Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
artie

State Disclosures

Recommended Posts

Begging my point even more that you will and have said some repugnant shit in a debate round with absolutely no thought as to how what you say will affect others...way to go Tommy......hard time believing it's just out of irony...

 

Bryan it's not like you've never ran anything that can be considered repugnant or anyone else on the circuit. For example, Nick and Katie run kill the terrorist, (Not that anything is wrong with that, im just proving a point)and you didn't say anything about them. why don't you just leave tommy alone, this "Lets all bash tommy" crap is getting old. It doesn't make you look cool or smart...just like an ass, who has nothing better to do with his time, than to make fun of highschool kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bryan it's not like you've never ran anything that can be considered repugnant or anyone else on the circuit. For example, Nick and Katie run kill the terrorist, (Not that anything is wrong with that, im just proving a point)and you didn't say anything about them. why don't you just leave tommy alone, this "Lets all bash tommy" crap is getting old. It doesn't make you look cool or smart...just like an ass, who has nothing better to do with his time, than to make fun of highschool kids.

 

First off what did i ever read that was repugnant?

Second Nick and Katie dont read "kill the terrorists" that is a joke about there aff.

Third I am only bringing this up because i dont like the way oklahoma debate is going, I dont claim to be cool or smart from what I say I am just posting my opinion of how i feel stacy. I see no reason why you posted what you posted except to just be mean. I am not trying to be mean to tommy but I disagree with what he runs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First off what did i ever read that was repugnant?

Second Nick and Katie dont read "kill the terrorists" that is a joke about there aff.

Third I am only bringing this up because i dont like the way oklahoma debate is going, I dont claim to be cool or smart from what I say I am just posting my opinion of how i feel stacy. I see no reason why you posted what you posted except to just be mean. I am not trying to be mean to tommy but I disagree with what he runs.

 

Why is Tommy supposedly representative of Oklahoma debate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok seriously.. everyone, stop it. this is for case disclosure, not for like.. arguing about morality of arguments.. at the point at which debate is a "game" you shouldnt worry about arguments that are ran.. just beat them.. whether its racial profiling good or racial profiling bad you should have answers.. etc etc... so dude, cut the junk and lets get back to the threads meaning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you debated in high school for starters.

 

but anyways,

a) i DON'T represent oklahoma debate. In fact, i am the opposite of most oklahomian debaters.

 

B) why IS racial profiling such a bad stance? Bryan, this is shit that is really debated in congress everyday. Actual people, people that WE voted for, defend this whole-heartedly(sp). What we defend is no more offensive than anything else. We just allow for better debates than most cases.

im not going to get involved, but your b point is horrible logic. "alot of people believe it" is not an actual defense of the belief. alot of people in germany believed jewish people should be exterminated, does that make the belief valid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok this is my last post in this thread if you want to continue this discussion lets start a new thread otherwise lets let it die

 

I have not just selected out tommy as the representitive of oklahoma debate I have made arguments aginst the way the community is heading and used him as an example. second The people in congress that support racial profileing would NEVER get my vote. just because it is happening in real life doesnt mean we should support it. tommy your argument gets you nowhere. alos in tommy you probably know nothing about my debate career in high school and if you did you would know nothing i ran was repugnant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A note on Yost's case. I am pretty sure that Shapiro would be pissed that you use him as an internal link to Capitalism good.

 

I'm pretty sure Lewis and Korten would be pissed too... what's your point? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Contention 3 – It’s Capitalism!

 

The free market is key to space exploration and colonization – it has the ideals, talent and the money

 

Zey, 1998

(Michael Zey, professor management in the School of Business Administration at Monclair State University and Executive Director of the Expansionary Institute. Seizing the Future, p. 114)

 

Space colonization is key to human survival—asteroid collisions prove extinction is coming

 

Carreau, 2002

(Mark Carreau, space reporter for the Houston Chronicle. The Houston Chronicle, Section A, pg. 1; “Beyond Earth: Space study seen as key to survival.” October 19, 2002. l/n)

 

Capitalism is key to stop global economic decline

 

Korten, 1999

(David C. Korten, Professor at Harvard Business School, regional advisor on development management to the U.S. Agency for International Development. The Post-Corporate World, p. 282)

 

Economic collapse leads to neocolonial and nuclear wars

 

Lewis, 1998

(Chris H. Lewis, professor of American Studies at University of Colorado at Boulder. The Coming of Scarcity, p. 56)

 

Growth leads to nanotechnology which will improve quality of life

 

Zey, 1998

(Michael Zey, professor management in the School of Business Administration at Monclair State University and Executive Director of the Expansionary Institute. Seizing the Future, p. 27)

 

Nanotechnology solves death and makes immortality possible because of cellular reconstruction and contaminant destruction

 

Zey, 1998

(Michael Zey, professor management in the School of Business Administration at Monclair State University and Executive Director of the Expansionary Institute. Seizing the Future, p. 146-147)

 

Protectionism increases the cost of food for developing nations

 

Froning, 2000

(Denise Froning, former trade policy analyst at the Center for International Trade and Economics at the Heritage Foundation. Heritage Backgrounder #1391; “The Benefits of Free Trade: A Guide for Policymakers.” August 25, 2000. http://www.heritage.org/research/tradeandforeignaid/bg1391.cfm)

 

A food price blip would kill billions

 

Tampa Tribune, 1996

(Paul Power, “Grain Shortage Growing Problem.” January 20, 1996. l/n)

 

The plan disrupts national stories of harmony – the acceptance of the immigrant injects ambiguity and diversity in the system, exposing the exclusion of the state

 

Shapiro, 1997(Michael J. Shapiro, professor of political science at University of Hawaii. “Narrating the nation, Unwelcoming the Stranger: Anti-Immigration Policy In Contemporary ‘America.’” Alternatives, Vol. 22, pg. 19)

 

hrmmm... at least they can go for a perm/link turn against cap and state bad ks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Especially when your internal link authors agree with the kritik.

an internal link? who would have heard of such of a thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...