Was just listening to the intelligence squared debate on this topic:
Whether or not you agree with her, it's somewhat fascinating to watch two old men speak patronizingly to Margaret Hoover, and then be subsequently skewered by her.
Why do liberals pick such dopes to represent their side in these debates? They were soundly beaten on the global warming debate as well. When Howard Dean is your star debater, you need a deeper pool to choose from.
EDIT: ok, so I finished the debate and Dean finished well--he actually is a fairly articulate speaker and comfortable in the role, but a little too prone to politicizing things (bringing immigration in on this, for example). My main point was not the outcome however--it was this natural tendency of otherwise enlightened men to talk down to the young woman in the room. Really bizarre.
Whether or not you agree with her, it's somewhat fascinating to watch two old men speak patronizingly to Margaret Hoover, and then be subsequently skewered by her.
Why do liberals pick such dopes to represent their side in these debates? They were soundly beaten on the global warming debate as well. When Howard Dean is your star debater, you need a deeper pool to choose from.
EDIT: ok, so I finished the debate and Dean finished well--he actually is a fairly articulate speaker and comfortable in the role, but a little too prone to politicizing things (bringing immigration in on this, for example). My main point was not the outcome however--it was this natural tendency of otherwise enlightened men to talk down to the young woman in the room. Really bizarre.