Prison Defeats Harvard In Debate

http://www.wsj.com/articles/an-unli...rvard-1442616928?mod=trending_now_2/?mod=mktw

This just in from that notoriously liberal rag, the Wall Street Journal. A prison debate team defeats Harvard in a debate about letting undocumenteds attend public schools. Ironically, the three "those people" liberal thugs had to support the side of denial of services. For the sake of thread creation I will pre-empt my true patriot brethren and ask why was good taxpayer monies spent on allowing these vicious criminals out of solitary and into libraries?

 

Because education is proven to result in better economic outcomes, and better economic outcomes is the single most effective way of reducing recidivism and overall levels of crime.

 

Agreed. I worked for years with criminals as an officer of the court and rehab and education are so very very important. But of course stuff like this will drive the usual suspects absolutely bonkers. Even though it has been proven time and time again to dramatically reduce recidivism and save $ in the long run.

 

Ideologues don't care about good policy. All they care about is feeling like they are "right." This tendency is why modern society has become so partisan, and why people on both sides of the aisle, left and right, are so categorically incompetent when it comes to choosing good politicians.

 

Moral of the story, the 3 guys on the prison team really wanted to learn and win the debate. You can lead a horse to water, but ya can't make 'em drink it.

 

When a group of prisoners can defeat the Harvard debating club, it is a testament to our declining educational system.

 

How so?

 

I rest my case.

 

Huh? Rest what case? You offered an unsubstantiated opinion not a "case". And that was in response to me asking for an explanation. No savvy.

I did speech and debate for 4 years HS and a couple at uni. Also have taught public speaking uni classes. This is surprising but certainly not shocking. Upsets happen every weekend in sports. This is no different. You obviously have had no experience with speech and debate. Or Harvard, I'd wager. Your experience in prison an and education I've no knowledge of. I find stuff like this encouraging and good. Then again I don't loathe prisoners, minorities or Ivy League students.

 

wow, really?

 

from what I've seen, college debates are now a joke. The prison team probably rapped their way into a win.

This is like saying they won a short bus race to the school for special needs students.
[video=youtube;fmO-ziHU_D8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmO-ziHU_D8[/video]

 

You are too funny. You would think someone who has studied debate would have a vague understanding of logic... but then again we are talking about a failed educational system here.

So let me get this straight, a Harvard debate team who are arguably supposed to be among the best and brightest that our educational system can produce, and who most probably have years of debating experience going back though high school, are pitted against a prison debate team who may or may not have graduated high school and who are considered to be the dregs and failures of our society and they get their asses handed to them. Perhaps Harvard should recruit our nations best and brightest from the prison system instead of from the educational system, or better yet from the criminal ranks who are smart enough not to get arrested. LOL

 

Pretty obvious you've never been to a college level debate. Like commenting on the Super Bowl after watching a Pop Warner game. Maybe you can post some more completely unrelated badblackpeople videos or articles about ivyleagueelitists.

 

That is very true. So my question to Democrats is why are you against vouchers for education so that more poor children do not have to be condemned to failing schools? Does it have something to do with support for the teachers' union?

 

Arguing this with you would be like p*ssin' up a rope. I've quite a lot of experience with this and you've obviously none. I understand (not really) your need to hate on prisoners, minorities, college students, higher education, etc but you'd think that reform and rehab, whatever its form, as a way to reduce crime and recidivism would melt your conservative heart. Or maybe not.

p.s. The Wall Street Journal seems to think this kind of program is a net social plus. But what those wobbly liberals know?

 

You have something in common with the Harvard debate team..... you both got your asses handed to you. So much for your debating expertise.

 

Good for the prisoners on the debate team. I think more prisons should have programs like this.
That's what I call a wise investment of tax payer dollars.

 

Damn near every prison in America has at least a law library. It is required by a supreme court decision several years back. Can't remember the name. By the way in spite of the fact that it creates hosts of nuisance lawsuits, I support that decision.

 

Good on ya, brother. What this other guy here ragin' against the article doesn't seem to understand is that just because you are a con doesn't necessarily mean you are a moron. I met many many very intelligent cons in my job. And growing up. Combine that with an adult's experience and perspective, a library, law or otherwise, and unlimited time and .....presto. Pretty simple really.

 

I'm not a Democrat, so I can't answer for them.

As for unions, I don't support public sector unions, at least when it comes to wage and salary negotiations. However, I do support private sector unions, at a local level. National-level unions tend to be corrupt, inefficient and harmful to both the economy and to labour. But a well-organized local workforce is absolutely necessary for workers to achieve any sort of wage parity - the result of going after unions to the degree we have is a massive government bureaucracy handling issues that ordinary union members used to handle, as well as the consistent stagnation of wages over the past thirty years. While unions became tremendously abusive in certain industries, they achieved enormous positive social and economic change elsewhere. So long as the government doesn't protect union workers from being fired for strikes, but does protect workers right to organize, I think that unions represent a very useful and necessary part of a free market economy.

 

Especially when you truthfully have nothing better to do. Better have them reading and learning than making shanks. By the way in my admittedly limited experience with cons, I've never known one that truthfully lacked self esteem. The problem with most of them is that they have way too much.

 

Rather it's a sign that Harvard didn't care.

 

I seriously, seriously doubt that. Don't think that just because they are nerds that they aren't super competitive. It is why they are there in the first place. It's Harvard. Can you imagine the razzin' they'll get for losing to Julio, Rasheed and JimJoeBubba?

 

I'm of the opinion that debating effectively has very, very little to do with formal education. Many of the skills associated with debating can be enhanced by education, of course, but they can also be enhanced on your own time, with your own resources, so long as you have an open mind, a healthy curiousity, and the ability to produce rational arguments based upon sound research. I think it is tremendously elitist to believe that any of these skills are only had by those who have excelled in the school system, especially given the fact that many of the world's greatest businessmen, politicians and thinkers have struggled with formal schooling throughout their lives. Many are high school and college dropouts, who often only get degrees once they've established themselves on their own merit, and not the merit of a diploma.

 

Excellent point.