Jump to content

robllawrence

Member
  • Content Count

    1232
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Everything posted by robllawrence

  1. I'm working on a new system to collaborate on files. Basically, it's a private lab forum, with an FTP system for evidence sharing. I have some former national qualifiers to work as "lab leaders" who will send full text files to lab members to cut once research assignments are made, and also to help with compiling evidence into "files." I'm looking for campers, as well as input from coaches on free content for the "learning" side of things. Basically, I'd like anything that would help people at a debate camp like how to cut files, or how to plan for the neg block...just anything useful. All of the files "donated" will be put in the free area for anyone to view.
  2. Boy, did they get into the wrong profession. I made more money as a bartender than I ever did as I public school teacher. And I didn't need to go to school for four years first. It was also perfectly acceptable to smoke, drink and curse on the job (not that I DID any of those things), but that's another issue.
  3. http://debatelinks.com/links -- has about 250 links right now. I'd also consider the customised search engine through google. Not hard to make and it focuses the articles quite a bit, (not so much junk.) I have one and Tomak has one if you want to take a look. (I have a text list of my links you are welcome to have if you want to make a similar one.) Once you get moved to the new domain, I'd be glad to list your site in my links section.
  4. I love the West Wing. I actually own every episode and I've seen them all numerous times. I would totally vote for Jed Bartlet although, not so much on Sheen. I know it's easier to make someone look, I don't know, reasonable and intelligent with a script and countless takes, but there aren't many politicians on TWW from either party that I wouldn't choose over the current administration. And that includes the guy who wanted to remove "North" from the name of North Dakota.
  5. Here's one possible way to go on an AIDS case with the new funding: 15 July 2004 More Health Care Workers Needed to Combat AIDS By Charlene Porter Washington File Staff Writer --U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator Randall Tobias called the lack of human capacity the major challenge to success of programs to deliver anti-retrovirals to the developing world. "Ignoring those limitations means wasting money and failing to solve problems," said Tobias in a keynote speech July 14. "All the AIDS drugs in the world won't do any good if they're stuck in warehouses with no place to go to actually be part of the delivery of treatment to those in need."-- HIV Medicine Association World AIDS Day: Experts Call for Support for Health Care Workers Worldwide November 29, 2006 "Antiretroviral therapy is making a tremendous impact in saving lives around the world, but it doesn't do any good to have medications available if there's no one to deliver them," said HIVMA Chair Daniel R. Kuritzkes, M.D. "The President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has made admirable progress providing care and treatment to the developing world, but the only way to sustain a lasting legacy is to ensure an adequate well-trained health care workforce." Shooting from the hip (I'm only a few articles in myself) my story would be that the PEPFAR funds are really just a huge subsidy to US pharmaceutical companies. Without new health care workers and staving off the brain drain and HC worker infections, blah blah blah. I don't know how much of the PEPFAR funds do that though. Edit: here's some more. NYT Playing to the Crowd: A Real Plan for AIDS June 1, 2007 Now, with the first five-year program set to expire next year, the president has proposed a five-year extension with almost twice the financing — $30 billion over fiscal years 2009 to 2013. The administration estimates that this, when added to the first five-year effort, would bring the total number of people treated to 2.5 million people, prevent 12 million new infections and provide care for more than 12 million people. This is a welcome commitment, but nowhere near what’s needed to curb the widening epidemic. An estimated 40 million people worldwide are infected with H.I.V., the vast majority in the developing world. Most of the millions already sick have no access to treatment. The president’s program remains burdened by restrictions requiring that up to 7 percent of the funds be spent on abstinence programs and by Congressional restrictions against providing clean needles to injecting addicts. But the primary need is billions of dollars a year in additional funding. Center for Health and Gender Equity May 30, 2007 Bush Efforts on AIDS will Fail Without New Policies Women’s Health and Rights Group Calls for Lifting Restrictions on Prevention Efforts and Real Commitments to Women’s Rights --Washington, DC—In response to President Bush’s call for a U.S. investment of an additional $30 billion for global HIV and AIDS programs over the next 5 years, the Center for Health and Gender Equity (CHANGE) called on Congress to remove onerous restrictions on prevention funding under the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) that are grossly undermining efforts to stem the spread of HIV. “Increased funding for global AIDS is a necessary but far from sufficient response to the global AIDS epidemic,” said Jodi Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Health and Gender Equity. “No amount of money will make up for the ideologically driven prevention policies now promoted by PEPFAR. Today, unprotected sex is the single greatest factor in the spread of HIV worldwide, and is responsible for 80 percent of new infections in sub-Saharan Africa, but the Bush Administration insists on funding abstinence-only programs that have now been discredited by the Institute of Medicine, the Government Accountability Office, and numerous independent research studies. U.S. citizens have the right to know that their tax dollars are being spent on the best and most effective programs aimed at slowing the spread of HIV while promoting the basic human rights of all persons.”
