| Contests Archives True debate week 1-Rule thread; True debate week 1-Rule thread
Here is a place for Nifty, and ToT to hash out details on this ... |
12-21-06, 11:10 AM
|
#1 (permalink)
| | Self-Banned
Join Date: Sep 2005 Last Online: 12-02-08 07:51 AM
Posts: 4,716
Thanks: 521
Thanked 583 Times in 356 Posts
Awards: | True debate week 1-Rule thread True debate week 1-Rule thread
Here is a place for Nifty, and ToT to hash out details on this debate, as far as rules and format. Once decided this thread will be deleted, and the debate started.
You Two Have until Dec. 31st....to set the parameters. If you require a Moderator for questions....let me know. Member suggestions are likely,and certainly not forbidden....but in the end these two decide.
__________________ Self-Banned |
| |
12-21-06, 11:25 AM
|
#2 (permalink)
| | thrifty
Join Date: Jul 2006 Last Online: 12-03-08 01:59 PM
Posts: 3,413
Thanks: 464
Thanked 767 Times in 489 Posts
Awards: | Re: True debate week 1-Rule thread thanks tecoyah.
I will be out of town between today and saturday. so I'll hash out some detailed stuff this weekend and post it. TOT, if you want to start with some ideas, please go ahead.
but let me say this to begin with. a debate on impeachment cannot resemble a trial. what kind of fantasy world would we be living in if any one of us were to think that Bush and Cheney would come to this website and testify? that ain't gonna happen! we can't have an impeachment trial.
so the best we could hope for, in my opinion, would me to state how:
1. it appears that Bush (and Co.) did it
-or-
Bush and Co said they did it
2. "it" qualifies as "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
I would state when and how "it" happened, and what "it" was, and why "it" is impeachable.
You, TOT, would state why "it" didn't happen, why "it" isn't impeachable, or why I might be wrong about "it," etc.
how many "it"s are there? how about if I list 3? TOT must refute all 3.
__________________ "I admit it. The liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures." - Bill Kristol |
| |
12-26-06, 05:30 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
| | Self-Banned
Join Date: Sep 2005 Last Online: 12-02-08 07:51 AM
Posts: 4,716
Thanks: 521
Thanked 583 Times in 356 Posts
Awards: | Re: True debate week 1-Rule thread Quote:
Originally Posted by niftydrifty thanks tecoyah.
I will be out of town between today and saturday. so I'll hash out some detailed stuff this weekend and post it. TOT, if you want to start with some ideas, please go ahead.
but let me say this to begin with. a debate on impeachment cannot resemble a trial. what kind of fantasy world would we be living in if any one of us were to think that Bush and Cheney would come to this website and testify? that ain't gonna happen! we can't have an impeachment trial.
so the best we could hope for, in my opinion, would me to state how:
1. it appears that Bush (and Co.) did it
-or-
Bush and Co said they did it
2. "it" qualifies as "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
I would state when and how "it" happened, and what "it" was, and why "it" is impeachable.
You, TOT, would state why "it" didn't happen, why "it" isn't impeachable, or why I might be wrong about "it," etc.
how many "it"s are there? how about if I list 3? TOT must refute all 3. | .................................................. ....................... |
| |
12-28-06, 01:55 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
| | Self-Banned
Join Date: Sep 2005 Last Online: 12-02-08 07:51 AM
Posts: 4,716
Thanks: 521
Thanked 583 Times in 356 Posts
Awards: | Re: True debate week 1-Rule thread ok guys....set your parameters....I will start a thread on Jan. 1st based on what you decide. |
| |
12-29-06, 11:15 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
| | thrifty
Join Date: Jul 2006 Last Online: 12-03-08 01:59 PM
Posts: 3,413
Thanks: 464
Thanked 767 Times in 489 Posts
Awards: | Re: True debate week 1-Rule thread hi tecoyah,
was my earlier post lost? I typed a bunch of stuff and received a message that you needed to approve my post. |
| |
12-29-06, 12:26 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
| | Lead Moderator
Mod team member
Join Date: May 2004 Last Online: 11-28-08 10:19 AM Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 7,148
Thanks: 382
Thanked 495 Times in 274 Posts
Lean: Very Conservative Gender:  Awards:
Current Mood: | Re: True debate week 1-Rule thread Permissions for forum was setup incorrectly for the older True Debate System.
Should work ok now.
Sorry about that. |
| |
12-29-06, 03:21 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
| | thrifty
Join Date: Jul 2006 Last Online: 12-03-08 01:59 PM
Posts: 3,413
Thanks: 464
Thanked 767 Times in 489 Posts
Awards: | Re: True debate week 1-Rule thread ok, I'd like to propose a structure.
seeing as how TOT is defending the Bush administration, it only makes since that I must begin the debate and TOT will follow. I'm not sure how we could do this one with questions from tecoyah, to each of us. this is merely a proposal. I'm open to other suggestions.
the combatants are limited to a posting structure consisting of the following sections:
I. Tue 1/2 niftydrifty's argument
II. Wed 1/3 TOT rebuttal
III. Thu 1/4 niftydrifty counter-rebuttal
IV. Fri 1/5 TOT's final word
the above schedule are deadlines. it is allowable to post early. but if the scheduled section is not posted by midnight at the end of the specified day, the tardy combatant forfeits the debate.
there is no limit to the length of each posted section. it can be as long as we need it to be.
in section I, I will state the alleged offenses committed by the Bush administration that are impeachable. this will not be a debate about whether Bush should, could, will or won't be impeached, this will be a debate about whether or not the Bush administration seems to have done anything that is impeachable, as suggested by the evidence that niftydrifty will present. |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | | |