Jump to content
mdawgig

Funniest Cross-Xs (Questions, Answers, etc...)

Recommended Posts

Edelman is actually very, very specific and nongeneric. Generic is advocating an alternative like "let being be" or "break through the wall". Edelman's call for eliminating the future through removing ourselves from the possibility of it is pretty specific compared to those things.

 

Oh, and Baudrillard.

 

i don't really know about edelman, i'll trust you because you sound like you do

BUT

what i meant about it being uber-generic is that the link analysis stays the same from aff to aff (they save children, that's bad, judge). As opposed to heidegger or foucault, where you have to do specific analysis on how they're technological thought/biopolitical. But i'm may be/probably am wrong

 

And thanks, i'll probably never get that right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i don't really know about edelman, i'll trust you because you sound like you do

BUT

what i meant about it being uber-generic is that the link analysis stays the same from aff to aff (they save children, that's bad, judge). As opposed to heidegger or foucault, where you have to do specific analysis on how they're technological thought/biopolitical. But i'm may be/probably am wrong

 

And thanks, i'll probably never get that right.

Yes, I think that you are wrong. I think that Edelman requires a lot more articulation on a link/alternative level (especially on an impact level) than your general Fuko/'Digger K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In practice today:

 

Q: How's the weather?

A: How is that related...

Q: Excuse me, this is my CX, I'm asking the questions. How is the weather?

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some kid that had a texas longhorns hat and jacket on: so, i'm basically done asking questions...do you like the texas longhorns?

Me: not particularly....

Him: wrong answer

 

then in his 2AR: my opponent may be winning the round, but he made one key concession - he doesn't like the longhorns. therefore, he's a commie. it's really easy to see, if you like america, you like the longhorns. if you don't like the longhorns, you don't like america, so he's a commie.

 

most hilarious round of my life

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some kid that had a texas longhorns hat and jacket on: so, i'm basically done asking questions...do you like the texas longhorns?

Me: not particularly....

Him: wrong answer

 

then in his 2AR: my opponent may be winning the round, but he made one key concession - he doesn't like the longhorns. therefore, he's a commie. it's really easy to see, if you like america, you like the longhorns. if you don't like the longhorns, you don't like america, so he's a commie.

 

most hilarious round of my life

must not have had too many rounds

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some kid that had a texas longhorns hat and jacket on: so, i'm basically done asking questions...do you like the texas longhorns?

Me: not particularly....

Him: wrong answer

 

then in his 2AR: my opponent may be winning the round, but he made one key concession - he doesn't like the longhorns. therefore, he's a commie. it's really easy to see, if you like america, you like the longhorns. if you don't like the longhorns, you don't like america, so he's a commie.

 

most hilarious round of my life

 

 

Not to knock the boy (being that I am a strong longhorns fan myself), but undying, fanatic college loyalty should best be left outside the round.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
must not have had too many rounds

his 2AR also consisted of an apology to me for wasting my time, rambling about how when he learned about nietzsche he questioned his existence, and saying the judge should vote for him because he looked like george bush

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just yesterday at Evanston:

 

Aff: When will [the benefits from your alternative] happen?

Neg: They happen as soon as we do nothing.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I think that you are wrong. I think that Edelman requires a lot more articulation on a link/alternative level (especially on an impact level) than your general Fuko/'Digger K.

 

Kunzelmen is right, "they save children" is nowhere near the link. Trying to claim the generic "they talk about the future" won't get you anywhere more than saying "they use the state" with Foucault. Edelmen is a far more intricate argument to getting to an impact level than most other Ks I know.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CX of 1AC:

Me: Can you specify exactly how many babies you save.

Them: Our evidence gives no exact number to the amount of babies.

Me: Oh so you dont actually save any babies

Them: Well our Mead evidence indicates that there would be lots of death, so that would include babies.

Me: So if i showed you that no babes would be harmed do i win the impact?

Partner of them: No babies are just one group we isolate that will die. Many other groups will die.

Me: So how many will die in all?

Them: Lots of people will die unless we get this plan passed. Without the plan everybody dies ok the world would be covered in the blood of thousands!. And does this have any importance in this debate.

Me: Why yes it does. it establishes how my K bites you in the ass.

 

Aren't you the 1N silly goose?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q: "So right now are we role playing?"

A: "Yes this is a form of role play(or some other affirmation)"

Q: "So what is the safe word?, next question"

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Q: "So right now are we role playing?"

