Bit Cloud 1 Report post Posted December 4, 2005 What beats this case? I hit it in Sems, and threw everything in my tubs that remotely applied to it that case, and still lost 3-0. Whats the killer arg. that takes this case down? Maybe an idea for a disad? I am truly stumped because its clearly squirrely, and I can't touch it. Please help, thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IwantRamen 163 Report post Posted December 4, 2005 it doesn't sound like you didn't have anything to say; it sounds like you were beaten. however, if you're asking about what links, i think any old detention links will work. run an agent CP. Ks always work. better luck next time Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bit Cloud 1 Report post Posted December 4, 2005 No what I had was a generic, Human Rights Promotion = China War Disad, a Courts Disad and T substantial. We simply had no evidence against Child Immigrants. Are there any Disads out there agaisnt Child Immigrants? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IwantRamen 163 Report post Posted December 4, 2005 oh you mean specific immigrant minors links? look in some case negs. i'm sure theres an immigrant minor neg out there somewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hong Kong Phooey 506 Report post Posted December 4, 2005 what was the plan text? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lydiajm332 17 Report post Posted December 4, 2005 I heard this case a few tournaments ago. I always thought that ageism and terrorism would be a fun strat just b/c their answers on terrorism will eff up the ageism flow for them. Just an opinion, and as with all strats there are some flaws. -Jessica Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
movingonup 678 Report post Posted December 4, 2005 No what I had was a generic, Human Rights Promotion = China War Disad, a Courts Disad and T substantial. We simply had no evidence against Child Immigrants. Are there any Disads out there agaisnt Child Immigrants? those are pretty bad arguments. hr promo -> china war is a horrible link story what courts disad? hit me on aim mafia debater and i can get you an imm minors neg file. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bit Cloud 1 Report post Posted December 5, 2005 PLAN Plan Plank One: Mandates The United States federal government will pass the Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act of 2005. Plan Plank Two: Enforcement Enforcement will be through the Department of Health and Human Services as specified in the Act. Plan Plank Three: Funding Funding will be through normal means. Plan Plank Four: Intent All affirmative speeches shall serve to clarify legislative, executive, and judicial intent. thats the plan text. Yes, i agree that my args were terrible, but like I said it was all we had. The courts disad was court overflow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thedowned 6 Report post Posted December 5, 2005 Here's a couple strats for you 1. T- detain War on Terror Court legitamacy Rule of Law and then there are tons of solvency deficits that you can find in any immigration case neg. 2. if they claim that hidden racism type thing- go one off: Farley K, it will destroy them if you argue the link debate the right way. 3. Lacan- hey, it works Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gary Busey 1453 Report post Posted December 5, 2005 lacan=bad strat. run eight minutes of agamben. post plan the refugee status still exists. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teeitup 9 Report post Posted December 5, 2005 Specific DA's that Apply are: Foster Care DA- Saying immigrant children will over burden foster care, causing the immigrants to be sent to prison Gang DA- Saying that children who come to America often follow their families and join gangs, regardless of the living situation. Also, Court Clog like a mo' fo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2leftfeet 9 Report post Posted December 8, 2005 Rights Malthus all day. YOu will win every time Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gcsdebate 3 Report post Posted December 8, 2005 there is no way to win every time maybe in your world but not the real one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2leftsocks 10 Report post Posted December 8, 2005 its possible to win all the time its just not very often. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hrafnaugr the Wordplainer 10 Report post Posted December 14, 2005 We hit a case along the same lines (still immigrant children, only using the Children's Rights Convention or some shit in the plan text), and T'd the hell out of that bitch, on decrease, saying that the government will just shunt the kids into immigration courts for any number of technical violations, thus not decreasing any de facto authority. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WGLF 516 Report post Posted December 14, 2005 THE CASE SOUNDS PRETTY AGEIST TO US. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The End 44 Report post Posted December 16, 2005 Run a CP that says, Open the Border. GEt some NAFTA advantages and solve for all the immigrants not just the children. The aff would never see it coming. They would have no evidence. All you need to do is get the evidence and you could win easily. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2leftsocks 10 Report post Posted December 17, 2005 that was so j-mac's idea. COPYRIGHT. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites