Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 20:55:44 EDT
From: Joel Young <joelyoung120@hotmail.com>
Subject: My Debate Partner - Chapter 13

MY DEBATE PARTNER

Chapter Thirteen

It never seems to fail.  Whenever you become too impressed with yourself,
or you get too caught up in winning, something happens to remind you that
you're only human.  For me, I was reminded of my humanity when they
announced that my team had made it to the final round of the State Debate
Championships during my Junior year of High School.  In front of an entire
room full of Debaters from around the State, I fainted.

When I started to regain consciousness, I was aware that there was a small
crowd of people around me.  I was on the floor, propped up against our
coach, Mrs. Weber.  She had her arm around me.  I heard her say I would be
fine.  I think she was telling everyone to go to the auditorium.

A few minutes later, I was able to sit up by myself.  There was no one in
the room except me, Mrs. Weber and David.  I held my head in my hands, and
took deep breaths to try to stop the tiny little explosions of light in my
field of vision.  Mrs. Weber told me to put my head down into my lap, and
that helped.

When I finally picked my head up, I saw David's face.  It was the most
beautiful sight I'd ever seen.  Despite an alarmed facial expression, his
crystal blue eyes were shining brightly.  His golden, silky hair was
hanging slightly over his forehead and his chiseled, classic features were
accentuated by a steam of sunlight coming from the high windows on the far
wall.

"Help me up, David, please," I asked.

I heard him ask if it was okay, and then I felt his strong arms around me
as he lifted me to my feet.  I melted into his strength.  He held me
tightly.  He told me he loved me and asked if I was going be okay.

"I'll be okay," I said.  "Just don't let go."

Mrs. Weber told him to help me into a chair, and he did.  She handed me an
unwrapped candy bar and told me to eat it slowly.  I took a bite.  The
sweetness was overpowering.

"What about the finals," I asked.

"Oh, you're in the finals," she said.  "You've got just under an hour to
pull it together."

She explained that after I passed out, Kettering's coach had suggested
replacing us in the finals with the third place team.  The officials had
wanted to call an ambulance.  Mrs. Weber said she knew I had probably just
fainted from the excitement, lack of sleep and not eating.  When the
officials were insistent, however, she had told them that I was diabetic
and the excitement of the tournament had lowered my blood sugar.  She told
them that all I needed was something to eat, and I'd be fine.

"I'm not diabetic!" I complained.

"Shut up," she said.  "Would you rather I told them that your boyfriend
made you swoon?  Now, eat your candy!"

Well, that certainly cut off anything else I had to say.  I took another
bite of candy.

She told me that the Jim and Sara had already started the first Debate of
the finals. They were in the auditorium now, debating Kettering's negative
team.  David and I had to go on ten minutes after their Debate ended.

"Or, " she said "We can forfeit."

I was starting to feel better.  "Hell, no!  But I'll need a sandwich and
some milk ... and coffee," I said.  "I can't stomach any more candy."

"Coming up," David replied.  He left to fill my order.

Mrs. Weber and I were alone in the room.  I told her I'd be fine, and she
could go watch Jim and Sara in the auditorium.  She refused.

"Joel," she said.  "I know how much this tournament means to you.  And you
know it means every bit as much to me.  I'm staying right here with you.
Not just because it's my job, but it's where I can do the most good.
Without you, this team will not win.  Jim and Sara are outstanding
Debaters, and David has brilliant moments.  But you're the glue, the
backbone, and the strength of this team.  Of course, I'm going to chew your
ass for not sleeping or eating, but we'll take care of that another time."

I took a deep breath.  "Obviously, you know about David and me."

"Yes, Joel," she said.  "I know you two are in love.  I don't have a
problem with it.  If you want to talk about it, I'll be there for you.
But, I truly think that now is not the time or place."

"Just one more question," I said.  "And then I'll drop it.  Who else
knows?"

"To my knowledge," she answered, "just Sara.  She thinks it's great, so
don't worry.  And, she hasn't told Jim.  Now, we need to bring your focus
back to the Debate.  How are you feeling?"

