
> > > > > > > > > > position seem
> > > > > > > > > > obviously absurd and kind of stupid. I accomplished that
> > > > > > > > > > by juxtaposing
> > > > > > > > > > and re-characterizing your positions in such a way as to
> > > > > > > > > > make you seem
> > > > > > > > > > nonsensical.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > When you said "seriously", you followed it up by whining
> > > > > > > > > > that "the
> > > > > > > > > > debates you see are more ideologically determined and
> > > > > > > > > > constrained than
> > > > > > > > > > the ones i see." This, to put it mildly, failed to
> > > > > > > > > > really provide the
> > > > > > > > > > rhetorical umpff that you were looking for.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Let's try this again (but, honestly, this is going to
> > > > > > > > > > have to be the
> > > > > > > > > > last time): the conceit by which you take it upon
> > > > > > > > > > yourself to challenge
> > > > > > > > > > the debate community to attack itself emerges from a
> > > > > > > > > > combination of
> > > > > > > > > > ignorance, smugness, and pretension that makes me almost
> > > > > > > > > > feel bad about
> > > > > > > > > > publicly mocking you. You need the debate community to
> > > > > > > > > > be as dull and
> > > > > > > > > > unnuanced as you are so that you can continue in this
> > > > > > > > > > pathetic moral
> > > > > > > > > > exhibitionism, where your desperate need to convince
> > > > > > > > > > yourself of your
> > > > > > > > > > own superiority comes together with an inchoate sense of
> > > > > > > > > > what counts as
> > > > > > > > > > political activism.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You really should stop pretending that you have either
> > > > > > > > > > the authority or
> > > > > > > > > > credibility to challenge anybody to do anything. It's
> > > > > > > > > > getting to be kind
> > > > > > > > > > of sad.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Omri.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 4/4/2007 3:26 PM Andy Ellis wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Seriously? are you really saying people dont make that
> > > > > > > > > > answer and win a
> > > > > > > > > > > lot of debates on it? The debates you see are more
> > > > > > > > > > ideologically
> > > > > > > > > > > determined and constrained than the ones i see. And
> > > > > > > > > > yes at least those
> > > > > > > > > > > folks who debated milliken have a great legal
> > > > > > > > > > knowledge to provide to
> > > > > > > > > > > their campuses...
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 4/4/07, *Omri Ceren* < ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     Seriously? This year's Milliken affirmatives
> > > > > > > > > > advocated using the USSC to
> > > > > > > > > > >     address de facto segregation in school districts.
> > > > > > > > > > You think that this
> > > > > > > > > > >     means that they said that the "the law is the best
> > > > > > > > > > way to end racial
> > > > > > > > > > >     discrimination in education", and in response you
> > > > > > > > > > petulantly chellenged
> > > > > > > > > > >     the community to sue... itself. And you can't
> > > > > > > > > > understand why this is an
> > > > > > > > > > >     example of how you don't get nuance?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     Seriously?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     Omri.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     On 4/4/2007 3:17 PM Andy Ellis wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >      > Also, what is it exactly that i am doing that
> > > > > > > > > > you are elaborating a
> > > > > > > > > > >      > community critique of?...like is this a
> > > > > > > > > > criticism that goes andy
> > > > > > > > > > >     ellis
> > > > > > > > > > >      > is a wacko  or does it actualy engage the work
> > > > > > > > > > being done on the
> > > > > > > > > > >     ground
> > > > > > > > > > >      > in baltimore to further this goal,if its the
> > > > > > > > > > former i know that
> > > > > > > > > > >     stuff if
> > > > > > > > > > >      > its the latter, id like to hear your version of
> > > > > > > > > > that criticism....
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      > On 4/4/07, *Andy Ellis* <
> > > > > > > > > > andy.edebate at gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto:andy.edebate at gmail.com >
> > > > > > > > > > >      > <mailto: andy.edebate at gmail.com <mailto:
> > > > > > > > > > andy.edebate at gmail.com>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >     wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >     So tell me omri (and i dont ask this with
> > > > > > > > > > the lazy revolutionary
> > > > > > > > > > >      >     bombast i often espouse) what have you
> > > > > > > > > > learned from a year of
> > > > > > > > > > >      >     milliken debates that you are now using and
> > > > > > > > > > working with your
> > > > > > > > > > >      >     debaters on to address racial
> > > > > > > > > > discrimination in education?
