Replies

While they’re prattling on about racism, they’re wasting time NOT addressing the 78-point argumentative barrage I had launched at the in my last stand. Then I would point out to the judge, “Now while my opponent is content to stand here and snivel about racism at the expense of debating the actual topic, let’s go through all of my points he failed to address, thus indicating his agreement with said points.”

That’s the old school way of debating and only works against white opponents. Minority debaters play to different standards. Arguments dont matter, victimhood does. Affirmative action has come to debating.

They still have to convince the judge of the merits of their arguments. They're not going to persuade me, but they have to persuade the judge.

Back in the day, I never gave the judge the chance to even consider such claptrap. Hardly ever lost a round, either, unlike these Harvard bozos, who apparently were letting these sniveling race "warriors" drag the round off topic. Anytime an opponent did that, I exacted some serious "reparations" from them, debate-wise, and I made sure the judge knew about it, too.

If what you say is true, that this is how minorities debate today, and they're allowed to get away with it, it's the fault of 1) their debate opponents, and 2) the judging (which may not be to the same standard of yesteryear, either.)