I was starting to feel like my old self.  David arrived with a ham and
cheese sandwich from a vending machine.  He also had coffee, but no milk.
I ate and drank, despite having absolutely no appetite.  When I was done,
the three of us walked around the outside of the building to be sure I was
okay on my feet.  The food, fresh air and exercise worked.

"Okay," I said.  We had about fifteen minutes before David and I were on.
"I can do this."

It was obvious that Jim and Sara's Debate had just finished when we entered
the building again.  There was a buzz from the auditorium, and people were
stepping into the hallway and lingering.

"Let's find out how they did," Mrs. Weber said.

We found Jim and Sara as they were coming down the steps on the side of the
stage into the auditorium.  They looked upset, but they immediately asked
about me.  When they were assured I had made a full recovery, they
explained what had happened.

Things had gone well until the last speech before the rebuttals.  Then, the
Kettering's negative team pulled the same stuff on them that the Kettering
affirmative team had pulled with David and me in October.  They'd produced
a surprising piece of evidence, and it had made Jim look foolish.  Then,
they attacked him personally - carefully worded to stay within the rules,
of course.  Jim had maintained his cool and fought back, but judging by the
reaction of the audience, Kettering had won.

I realized at that moment that our hope for victory was slipping out of our
hands.  Even if David and I won, it would be a win/loose draw, and the
decision would be based on speaker points.  As the judges obviously favored
Kettering, even before we opened our mouths, it would be difficult to
defeat Kettering on a subjective point system.  I started to think that
just placing in the State finals wasn't that bad.  After all, as long as I
debated and we didn't forfeit, we were guaranteed 2nd place.

I noticed Mrs. Weber working the room. She came back to us a few minutes
later.  "Jim and Sara, great job!" she said.  The other coaches I spoke to
said you held your own.  They were very complimentary.  Kettering may or
may not have won, but in any case, you did yourselves and you school
proud."  She hugged each one of them.

"Okay, Joel and David," she said, "Time to mount the stage."

The audience started coming back to their seats, and the same asshole
official called for the final Debate to begin.

I was absolutely amazed when the first affirmative speaker, the same slick
Sean, presented his case.  His presentation was identical - point by point
identical - to his opening speech at the October invitational. Of course,
the presentation was a bit more polished, and there was a piece of new
evidence here and there, but not one new idea.  As first negative, I could
have prepared my response to Sean's speech weeks ago.  Fortunately, I had
gone over the October Debate with Kettering at least 50 times in my mind,
and I was prepared.

If I do say so myself, I nailed my questioning of Sean, and my first speech
was going very well.  I was on!  I raised only four criticisms, but I had
hard evidence to back them up, and I drove my points home.  I started
feeling bold.  I had already decided that our chances for 1st place were
remote at best, so I decided to take some risks and have some fun.  Second
place was wrapped up, and I'd already been promised an ass chewing, so what
did I have to loose?

>From somewhere in the far recesses of my mind, I heard my own voice
saying, "Draw out their New Paradigms quotation." Jim, Sara and Mrs. Weber
all knew about that quotation, and they'd surely think my mind was going
fuzzy again if I deliberately went down a known problematic path.  But,
hey, what the hell?

I decided to take the risk.  The only problem was, I needed the quotation
from the former Director of US Treasury to draw out their New Paradigms
quotation, and I hadn't brought the card to the podium. I sent David a
message, using prearranged cues.

"Now that I have demonstrated to you," I said, "that the claimed advantages
of the affirmative team's proposals are based on faulty assumptions, let me
discuss the potential economic impact of their short sighted plans.  First,
I will turn to noted economic analyst Marshall McConnel to shed some light
on the burden already carried by US tax payers to fund such programs.
Next, I will share with you a prophetic quotation by a former Director of
the US Department of Treasury that clearly explains the disastrous effect
that further deficit spending will have on this country."

Whenever one of us previewed upcoming evidence in this manner, it was a
call to our partner for help.  We would always start by previewing the
evidence we had.  If we said Next I will share,' it meant "Help!  Get me
the card I need.!"

I began reading the McConnel quotation, trying to see if David was getting
me what I really wanted.  I caught a glimpse of his face.  He was staring
at me in disbelief.
  I needed that card.  And I was running out of time.

