I don't care what they say...Vengeance is sweet

I got home at 1:30 today from a three-day super-tiresome speech & debate tournament from Thursday through Saturday. It was at U of O in Eugene. In prelims for Lincoln-Douglass debate I faced two people from Ashland (can you guess who?). That's right, the two guys from Ashland who have beaten me before. One beat me to a quarterfinal round, and one beat me in a final round, both in previous tournaments. I lost to both of them in prelims, and barely scraped up quarterfinals. Needless to say, I was mad. I beat my opponent from Tigard in quarterfinals and moved on to debate in semi-finals. There were three Ashland debaters against me. I faced Nathan, the guy who beat me in finals. I out-debated him since he wasted his last two speeches talking about abuse while I was actually trying to debate. And then, finally, I came up against Alex, a guy who I actually like and is a good debater. It was a good debate, but I pulled ahead with a 2-1 vote, and won Junior LD at U of O. My team was really happy that I had faced down three Ashland debaters (who are infamous for being abusive, debatespeak for cheating). I got a small black brick with gold letters on it as a prize, and a U of O debate t-shirt. Sad prizes, but what they symbolize is the downfall of Ashland monopoly on LD, and vengeance on a once-tyrannical school. I used what I think is my favorite argument I've written so far. (for those who care, the resolution is In the United States, the principle of jury nullification is a just check on government) I argued that since jurors are paid by the government for their services, they are part of the government. Since one branch of the government (in this case the judicial) can't check itself, jury nullification can't be a check on government. None of my opponents could attack that argument effectively, so I won =). Margaret, don't you DARE take that argument.