Author |
Message |
   
mrosner
Citizen Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 1767 Registered: 4-2002
| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:20 pm: |
|
How about Tom Kean - he was in charge of the 9/11, is a republican and is a decent debater, plus he lives in the area. |
   
Michael Janay
Citizen Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1655 Registered: 1-2003

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:32 pm: |
|
Now THATS a great idea. Any idea how to contact Kean? I know he used to be dean of Drew U. Googling him gave me no contact info. Paul and I could be the undercard. I'll start working on it, any help would be appreciated. What do you think Paul? |
   
Paul Surovell
Supporter Username: Paulsurovell
Post Number: 259 Registered: 2-2003
| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:32 pm: |
|
Michael, Let's stick to the original plan -- you line up Oliver North for a one-on-one debate with Scott Ritter and I'll forward the information to Scott. Also, to reiterate -- I will be happy to participate in a one-on-one debate with you on your proposition: "It is worth the deaths of one and a half million American servicemen and women to achieve 'democracy' in Iraq." You will argue, as you have on MOL, in favor of the proposition, I will argue, as I have on MOL, against the proposition. |
   
Tom Reingold
Supporter Username: Noglider
Post Number: 5713 Registered: 1-2003

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:35 pm: |
|
I don't expect you can get Kean in as a Bush supporter! |
   
D.
Moderator Username: Dave
Post Number: 5480 Registered: 4-1998

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:36 pm: |
|
I bet Drew University would hold a Ritter/Kean forum. They run a speaker series and have hosted other important historical figures like Dave Barry and Henry Kissenger. |
   
D.
Moderator Username: Dave
Post Number: 5481 Registered: 4-1998

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:37 pm: |
|
I missed an opportunity to meet Bush in Westfield by 20 minutes. I was going to slap him on the back for his stand on frivolous lawsuits. |
   
Michael Janay
Citizen Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1656 Registered: 1-2003

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:51 pm: |
|
There was NO original idea. North was brought up by YOU with regard to speaker fees. I said I'd love to see it. Then I said: Hey, Paul offered to help organize a debate between Ritter and anadministration supporter. I'd love to see Ollie rip Scott to shreds. But then again, I'd love to rip Scott to shreds. I Volunteer to engage in a debate against Ritter (only if we can't get Ollie, or better). Lets do it. Do I have to create an organization like Maplewood/South Orange supporters of Freedom and Liberty, or can I just do it by myself. I'm serious, and I'm throwing down the gauntlet. Paul, what do you want me to do? So I guess the original idea was that I would debate Ritter unless we could get someone more notable. Is Ritter afraid of Kean? Or me? As for our debate, name the place and time. Lincoln Douglas rules, and why do you feel the need to keep changing the premise? I said in other posts that it was worth a million or more lives to save millions of lives, free hundreds of millions of people from tyranny, and bring peace and democracy to the middle east. You can go back to any of my posts ad see what I said instead of trying to construct a strawman. You've constructed a strawman by a) adding "American servicemen and women to achieve 'democracy' in Iraq" and B) changing the numbers from one post to the next. IE. Regarding a debate with you -- I'd be happy to debate your allegiance to the proposition that it would be worth the deaths of 1 million American servicemen and women to achieve "democracy" in Iraq. To: "It is worth the deaths of one and a half million American servicemen and women to achieve 'democracy' in Iraq." But I won't let your petty little tricks stop the debate. 1 million, 1.5 million, whatever. Its obvious the trap you're trying to set. Name the time and place. Lincoln Douglas rules and format, and I will be the affirmative. |
   
Michael Janay
Citizen Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1657 Registered: 1-2003

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:52 pm: |
|
My synagogue has a great speakers program too. I'll talk to the President of the Mens club. But I'm kidding myself. Ritter will NEVER debate anyone. |
   
Michael Janay
Citizen Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1658 Registered: 1-2003

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 4:57 pm: |
|
Oh and Tom, Kean is still a big Bush supporter. |
   
anon
Citizen Username: Anon
Post Number: 1675 Registered: 6-2002
| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 5:18 pm: |
|
Isn't Oliver North a convicted felon who used his position in the Government to line his pockets and who sold arms to the terrorist Iranian regime? If you want to have a "conservative" speaker, how about someone with a brain, for instance Bill Kristol? |
   
Michael Janay
Citizen Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1659 Registered: 1-2003

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 5:24 pm: |
|
Oliver North was Paul Surovell's idea. |
   
D.
Moderator Username: Dave
Post Number: 5486 Registered: 4-1998

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 5:39 pm: |
|
For the record, I invited Scott Ritter by e-mail to engage readers on MOL and he never replied. I was a bit disappointed and the non-response kind of lends itself to Michael's assessment. |
   
wendy
Supporter Username: Wendy
Post Number: 581 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 5:42 pm: |
|
To Michael, Why not try rereading your own posts? That might be good practice for a debate. Paul mentioned Ollie in the context of how much Ritter charged for speaker fees. YOU suggested that Ollie would be able to rip him to threads in a debate. To D., (whoever the heck that is) Would you care to post how you suggested that could happen. Debating with anonymous posters has not been many people's cup of tea. And some prefer the face to face for all kinds of reasons. |
   