When I finished reading the McConnel quotation, I held the card up in my
left hand for dramatic effect, while I paraphrased what McConnel had said
and stalled by elaborating on his points.  I held my right hand out toward
David, making it clear I expected him to hand me the card.  It was the only
way I could communicate GIVE ME THE DAMN DEAD TREASURY GUY QUOTE!!'

To my relief, I felt an index card being slipped in my hand.  A quick
glance, and I confirmed that David had given me the right card.  I read the
quotation, summarized my points quickly, and my time was expired.  I stood
there waiting for Brandon, the second affirmative speaker, to question me.

I knew Kettering had taken the bait when Brandon asked seemingly innocuous
questions that almost begged me emphasize the economic expertise of the
former Treasury Director.  I played dumb, and laid it on thick.

When the questioning was done, I sat down and Brandon took the podium.  He
wisely reviewed the affirmative team's proposals quickly and expanded on
their noble purposes.  Next, he discussed my criticisms, methodically
providing evidence that disagreed with my quoted sources.  And then, he
used the New Paradigms quotation, turning my own expert against me.  Sure
enough, the same former Director of the US Treasury was quoted as
expressing deep regret for his role is squashing needed social programs in
order to save a measly few dollars.  For some reason, however, Brandon did
not attempt to attack me personally, as he had David in October.

I found it odd that Brandon hadn't attacked me.  It also seemed odd that he
never gave the date of the New Paradigms Newsletter he referenced.  A basic
rule of evidence requires providing both the name and date of any
publication quoted.  Yet Brandon had only given the name.

Brandon was finishing his Speech, and David was to question him when he was
done.  I wrote David a note, asking him to verify the New Paradigms
publication and request a date.  I also told him to let me handle our
response to the New Paradigms quotation in my rebuttal.  He read the note
and nodded in agreement.

During questioning, Brandon eagerly confirmed The New Paradigms Newsletter
as the source, and he tried to waste David's questioning time by adding in
a lot of unrequested mush about what a respected publication it was.  David
wisely cut him off and asked for the date the article appeared.

Brandon hesitated briefly, and said, "I don't recall the exact date.  I'd
have to check my evidence files to be sure."

"Well, I think you are required to identify the date of the publication,"
David replied, "so please, check your files and answer the question."

Brandon went to his file, and came back with another card moments later.
"The article appeared in the July Newsletter last year," he said.  David
then moved on to other questions.  When the two minutes were up, Brandon
sat down, and David began his speech at the podium.

I must admit that I didn't pay much attention to David's speech, although I
could tell he was doing well - confident and articulate as usual.  The New
Paradigms situation was bothering me.  I knew something wasn't right.
There was something telling me Brandon had screwed up, and that I had been
given an opportunity, but I couldn't quite bring it into my awareness.

I pretended to concentrate on some piece of evidence on the table, but
really, I closed my eyes and tried to ignore everything going on around me.
That was difficult.  After all, I was actually in the State finals, the
auditorium was packed and I had recently embarrassed myself totally by
fainting in front of the entire group.  I blocked those thoughts from my
mind.  I forced myself to focus.

I reviewed all of the events surrounding the New Paradigms quotation from
the beginning.  First, Kettering using it against us in October, then
devising a plan while my father and I ran, then writing to the Edi....  GOT
IT!!!!!!  It hit me like a bolt of lightening.  I knew what I needed to
attack their evidence, and I had it!

I searched for the letter I had received from the Editor of the New
Paradigms Newsletter.  I remembered stashing it in my file in case I
decided to share it with David.  I had not told him about it, however.  The
letter was just where I remembered putting it.  I read it over, confirmed
my memory of its contents, and planned how I would present my attack.  As
Brandon had not used the quotation as an opportunity for personal attack, I
decided to avoid theatrics, well most theatrics at least.  I told myself
just to make the point - hard - leave it, and go on.  No, I thought.  Save
it as the final point in your rebuttal.

I waited my turn.  David finished and did a fine job of giving up no ground
while Sean questioned him.  Then, Sean gave the first rebuttal speech.  I
have to admit he did a good job; not devastating to us, but he was a slick
Debater.  Then, it was time for me to give my rebuttal.