  6. I highly recommend Doris Kearns Goodwin's biography of Johnson to anyone who wants a look into the man. I agree with your assessment of "tragic figure."
  7. Just wanted to add my site to the list. It's still early for me, but the site has about 250 links right now and anyone can add to it using a short form. http://debatelinks.com/links Edit: Also just made something similar, that just searches the links on my site. Not meant to step on toes...I've been meaning to do it for awhile, but I just finished design changes this weekend. If you're interested, I'd be glad to email you a list of URLs to add to yours as well.
  8. What the heck is with this pic of Gonzales from CNN's Political Ticker? After seeing this goofy ass face, I've lost all objectivity about the story.
  9. I thought of that after I posted. Hey, let's come up with a telescope name with the acronym A.L.I.C.E. that we can send to the moon. Now THAT's the way to get some NASA funding.
  10. This reminded me of Herman Wouk's books, "The Winds of War" and "War and Remembrance" which I highly recommend. I don't usually read much "Fiction", but the historical nature makes these notable exceptions.
  11. OK, it's about a month late, but thanks gang. I've been a busy bee lately so I haven't been on in awhile. For the record, I'm 33. 4/6/1974. Two days after Nixon released the Watergate tapes for anyone that wants a benchmark. Alexander the Great had conquered the known world at 33, Jesus had spawned a new religion, Newton had created Calculus and found the moons of Jupiter and Einstein had published his theory of relativity. So I gotta get crackin'.
  12. too lazy to search...does anyone have the dates and a rough schedule for state?
  13. Just thought I'd bump this thread for an "I told you so." Shortly after the election, I claimed in this thread to the dismay of some, "Obviously, I'm not working with Iraqi politicians on a daily basis, but someone is. Someone can say "they ought to be able to do it in x." My guess is that, and it's just a guess, it would be somewhere in the 18 month range. That also happens to coincide with reelection time...not that I'm cynical enough to think they would make a timeline like that...ok, yeah, I am. I bet someone suggests 18 months." In short, the deadline for troop removal would coincide with reelection cycles. The dems in the house just passed a deadline for fall of '08. But then, I was just guessing.
  14. That's very true. We looked at the topic more as a suggestion. However, I still contend that providing potties for homeless people IS a social service. If reducing public urination and defecation isn't a service to society, then what kind of world are we living in? Mostly though, we liked reading the cards...I mean a hotel having to paint the bottom eight feet of the building 6 times in a year...it lead us to ask, "who in the world has the ability to pee eight feet up a wall?" We were somewhat juvenile. The case was filled with innuendo and potty humor. But I digress. Regarding topicality, our strategy was bring it on. We debate this every round (with OUR choice of cases) and you debate this specific violation once in a blue moon. However, I do think that that reputation was earned the previous year (astronomy education for 5th graders on the space exploration topic) and just never went away. I think if any camp had written a toilets case, it would have been viewed as topical, at least as topical as providing mailboxes which WAS written at camp, and was considered practically mainstream. Sucks for you that we did some original research, but that doesn't automatically make it untopical. Again, I digress. By state that year, Matt had a file on it that simply said "Jestice/Lawrence" which was his entire strategy against our case. Which was fine, since we had one that said "Gerber" (he had bounced around partners...I think he debated at one point or other with Bryant, Hocutt, Riggs, and McCormick) against the Job Training Partnership Act. A number of rounds that year came down to who won the coin toss.
  15. If there were, they simply weren't paying attention. But that's not the point. It just used to be sacrosanct. No judgment intended, it's just a different set of expectations. (Actually, we DID break a new case in outrounds at state, but that's just because Matt Gerber finally had our number on topicality after many many attempts. We squeaked out a win at regionals, but we knew our luck was running out. He had planned on going nothing but T and most likely would have beaten us on "services." Ah the joys of hitting the same teams over and over. We ended up running Negative Income Tax because that shafted his other preferred strategy which was multidrug resistant TB, which they ran anyway though it did not link in any way and still somehow beat us. How banning homeless shelters and using the money for direct cash to homeless people results in MORE tuberculosis, I will never know.) Case in point of teams not paying attention...We had been running that toilets case every aff round from the time we finished writing it after the first tournament, everyone knew we ran it and we didn't hide that fact at all. But for some reason, Jenks (Ligget and Shields) still thought we were running Confidential Shelters at districts that year. It turned out to be quite a surprise for them. Beau actually read the first few sentences of that case before dramatically pausing looking at me and saying that he'd decided to change cases...whereupon he began reading the case we had actually been running all year long.
