Jump to content
mdawgig

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

Recommended Posts

If they said something like, "in a world of fiat, our plan would be passed immediately" it would sound a lot less stupid.

It's the "immediately" part that's the problem

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the "immediately" part that's the problem

I'm not saying that it isn't stupid, cause believe me I know it is. But if they used "fiat" it would at least sound not AS stupid at that particular moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that it isn't stupid, cause believe me I know it is. But if they used "fiat" it would at least sound not AS stupid at that particular moment.

 

pains.jpg

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging novice rounds:

 

Q: "When was the embargo put in place?"

A: "I dunno, probably like the 90's."

 

Q: "Can you explain your china advantage?"

A: "Well, china is becoming the hegemony..."

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me as neg vs. a team running a environment advantage w/ BioD impact.

 

Q: Can you explain to me how animal extinction would cause human extinction?

A: I don't see how that's relevant.

Q: Biodiversity isn't relevant to your plan?

A: It has nothing to do with it.

 

We won.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q: What does the fox say?

A: Look, could you just like... ask why we're topical or something?

That didn't happen.

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really a CX question but happened when one of my teammates was debating another team who knew nothing about Ks -

 

"Existence comes before ontology."

Edited by BwO
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really a CX question but happened when one of my teammates was debating another team who knew nothing about Ks -

 

"Existence comes before ontology."

Well, even if it has no weight in argumentation, at least it's sort of true. Can't really study existence without existence.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, even if it has no weight in argumentation, at least it's sort of true. Can't really study existence without existence.

 

I see your logic...and I raise you [insert French or German philosopher here]

Props to all of our favorite ivory tower authors!

 

Q: Are children the future?

A: Yes, yes they are.  They are the only hope for a better tomorrow

 

This was against a breastfeeding aff - the order was one off - Edelman + Zizek

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our JV team getting cross-xed in the finals round that they won -

 

Q: "Why are W visas better than the ag jobs bill?"

A: "Well the W visas... don't increase the male rape stigma."
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they also ran t substantial of which was the real reason we lost to

"of which was the real reason we lost to"

"which was the real reason we lost to of"

 

I try not to be a grammar Nazi too often, but that is 2 more prepositions than you need

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Our JV team getting cross-xed in the finals round that they won -

 

Q: "Why are W visas better than the ag jobs bill?"

A: "Well the W visas... don't increase the male rape stigma."

 

well they DON'T

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My cross-ex of the 1NC:

(We read Cuban embargo aff and they had read a Bioterror turn)

 

It was already pretty obvious they didn't know what they were reading.

 

Q: So, how does lifting the embargo leads to bioterrorism?

A: Our evidence said it does

 

Q: Sorry, could you explain how, in your own words?

A: It just does

 

Q: Okay... what is Bioterrorism, in your own words?

A: I AM NOT A DICTIONARY!

 

Needless to say, we won that round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worst question ever. We're running an affirmative that says cut useless weapons and use the money for Mexican Education (and NOBODY runs a competent T or an Extra T), and the 2NC's up for questions.

 

"Can you prove that airplanes that can't fly are useless?"

 

"Yes. They are airplanes. AIRplanes. It's kinda their purpose."

 

"Do you have a card?"

 

"...We needed one?"

 

"So no? No further questions."

 

Proceeded to flood 1NC with about 9 new arguments based on airplanes that can't fly are not useless because we don't have cards. Never said how they're useful, though. At all. Argument got shredded later, but this was not a throwaway to salvage a win, apparently. This was this girl's ace-in-the-hole, apparently. She thought this would actually work. It's become a running gag in mock debates since to ask about some inane common sense aspect of the debate, then demand proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worst question ever. We're running an affirmative that says cut useless weapons and use the money for Mexican Education (and NOBODY runs a competent T or an Extra T), and the 2NC's up for questions.

 

"Can you prove that airplanes that can't fly are useless?"

 

"Yes. They are airplanes. AIRplanes. It's kinda their purpose."

 

"Do you have a card?"

 

"...We needed one?"

 

"So no? No further questions."

 

Proceeded to flood 1NC with about 9 new arguments based on airplanes that can't fly are not useless because we don't have cards. Never said how they're useful, though. At all. Argument got shredded later, but this was not a throwaway to salvage a win, apparently. This was this girl's ace-in-the-hole, apparently. She thought this would actually work. It's become a running gag in mock debates since to ask about some inane common sense aspect of the debate, then demand proof.

 

Hey, hey, hey! Don't you know airplanes are just submarines that didn't make it?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Novice CX

"What is biodiversity?"

"It means lots of bios"

 

I rolled around the floor laughing for a good five minutes unrelated: that kid does PF now

Edited by fromthemitten
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were running our OOO embargo aff last tournament and every CX went something like this: 

 

"Wait a minute... So, you're telling me that your plan has the Constitution lift the Cuban Embargo?" 

"Yeah" 

 

"Uhh... How can the constitution lift the Embargo?"

"Well the constitution is the highest law in the land, has its own sense of agency, and we have this magical thing called fiat." 

 

"So your saying the constitution is alive?"

"That's one way of putting it." 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were running our OOO embargo aff last tournament and every CX went something like this: 

 

"Wait a minute... So, you're telling me that your plan has the Constitution lift the Cuban Embargo?" 

"Yeah" 

 

"Uhh... How can the constitution lift the Embargo?"

"Well the constitution is the highest law in the land, has its own sense of agency, and we have this magical thing called fiat." 

 

"So your saying the constitution is alive?"

"That's one way of putting it." 

 

o3 embargo... wh...... how...

Edited by georgebushsdogpaintings
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

o3 embargo... wh...... how...

 

Gotta Orientate your focus to embracing the Ontological agency of Objects like the constitution

 

(Just kidding, I have no idea how this would work)

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

definitely the most interesting thing ive heard in round was the "we should voluntarily exterminate the human race" counterplan with evidence from how.com and scientificamerica.com that was read to my multilat and sustainable ag advantages

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

definitely the most interesting thing ive heard in round was the "we should voluntarily exterminate the human race" counterplan with evidence from how.com and scientificamerica.com that was read to my multilat and sustainable ag advantages

Run with like a deep ecology/anthro argument accepting extinction or even encouraging it could probably be legit. 

Edited by CrypticKitten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta Orientate your focus to embracing the Ontological agency of Objects like the constitution

 

(Just kidding, I have no idea how this would work)

You know, that's probably pretty much it, to be honest. I'd love to see the aff though, does anyone konw if it's on the wiki?

Edited by dancon25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not disclosed on the wiki but there is a version of it in the OOO Cuba Embargo Aff thread under evidence trading

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...