Nohero
Citizen Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4405 Registered: 10-1999

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 5:46 pm: |
|
Dave, that's a little harsh. The guy came to town in person, and was willing to talk to anybody and answer their questions. And as for Wendy's point, let's go to the videotape:
http://www.southorangevillage.com/cgi-bin/show.cgi?tpc=26018&post=347173#POST347173
|
   
D.
Moderator Username: Dave
Post Number: 5487 Registered: 4-1998

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 5:49 pm: |
|
Don't get me wrong. I give props to Scott for coming to Maplewood. It was he who asked about a follow-up debate (or pre-debate) on MOL. Here's my letter to him.
quote:Hi Scott, I'm following up on a request from Paul Surovell to contact you regarding possibly participating in an online forum on MaplewoodOnline (MOL). First off, let me say it would be an honor to have you participate in our online community forum; given the current state of affairs, the more dialogue the better. 1) The online forum Here's the idea I have for moderating the forum, which is probably your top concern. And let me preface this by saying I'm totally open to your suggestions on how to arrange it. The message board software allows me to create a new top-level topic eg., "Talk with Scott Ritter" (you can suggest title), and set the parameters for how people participate. One of the options is to preview posts before they go live, which eliminates personal attacks completely, but it can also create disjointed conversation. The other option is that I monitor for personal attacks manually and delete them as they happen. It's fairly easy for me to prevent an offender from repeats by banning them for the duration of the discussion and I'll let Paul Surovell be a co-judge for monitoring the discussion. (Though I'll handle obvious ones immediately). With all of that said, I expect more interested participation than pranks. The direct link to the online forum is: http://www.maplewoodonline.com/forum/ I created an account for you, which is: username: ScottRitter (all one word) password: ******* I did not associate your email address with the account, so no one will be able to know your email address, nor will they be able to contact you through the message board in any way. 2) Timing Would you like to open the online forum before your March 1 talk or as a follow-up (or both?). Also, I want to be mindful of your time commitments so we can set some expectations for your ability to follow up on answering questions (MOL is a fairly busy online community and I'm sure there will be lots of questions). Part of my job can be to look through the questions and generate topics/questions that are related so you can reply accordingly without repeating yourself. 3) Bio/Book Links If you have a brief bio and URLs to your books I can post in an intro area, please send whenever convenient. Also, feel free to call me to discuss any of the above items and again, thanks for considering this. I think you'll find an interested audience. -- Dave Ross MaplewoodOnline.com 973.378.9135 cc: Paul Surovell
|
   
wendy
Supporter Username: Wendy
Post Number: 583 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 6:03 pm: |
|
Fair enough D. No response is a bit troublesome, I agree. If you do hear from him about why that didn't happen, I assume you'll post a follow-up. That videotape, Nohero, will still let Michael wriggle out of things. It was the S----man who first suggested Ollie, I believe. Then Michael said the above. Then he said the following: "Hey, Paul offered to help organize a debate between Ritter and anadministration supporter. I'd love to see Ollie rip Scott to shreds. But then again, I'd love to rip Scott to shreds. I Volunteer to engage in a debate against Ritter (only if we can't get Ollie, or better)."
|
   
Mustt_mustt
Citizen Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 295 Registered: 8-2003
| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 7:05 pm: |
|
Looks like we are having a debate about about having a debate. If we don't end this quickly enough, we might end up with Ollie "went" South debating Mr. Janay. Wonder what rules they will follow!
|
   
Reflective
Citizen Username: Reflective
Post Number: 790 Registered: 3-2003
| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 10:06 pm: |
|
O North afraid of debating Ritter? Who is kidding who? Remember Colonel North in front of Senator Inyohe's(another sp ?) inquisition committee and he wasn't allowed to show his slides describing the communist influence he was working against in South America. In full uniform, medals and all, Ollie picked up the first slide, looked at it, then verbally described what it showed. This is the way he did his presentation to the Senate committee. As an experienced national securities industry presenter, I have never seen a more effective presentation with or without slides. The contra Reagan senators looked like they would explode. They didn't, but they knew they had been had - big time. Afraid? Ollie the Marine, (I'm Army and dammed glad there are Marines)went in on the first wave of the Iraqi invasion. Anyone see his reports on Fox? Ritter, el political commissar and sometimes general, wouldn't be caught anywhere near live fire.
|
   
Parkbench87
Citizen Username: Parkbench87
Post Number: 1800 Registered: 7-2001

| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 10:47 pm: |
|
When any of you put yourself in the corner of a person who David Hackworth calls "psychopathic" you lose all credibility. Now wasn't this thread about the conservatives who didn't show up or say anything at Ritters presentation this week? Now you want to hide behind Oliver North? |
   
Reflective
Citizen Username: Reflective
Post Number: 798 Registered: 3-2003
| Posted on Friday, March 4, 2005 - 11:02 pm: |
|
David who? (And it takes one to know one) Who says a thread is supposed to be about anything except what the immediate poster writes? You want rules? TGIF. |