A: "Yes this is a form of role play(or some other affirmation)"

Q: "So what is the safe word?, next question"

The safe word is "The Gulf War Did Not Take Place" and then high fives all around.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so we're aff, im cxing the 2NC

 

me : 'why are you charging your laptop

'because it has low batteries

'isn't that consuming electricity'

'yes'

'and that contributes to pollution,which kills infants'

'kinda'

 

 

-we proceed to unplug their laptops and ask our judge to vote for us for inround activism

 

thank god the judge was half asleep and stoned, otherwise......

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

getting c-x'ed on the aff

we claimed in round activism

 

them: "how are you the only one getting *mumble* solvency when we are all doing *mumble* stuff, and umm...why?

me: wait, que? (i was really tired and didn't realize i didn't actually say "excuse me?")

them: comense to speak spanish

i eventually phased back in and figured out the question

 

lesson: white guy speaking spansih to a spanish girl is appaently misleading :/

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CXing the neg: Partner: What are your warrants for Bataille being falsifiable? Neg: We lose on Bataille all the time.

  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This was at double octos at Logan. Neg ran a states CP, part of my aff ratifies a treaty.

 

C-X of 1NC

 

Me: How can the states pass the plan when the constitution explicitly bans them from ratifying treaties?

1N: Uh, yeah they can, do have any evidence that says they can't?

Me: Yeah, I take AP Government. Article I of the constitution says Congress is the only body with the jurisdiction to ratify treaties.

1N: So we're supposed to assume you're not lying and go with what you claim to have learned in a government class?

Me: Dude, I have a 97% in that class, and any idiot who's taken government knows that.

 

So my partner makes the argument it's not constitutional to have the states do it.

 

The 2NC then gets up and says, "Noooooo, they never read any evidence that says that, make them prove it."

 

Coincidentally, we happen to be in a government classroom. So grabbed a government text off the bookshelf.

 

My CP flow in the 1AR started with me screaming, "I WIN! SECTION I, ARTICLE 10 - No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation" and then slamming the book on the floor.

 

The CP, obviously, was missing from the 2NR.

 

 

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha wow dude. That is the most hilarious thing from debate i've ever heard haha.

 

this past friday we had our district tournament, we were the first seed so we had 6's, and in the last round we were neg and they ran nuclear so we ran T on how its not renewable because uranium will run out. they gave a counter definition of "renewable is something that can be renewed or wont run out, and is not finite." i get up in next speech and say their CD supports ours blah blah blaw we win(you know the drill.) so in their last speech the chick gets up and says, in a pissed off voice (lol) "my partner already said it is renewable and thats all i'm going to say about it."....................................we proceded to laugh our asses off along with the judge haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This was at double octos at Logan. Neg ran a states CP, part of my aff ratifies a treaty.

 

C-X of 1NC

 

Me: How can the states pass the plan when the constitution explicitly bans them from ratifying treaties?

1N: Uh, yeah they can, do have any evidence that says they can't?

Me: Yeah, I take AP Government. Article I of the constitution says Congress is the only body with the jurisdiction to ratify treaties.

1N: So we're supposed to assume you're not lying and go with what you claim to have learned in a government class?

Me: Dude, I have a 97% in that class, and any idiot who's taken government knows that.

 

So my partner makes the argument it's not constitutional to have the states do it.

 

The 2NC then gets up and says, "Noooooo, they never read any evidence that says that, make them prove it."

 

Coincidentally, we happen to be in a government classroom. So grabbed a government text off the bookshelf.

 

My CP flow in the 1AR started with me screaming, "I WIN! SECTION I, ARTICLE 10 - No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation" and then slamming the book on the floor.

 

The CP, obviously, was missing from the 2NR.

We kept a pocket Constitution in our tub specifically for this purpose. It was particularly helpful when one team cited the 28th Amendment as justification (though I forget what for).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im novice and it was at state quals it went something like

 

us neg. 2and a half mins of questioning cellulose ethanol

they didn't sayanything new and then me

 

"does ur plan ever consider women"

them: " umm no not really"

 

 

i was trying to link to impact (opresses womens rights)

p.s. both judges were women it was kinda funny they got mad i think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I am wasting time with no more questions to ask but want my partner to have the prep:

 

1) Me: Can you believe it's not butter?

Him: I can.

Me: Why are you so boring?

 

2) Me: How was your day?

Her: Fine

Me: Can you define fine?

Her: Adequate, ordinairy.

Me: How different is ordinairy from adequate?

Her: Moderately different.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CXing the neg: Partner: What are your warrants for Bataille being falsifiable? Neg: We lose on Bataille all the time.

 

Dan Charles.

  • Downvote 1

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...

×
×
  • Create New...