[eDebate] ans D'Amico and Farra

Michael Korcok mmk_savant
Thu May 24 13:09:08 CDT 2007


 
Look, I compliment Gordon's shapely buttocks each time I see him.  I still don't get no sugar for it, though.  Well, he winks back occasionally...
 
No, I think GM is an apt analogy for the topic committee.  I think a big part of the problem is that people are working too hard, putting too much effort, and committing way too many resources into crafting resolutions.  Bureaucratic expansion has developed for topic selection and the product reflects that.   The topic committee, after the huge effort put into resolution crafting, would never produce something like "Resolved:  The United States Federal Government should legalize marijuana."  That just seems too simple and straightforward, hardly justifying the institutional and personal resources devoted to resolutions.  
 
So we get "Resolved: that the United States Federal Government should increase its constructive engagement with the government of one or more of: Afghanistan, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, Saudi Arabia, and Syria, and it should consist only of offering them a trilateral security guarantee(s) with Israel and/or a bilateral security guarantee(s)."  now, THAT is a Chevy Avalanche of a resolution, a fazzoli-style pickup/suv/atv worthy of GM!!!
 
And just like GM will have its fanbois even while the Federal Government is putting together the bail-out package, the topic process too, has fanbois writing things like:
 
"There is no doubt that the topics produced are a little wordy and somewhat jargonistic"  Yes, a little.  And because the Middle East is... wordy and jargonistic or something...  Good point.  I will not cheap-shot by pointing out that if the resolutional wording reflects the realities of the Middle East, then the Dixie might consider security against resolutional suicide-bombers.
 
"Seriously, have you ever thought about leadership at all and how you should lead with praise before you rip into people?" Great advice, Dale...  but... but... didn't you BEGIN your post with "Michael, Your attitude is insulting and condescending...  I don't even know you and I'm bothered. How does it feel to have someone dislike you just for what you typed on a web page?"  I am not tasting the honey there, Dale...  Where's MY sugar, bitch?
 
"Your ACADEMIC chairs might understand there is a method to the madness of more complicated phrasing."  No... they aren't posers, either.  They would see it for what it is.
"the reason the committee used a legalistic topic wording choice is it creates a more precise resolution - less suscesptible to squirrely affs outside of the controversy and less prone to niggling T debates."  Yeah, I had to look up "niggling" to make sure it wasn't related by blood to... that other word... you know...  that one of which Akon sings.  Yes, these resolutions are "precise".  They are "precise" in the same way as the steering of the Chevy Suburban is "precise".
 
Okay, gotta run to the grocery store and get her some cream for her coffee...
 
Michael Korcok
_________________________________________________________________
Change is good. See what?s different about Windows Live Hotmail.
www.windowslive-hotmail.com/learnmore/default.html?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGLM_HMWL_reten_changegood_0507
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070524/414ed669/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list