I chose from among our arguments those that seemed to withstand Kettering's
attacks best, and I reviewed them, pointing out the weaknesses of
Kettering's rebuttal.  I attacked the overstated benefits of their
proposals once again.  I attacked the fundamental premises on which
Kettering's proposals were based.  And then, I attacked the economic issue.

"The affirmative team," I said, "has failed to answer the legitimate
questions we have raised regarding the funding of their ill advised
proposals.  Let's review the evidence presented by both sides in today's
Debate.  Other than perpetuating the tax and spend philosophies of many of
today's short sighted politicians, our competitors have offered no creative
ways to fund the ideas they wish to impose on the American public.  My
partner and I, however, have provided several direct quotations from noted
economists who properly warn us about the devastating impact that
uncontrolled deficit spending will certainly have on future generations of
Americans.  The keen observations and sage advice provided the former
Director of the US Treasury is a primary example of the evidence we have
provided."

"But let us consider the affirmative team's response.  First, they have
agreed with us that this noted public servant was an expert in the field of
US economics.  But, they would have you believe that following his long and
distinguished career, dedicated to building a sound economic base that
could support a bright future for our country, he woke up one day and said,
Oops!  I was wrong all those years.  What we need to do is to go deeper
into debt so we can spend more money today.'  To support this preposterous
claim, the affirmative team offers you a quotation from an obscure
publication called the New Paradigms Newsletter. They tell you that in this
Newsletter, in some unidentified volume, the former Director of the US
Treasury supposedly recants his miserly ways from his own deathbed. And
please note, that it was only under direct questioning by my partner that
the affirmative team offered you the date that their remarkable discovery
appeared in print.  And let me remind you of this important date: July of
last year."

I was keyed up, and I had allowed my voice to take on an emotional edge.
Now, I deliberately slowed down and lowered my volume.

"Ladies and gentleman," I continued, "I will be completely candid with you.
When I first heard the Affirmative team use this quotation back in October
of this year, I was perplexed.  Frankly, I couldn't believe my ears.  And,
following some very wise guidance I received, I decided I should read the
full article from which Kettering's quotation is taken.  But, you know
what, I couldn't find it.  No public libraries in the State have it. No
university libraries in the State have it.  And no other periodical,
including all those indexed by the U.S. Library of Congress, seems to have
picked up on this amazing story."

"So, I wrote to the editor of the New Paradigms Newsletter, and I received
back correspondence dated the 16th of this month and written on their own
letterhead.  I would like to read you that correspondence:

     Dear Mr. Young,

     Thank you for your expression of interest in the New Paradigms
Newsletter.  We
     would be most happy to add you to our list of subscribers.

     We write our Newsletter for a very limited audience of the most
forward thinking
     economic philosophers in North America today.  We publish only four
times a
     year: February and March; October and November.  Please remit our
annual
     subscription fee of $185.00 in US currency if you wish to begin
receiving the our
     publication.

     Very Truly Yours,

     Edward Fayheid Smith
     Editor and Publisher


"They only publish ... in February and March; ... October and November.
Not January.  Not April, not May, not June.  And not in July - even though
the Affirmative team tells you they quote from the July issue.

"I will leave you to draw your own conclusions."  My rebuttal time was up,
and I sat down.

I heard the audience start to react.  People were having hushed
conversations throughout the auditorium.  I wasn't sure what they were
saying, but I had gotten their attention.

I looked into the audience where Jim, Sara and Mrs. Weber were sitting.
Jim's fist was half way in the air, and it was obvious he thought I had
delivered a killer punch.  Sara was staring at me with an astounded look,
as if to say "Why didn't you tell us you had that?"  Mrs. Weber sat
quietly, with a Cheshire Cat look on her face.

I finally turned to David.  He smiled broadly, winked at me, and whispered,
"Way to go, Tiger!"

The remaining rebuttal speeches flew by.  Brandon tried to recover by
saying that he had misread the date of the quotation.  He said that July
was actually the date that he and Sean had found the quotation, and he had
misspoke himself in the questioning round.  He said the quotation was
really from the February issue.  His defensive tone and his less than
polished presentation of this rebuttal argument did not engender
credibility.

