wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

What argument? I heard no argument- no point of view!!! In fact, my natural reaction was concern for the young man speaking. Is he okay? Does he need a doctor? I mean, where was his breath? The words that emanate from a person's mouth( whether debating, or in casual conversation, etc..) has to be connected to the breath. The thoughts then ride on the breath. Muddled breath, muddled thoughts.I'm sorry, I listened, but all I heard were words,words,words at a rapid pace.

As a coach of a Brooklyn UDL Policy Debate team, I think that Brian did not adequately introduce policy debate in this interview. Policy debaters must read information into evidence as quickly as possible because they must establish the merits of their arguments to the judge. Quionnea was reading quickly; this is a valuable skill within policy debate, urban or not. Following this constructive stage of the debate, speakers must explain why their argument is compelling to the judge. This explanation is the critical portion of policy debate, which is not adequately addressed in Brian's interview. Presidential-style debate is a different animal entirely.

The NY Urban Debate League is a program that focuses on providing opportunities for New York public school students to build skills in research, active listening, public speaking, and leadership. The dismissiveness exhibited by some of the commenters above is disturbing, particularly from past debaters who know the value of reading evidence quickly.

As an avid viewer of presidential debates, I'll take Quionnea and any other UDL debater over Karl Rove any day. The NY State Policy Debate Tournament is this weekend in Albany - please make an effort to support policy debate and the Urban Debate League!

Wow, debaters are just weird people man.
Problem is, while we're all snoozing debaters, from Rove to these kids, are running the government. Man. I bet Spitzer was a great debater. Just the depths of the human spirit.
Horrible. Never heard "I" so many times on your show.

Of course ... censoring makes any 'debate' really difficult.

I couldn't be more disheartened. Once a debater myself, I found nothng encouraging in the demonstration of the students on todya's show. In my day we learned valuabe skills in analizing and reasoning, in reasearching, in thinking on one's feet and in arguing persuasively and eloquently (not speedily and spastically).
The shamelful display on air vaulted me back to my student days where a team I argued against employed just the tactic I reheard this morning, with an additional wrinkle. On cross-x, when I put a question, the opposition's response was delivered at a snail's pace (with the clock running). The judges needed no time to deliberate. The other team lost.

Logic and Eloquence...hallmarks of debating skills. I'm not sure I heard very much of either in this segment.

This is truely one of the more dispiriting discussions I've ever heard on this show. Presumably these kids are amongst the educational "success" stories in our schools. Anybody who thinks debate can encompass music, juggling etc has re-defined the notion of 'debate' utterly beyond any connection to it's widely understood meaning. I don't think I heard the word 'logic' used even once. A logical, consistent, coherent, persuasive argument on different sides (not necessaryily ONLY two) of an issue is what a debate is... or was. I don't know what they're talking about or how it relates to 'debate'.

I think the potential for great debaters is certainly possible in the inner city. Just the other day (I work at an inner city community college in NJ) I was having lunch in the cafeteria and there was a debate going on about men's treatment of women. It was loud, there was A LOT of cursing, but when somebody came in to quiet them down, the professor pointed out that they were making some interesting points but that they needed to do it in a better manner. Seemed to me that their reasoning power could be harnessed and redirected in a more positive manner.

What the hell is debating with pupets and music??

Lincoln is turning in his grave!

I'm all for innovation and doing this different but what I heard was NOT debating.

I don't know what I heard.

They should finish up every one of those rapid statements with "if it doesn't say Micro Machines, it's not the real thing!"

First demonstration sounds like a seizure to me, utterly unlistenable and reminiscent of the "legal copy" at the end of a commercial.

My favorite form of debate is what the presidential candidates employed, listen to the question then utterly ignore it and rant away at whatever topic they choose.

how is speaking in this manner valuable when it's nearly impossible to understand what this high-school kid is saying?

What was that!!!? I thought debate was supposed to be eloquent? Just speaking rapidly is seriously judged?

Kudos to these young people for developing these skills, but, Lincoln-Douglas it ain't! :)