  16. Wow. I remember the good old days when my partner and I would personally beat the crap out of anyone that outed our state strategies. Maybe that's just a "west side" thing though.
  17. I'll QFA the absurd part. But frankly, this is exactly the kind of "debate" I'd expect from mouth breathing knuckledraggers in Wal-mart. It's everything I hate about the non-debate world.
  18. You're absolutely right here. I wasn't actually trying to say that it was the political nature of the speech that made it protected, although the part you have quoted does seem to say that. I was saying that it's the fact that speech is protected (or should be RE Tinker) if it doesn't affect the function of the school. Since I could wear pink hair to express any number of opinions it is expression AND since (I would argue) that expression doesn't affect whether the school can teach me, then it should be protected speech. With regards to the other opinion (and to some extent Tinker as well, as I mentioned) it isn't exactly the direction I'd want to go in front of a school board. Let me make my reasoning more clear here. I wouldn't go in to the school board and say "You have to do this, the Supreme Court says so", I'd go in and use the argumentation of those justices where it suits my needs. The reason for that is that the law, quite frankly, comes down on the other side. As I mentioned, Tinker specifically mentions regulating hairstyle as an acceptable policy of schools to maintain order and discipline. That wouldn't stop me though from using the logic of the decision to try to persuade them that the policy should be abandoned. If, however, this student wanted the fight, then I'd probably skip the board altogether. I'd try to get the principal to change the decision in the school, and when that failed I'd violate the rule and take the punishment and get a lawyer.
  19. You might not want to mention that the Tinker decision also says that there is a difference between armbands, which are strictly for a political statement, and other things that are aspects of school discipline and order...specifically mentioning dress code and hairstyles. However, if it comes up, I'd suggest that there should be a community standard test. Someone coming to school with bright orange hair in 1969 would cause a stir. In 2007, it would get a few giggles at most. In essence, Tinker says that if there isn't a serious threat to the discipline and order of the school, or general functioning of the school, then it's protected speech. So...what if a person colored their hair pink and claimed that it was a political statement in favor of breast cancer funding. Or bright red to support AIDS research. Would that be political speech? If so, then isn't hair color a protected form of expression? I think I might also point out that youth is a time of testing boundaries and general rebellion to authority and that dyeing one's hair is a pretty innocuous way to do that. To some extent, high school is a period of academic experimentation. People are in the process of defining who they are. "Tomorrow we may be doctors, lawyers and school board members and we may not have the social acceptance of having purple hair. Perhaps by allowing us that freedom now, we may become artists, actors and musicians if that is who we decide we want to be." Also, cramping one form of expression only causes people to seek other forms, which may be even less acceptable. ok, good enough. good luck,
  20. Reference Tinker v Des Moines for some good arguments for students having free speech. http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html
  21. I agree with this sentiment completely. Couple of other issues. One, the distinction between this and the touchscreen problem is huge since this would require some sort of identification process, like credit card or SSN/tax ID verification or something. So there IS a record of your vote, unlike a walk in and click system. And that creates the other issue up for discussion which is that now you're vote is linked to your identity, thus risking anonymous voting in the case of a database hack.
  22. I said yes, but not because of nuclear weapons (at least not entirely because of them.) Yes, because the hostage crisis was almost 30 years ago. We tell Israel and Palestine to get over the horrors of IDF troop activity and Hamas suicide bombers and live together in peace and harmony. We have to be able to live with the fact that a country in the world did something bad to us and our people because they don't agree with us. I'm not saying we should consider them an immediate ally. But it's time to at least talk about moving forward with some form of a relationship. Besides, it's in both of our interests. Engagement works better than containment most of the time. By the way, Cross Apply to Cuba. I want a good cigar dammit.
  23. At long last, my schedule and the weather allow for me to come out of retirement to judge. So, I'll be there. Hartney asked me today.
  24. I don't think they'd be counting on winning the deep south. They'd be hoping for big draws in the NE and SW. And yeah, there's racism on those places too, but there are also a lot of people who would go out of their way to prove they aren't. unrelated, but since I'm here: Fox news reported (inaccurately of course) that Obama attended a madrassa when he was 6. Here's Keith Olberman's report on their report: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16770784/ So, I guess it's never too early to start planting the seeds of racism, bigotry and doubt.
×
×
  • Create New...