David's rebuttal speech, the last of the Debate, was perfect.  He
concentrated on the major issues only, reminding the judges of our
strongest arguments, and pointing out Kettering's weakest proposals.  His
only reference to the New Paradigms quotation was in his last words to the
audience:

"And I think it is obvious," he said, "that the credibility of our
opponent's evidence related to the opinions of the former Director of the
US Treasury have been fully addressed in my partner's rebuttal speech."

The Debate was finally over.  Jim, Sara and Mrs. Weber made their way to us
through the crowded auditorium.  There were hugs and congratulations, even
though the winner would not be announced for twenty minutes.

I let myself hug David in public.  We kept it as platonic as possible, but
it felt wonderful to feel his closeness.

"You were fantastic!!!!" he told me.  "Why didn't you tell me about the
letter," he asked.

I told him the truth.  "I forgot," I said.

Despite the fact that we all thought David and I had taken the round, we
concluded that Kettering would take first place.  Jim and Sara were
convinced that they had lost.  No one, including Mrs.  Weber, thought that
the judges would take the title away from Kettering on speaker points.  We
all decided, however, that 2nd in the State was damn good and something to
be very proud of.  Our spirits were high as we impatiently waited for the
judges to finish their work and for the officials to make the awards.

About 15 minutes later, one of the officials came and got Mrs. Weber.  She
left and came back shortly.

"They want to see your letter from the Mr. Fayhied Smith," she said.

This was highly unusual.  In fact, I had never even heard of a judge asking
to see evidence.  But I was happy to oblige.  I opened my case, pulled the
letter and gave it to Mrs. Weber.  She left to take it to the judges.

"This is great," David declared.  "They must have believed you when you
called Kettering a bunch of cheaters."

"I never said that," I replied.

"You know what I mean," David said.  "They're questioning Kettering and
that can't be bad for us."

"Maybe they're questioning me," I countered.

David looked annoyed and said, "Joel, the Debate's over.  You can stop
arguing every point someone makes."

Mrs. Weber rejoined us in the auditorium, and she had no additional
information.  She said that she was told she could pick up the letter after
the awards ceremony.  Then we waited nearly twenty more minutes.  It was
totally nerve wracking.  Finally, the officials began their procession down
the isles and up to the stage.  The asshole took the microphone.

"Ladies and Gentlemen," he said.  We apologize for the delay in starting
the awards program.  As you all know, these State finals were . . . unique,
and the judges needed to take additional time in performing thier very
important duties."

"With no further delay," he continued, "I will announce this year's top
ranking High School Debate Teams.  In third place, please congratulate the
fine team from Reese City!"  The Reese City team came forward, and the
audience clapped loudly.

I was glad Reese City had come in third, obviously knocking Country Day
into 4th place.

The official started to announce 2nd place.  I almost stood up before he
read our names.

"In second place," he said, "the great team from East Pointe Country Day!
Country Day, please come forward!"

There was a dramatic pause and a few gasps in the crowd.  It took the
audience several seconds to begin their applause for Country Day.  Everyone
was wondering how this could be.  They were not in the finals!  How could
they take 2nd?  I could tell the Country Day team was thinking this same
thing, for they appeared very unsure that they should go to the stage for
the 2nd place trophy. But of course, they did.

David put his arm around me, and he whispered, "What the hell is
happening?"
  I just shook my head.  I was feeling weak, and I appreciated being able
to lean into him.

"And now," the offical said, "the moment we have all been waiting for - the
moment we name this year's number one Debate team in the entire
State..........................Detroit Joliet!!!!!!!!!

The room erupted in applause, and I heard Mrs. Weber scream out loud.  She
was jumping up and down, grabbing, hugging and just going wild.  So were
Jim and Sara.  And David and I were standing, locked in a tight embrace.

"We did it.  We did it!," he said.  "Oh my God, we did it!"

It took quite a while before our excitement ebbed enough for us to mount
the stage and accept the award.  We grabbed Mrs. Weber and pulled her to
the stage with us.  She resisted at first, then gave in.

I'll remember forever the emotional high I was on, standing on the stage,
as Mrs. Weber was handed the huge trophy reading "State Champions."

Comments can be directed to joelyoung120@hotmail.com