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >     On 4/4/07, *Omri Ceren* < ceren at usc.edu
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto: ceren at usc.edu> <mailto: ceren at usc.edu
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto: ceren at usc.edu>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         No. You just don't get it.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         There's actually a relatively robust
> > > > > > > > > > criticism to be made
> > > > > > > > > > >     of you,
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         tracing how risk-free revolutionary
> > > > > > > > > > posturing can hold
> > > > > > > > > > >     the good
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         hostage
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         to the perfect while using aggressive
> > > > > > > > > > smugness to insulate
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         intellectual
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         laziness. So for instance, no one of
> > > > > > > > > > any intellectual
> > > > > > > > > > >     care would
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         claim
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         to have seen the best debaters in the
> > > > > > > > > > country claiming
> > > > > > > > > > >     that "law
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         is [the
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         best method]... of pursuing racial
> > > > > > > > > > justice in education".
> > > > > > > > > > >     First
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         of all,
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         outside of a very precise use in
> > > > > > > > > > pyschoanalytic critical
> > > > > > > > > > >     literature,
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         "the Law" isn't a meaningful category.
> > > > > > > > > > There are multiple
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         branches and
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         levels of government empowered to
> > > > > > > > > > enforce legislative and
> > > > > > > > > > >     judicial
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         decisions - and while I know that most
> > > > > > > > > > of the debates
> > > > > > > > > > >     that you
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         saw this
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         year didn't really think that those
> > > > > > > > > > distinctions mattered,
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         that's kind
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         of my point too.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         Anyway, like I said - there's a
> > > > > > > > > > relatively robust
> > > > > > > > > > >     criticism of your
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         personal sensibility, political
> > > > > > > > > > ideology, and interpersonal
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         community.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         But I doubt you'd get it.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         Omri.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         On 4/4/2007 3:00 PM Andy Ellis wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  Uh right, i will continue to do the
> > > > > > > > > > work outside of
> > > > > > > > > > >     the legal
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         structure
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  and in it when necessary to increase
> > > > > > > > > > minority access
> > > > > > > > > > >     to and
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         completion
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  of college. I dont doubt
> > > > > > > > > > the  efficacy of my methods,
> > > > > > > > > > >     and sure
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         i didnt
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  see the same debates you saw but my
> > > > > > > > > > term heard and i
> > > > > > > > > > >     saw many
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         teams
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  adamently defending the necessity of
> > > > > > > > > > using the law to
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         challenege racial
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  discrimination and i am simply
> > > > > > > > > > asking those that made the
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         claims to
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  follow up on them.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  Furthermore i understand debaters
> > > > > > > > > > cant sue for other
> > > > > > > > > > >     peoples
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  inclusion(in a basic sense of the
> > > > > > > > > > term i think there
> > > > > > > > > > >     could be
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         a claimant
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  who suggested that they where
> > > > > > > > > > damaged by the lack of
> > > > > > > > > > >     minority
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         inclusion
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  in the community, but im probably
> > > > > > > > > > wrong like you said
> > > > > > > > > > >     im not
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         in the
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  highly technical debates) but there
> > > > > > > > > > are legal cases and
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         movements that
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  debaters can contribute their skills
> > > > > > > > > > and dedication to
> > > > > > > > > > >     and
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         furthermore
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  if through those super high end
> > > > > > > > > > debates you saw
> > > > > > > > > > >     provide the
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         training
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  they promise then it seems as if you
> > > > > > > > > > can figure out how to
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         uses cases on
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  your campus as entree points to
> > > > > > > > > > legal justice movements.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  or maybe all those things i heard in
> > > > > > > > > > debates where
> > > > > > > > > > >     just lies
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         and nods to
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  racial inclusion?
