Jump to content

birdwing7

Member
  • Content Count

    2128
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by birdwing7

  1. The point of the thread was that I really don't know whether Limbaugh was being sarcastic (I still don't). I never listen to Limbaugh, and don't know how to read him.
  2. Of course you're right. But I think plans can topically remove both personnel and materiel. Tanks and airplanes and guns and bullets and TNWs are part of the U.S. military presence, aren't they?
  3. Was he joking? Think Progress took him seriously. Ann Althouse says it was clear he was joking. I can't force myself to go back through his show to listen for myself. Can anyone tell me if he was joking?
  4. I don't think it's either effects or extra topical. Plan text removes the troops, not the tanks. But without the troops, the tanks have no (dis)utility.
  5. birdwing7

    PECs

    I agree that plan-plus counterplans are bad counterplans. I also agree that ban the plan counterplans are bad counterplans. But I don't think "exclude country X" is necessarily a bad counterplan.
  6. birdwing7

    PECs

    I disagree. A plan inclusive counterplan, in my view, is plan plus. It includes the entire plan, plus something else. A plan exclusive counterplan is plan minus. It is the plan less something. Of course, such labels are unstable and subject to different definitions.
  7. birdwing7

    PECs

    I like a good plan exclusive counterplan. I seem to recall they were popular on the Africa topic. Plan: The USFG should provide X to sub-Saharan Africa. Counterplan: The USFG should provide X to sub-Saharan Africa, except to Somalia. Net Benefit: Aid to Somalia is bad.
  8. But don't specific weapons systems, like tanks, require specialized forces? If a type of tank is removed from Iraq, for example, I think the individuals in the tank unit go with the tanks (although I'm not positive about that). Of course, I generally think almost anything is topical.
  9. Thanks for this thread, Greg, and particularly for the article. I do not pretend to scholarship on this issue, but one metaphor I find helpful is Christ as advocate. By willingly taking upon himself our sins, he has the right to plead for the penitent before the bar of justice. I also think of the atonement as extending far beyond the forgiveness of sin. Christ has suffered on our behalf, not just sin, but every manner of pain, injury, oppression, privation and embarrassment. In a way I do not understand, his suffering can salve our feelings, not just of guilt, but of illness, inadequacy and the pain of abuse. Edit: You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to TheGreatInstigator again.
  10. I believe nuclear weapons have specially trained personnel to handle them. If you withdraw the personnel, I think it's reasonable that the weapons come with them. Just as if you closed a naval base, the ships would also come home.
  11. As I say, I am not at the ramparts opposing tort reform. It just seems to me that the Michigan approach might be better than caps. It sounds a lot like the workers' compensation approach (for good or ill). Edit: I have now read the article you linked to, and it troubles me. First, Dr. English practices in Atlanta. Georgia passed tort reform five years ago. "In 2005, the Georgia Legislature passed comprehensive medical liability reform that included $250,000 caps on punitive damages and $350,000 caps on noneconomic damages. Since then, the average number of medical malpractice claims has decreased by 39 percent, from more than 1,128 in 2004 to 683 in 2008. Additionally, professional liability insurance rates for physicians in the state have decreased 18 percent since the reforms were enacted." http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_94/ma_congressional_relations/43541-1.html If tort reform is so effective, why is Dr. English still practicing defensive medicine? Do we need additional tort reform that Georgia did not enact? If so, what? I'm left wondering if Dr. English is so risk averse that he will practice defensive medicine unless all malpractice claims are eliminated. Second, I don't think that a neurologist's defensive medicine statistics are necessarily applicable to all of America's doctors. But I will say that, when I watch House, I often think "there's no way the insurance company is going to pay for that test".
  12. There has been substantial discussion of tort reform on these threads in the past. I thought this article was interesting: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=political_malpractice I'm not necessarily against caps as tort reform, but the University of Michigan approach seems to be one worth considering.
  13. Interesting piece in Newsweek. http://www.newsweek.com/id/233942 And Lomborg's response to Friel's book: http://www.lomborg.com/dyn/files/basic_items/118-file/BL%20reply%20to%20Howard%20Friel.pdf
  14. I think Sun Country was about $1,100 last year (including room and board).
  15. Perhaps I didn't explain the plan correctly, or I'm misunderstanding your arguments. Plan would be to stop covert action. Wouldn't that make the "non-covert action counterplan" and the plan pretty much the same thing?
  16. I don't think you would argue any perception based advantages. Part of the point would be that politics disadvantages would be difficult to link. I'm not sure why it would be extra-topical. Plan: The USFG should decrease its military and/or police presence in X by removing all covert operatives from that country. Are you suggesting the plan must remove all military and police presence from a country in order to be topical?
  17. The topic paper discusses the idea that the topic should be written to discourage "decrease covert activities" affirmatives. But I don't think the topic discourages them at all. Thoughts?
  18. I miss Tomak's contributions to this site.
  19. I think a "re-direct troops to country X" case is susceptible to a close all bases/non-intervention counterplan. 1AC forecloses the "do both" perm. It's true the 1AC acts as a disadvantage to the counterplan, but I think a negative strategy of :45 seconds of T and the counterplan would be hard to beat.
  20. Perm. They are topical, good cases.
  21. Sorry, I'm not familiar with this year's college topic. But I would guess the reason college teams are running Japanese prolif and TNW is that they are good cases.
  22. Remove U.S. tactical nuclear weapons from Turkey. http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/the-status-of-us-nuclear-weapons-turkey Turkish politics: http://www.basicint.org/gtz/gtz11.pdf Turkey key to nuclear disarmament: http://www.ploughshares.org/news-analysis/blog/turkey%E2%80%99s-nuclear-crossroads-0
  23. Withdraw troops from Japan equals Japanese prolif. Japanese prolif good.
  24. birdwing7

    MWC 4-0

    I agree with you about geography and TV markets. I'm not sure what you're saying about academics. I don't think some of the Big 10 schools (or Missouri) are better academically than Air Force, BYU or Utah. Of course, Air Force and BYU are not research institutions, if that's what you mean.
×
×
  • Create New...