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  On 4/4/07, *Omri Ceren* <
> > > > > > > > > > ceren at usc.edu
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto: ceren at usc.edu> <mailto: ceren at usc.edu<mailto:
> > > > > > > > > > ceren at usc.edu>>
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         <mailto: ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto: ceren at usc.edu <mailto: ceren at usc.edu>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     Andy,
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     Surely you should be leading this
> > > > > > > > > > effort, what with
> > > > > > > > > > >     all of the
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     topic-specific research that I'm
> > > > > > > > > > sure you did this
> > > > > > > > > > >     year.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         And with all
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     the high-tech policy rounds that
> > > > > > > > > > you judged and
> > > > > > > > > > >     scouted.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     Omri.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     On 4/4/2007 9:55 AM Andy Ellis
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > So after a year of hearing
> > > > > > > > > > debates about how the
> > > > > > > > > > >     law is
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         not only
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     a good
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > means of pursuing racial
> > > > > > > > > > justice in education,
> > > > > > > > > > >     but the
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         best method, i
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > have a challenge to offer. Use
> > > > > > > > > > the skills that
> > > > > > > > > > >     you have
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         acquired in
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > debating about the law to
> > > > > > > > > > craft a strategy that
> > > > > > > > > > >     uses the
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         law to
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     increase
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > meaningful minority
> > > > > > > > > > participation in the
> > > > > > > > > > >     community. The
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         NCAA has been
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > sued for admissions
> > > > > > > > > > requirements that preference
> > > > > > > > > > >     test
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         scores and
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     gpa, if
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > there is precedent in that or
> > > > > > > > > > other cases there
> > > > > > > > > > >     should
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         be a case
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     to sue
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > your university or your debate
> > > > > > > > > > team or ceda or
> > > > > > > > > > >     the ndt,
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         if they have
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > those standards. But dont let
> > > > > > > > > > my suggestions
> > > > > > > > > > >     limit you,
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         many many
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     many
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > of you have researched and
> > > > > > > > > > learned a whole lot about
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         using the
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     law to
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > fight for racial justice in
> > > > > > > > > > education, you im
> > > > > > > > > > >     sure can
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         come up with
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > something on your own.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > eDebate mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto: eDebate at www.ndtceda.com > <mailto:eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto: eDebate at www.ndtceda.com>>
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         <mailto: eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto: eDebate at www.ndtceda.com> <mailto: eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto:eDebate at www.ndtceda.com>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > No virus found in this
> > > > > > > > > > incoming message.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >      > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus
> > > > > > > > > > Database: 268.18.26/746 -
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         Release Date:
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     4/4/2007 1:09 PM
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     --
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     --------------
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     PhD Student, USC Annenberg School
> > > > > > > > > > for Communication
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     Email: ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto:ceren at usc.edu <mailto: ceren at usc.edu>>
> > > > > > > > > > <mailto:
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         ceren at usc.edu <mailto: ceren at usc.edu>
> > > > > > > > > > <mailto:
> > > > > > > > > > >     ceren at usc.edu <mailto: ceren at usc.edu>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     Mobile: 412-512-7256
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >     --------------
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  No virus found in this incoming
> > > > > > > > > > message.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         >  Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database:
> > > > > > > > > > 268.18.26/746 - Release
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         Date: 4/4/2007 1:09 PM
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         --
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         --------------
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         PhD Student, USC Annenberg School for
> > > > > > > > > > Communication
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         Email: ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     <mailto: ceren at usc.edu <mailto: ceren at usc.edu>>
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         Mobile: 412-512-7256
> > > > > > > > > > >      >         --------------
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >      >
> > > > > > > > > > >      > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > > > > > > > > >      > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > > > > > > > > >      > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.26/746
> > > > > > > > > > - Release Date:
> > > > > > > > > > >     4/4/2007 1:09 PM
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     --
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >     --------------
> > > > > > > > > > >     PhD Student, USC Annenberg School for
> > > > > > > > > > Communication
> > > > > > > > > > >     Email: ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>
> > > > > > > > > > >     Mobile: 412-512-7256
> > > > > > > > > > >     --------------
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.26/746 -
> > > > > > > > > > Release Date: 4/4/2007 1:09 PM
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --------------
> > > > > > > > > > PhD Student, USC Annenberg School for Communication
> > > > > > > > > > Email: ceren at usc.edu
> > > > > > > > > > Mobile: 412-512-7256
> > > > > > > > > > --------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > eDebate mailing list
> > > > > > > > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > eDebate mailing list
> > > > > > > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  ------------------------------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > eDebate mailing list
> > > > > > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > eDebate mailing list
> > > > > > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > eDebate mailing list
> > > > > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > eDebate mailing list
> > > > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > eDebate mailing list
> > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > >
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070405/758523be/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list