Jump to content

I_Hate_Policy

Member
  • Content Count

    500
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by I_Hate_Policy

  1. As said earlier in this thread, it's all about how you frame the discussion. Paint a picture for the judge about what debate would be like if the practice-in-question were performed every single round. Make sure you impact it out further than just "it wouldn't be fair" or "not educational". Talk about how it harms competitive equity. When one side has an uneven playing field, debate becomes less about the issues at hand, thus reducing the amount of topic-specific discussion. Additionally, tie in that critical thinking skills are not gained by allowing the practice-in-question to be tolerated, and that critical thinking is the most important lesson we learn from debate. Lastly, stay away from "death of the activity" arguments, because they really just aren't convincing and slightly undermine your credibility.
  2. Federal Election Reform would be sweet. Judging rounds that don't lead to body count debates... I get all excited just thinking about it. I'm not sure if it would be as fun for the debaters, but somehow I think getting away from traditional impact areas would be good for Policy; make it more outsider friendly or something along those lines.
  3. The disad doesn't have to disprove the resolution. It disproves the perticular instance of the resolution. The disad is a reason why the CP is a superior policy option than the plan.
  4. How is this 1 year late? Why not over 20 years late?
  5. The problem with the government guaranteeing clean water is exactly what was stated above, though. When it's free, there is even more waste than in a privatized system. There's problems with either system.
  6. As someone who is from Las Vegas, I feel that I must point out a few errors. First, your analysis that people in Vegas use a crapload of water is true. It just is. However, I find little evidence supporting the claim that Vegas has the highest per capita consumption of water on earth. The site you give makes this claim but has no sources sited or evidence to back it up. Additionally, you claimed that 70% of all water used in Las Vegas is used for golf courses and lawns. That's straight up false. That 70% figure is 70% of all residential areas. Residential usage comprises 59% of total use. Adding that together with the figure of golf course usage, it comes out to 48.3% of all Vegas usage going to lawns and golf courses. Lastly, the mapquest map you show is artificially green. If you zoom in, you'll that the vast majority of Vegas is grey and brown. It's a freaking desert. The map gives everything grey a sort of greenish look for some reason. I think it's the black streets blending with the grey buildings. Now, I won't deny that Vegas-dwellers are a bunch of wasteful retards, but I gotta at least try to defend my town. Very informative overall. It is true that water is very limited and we will soon start to see problems arising.
  7. Chris Rayl, your post was great at detailing the sad history of U.S. wind power, but how is all of this the fault of the Bush White House? Seems like people just don't like wind power.
  8. Perhaps you are mistaking the plan for their advocacy. If the Affirmative is presenting a "critical" framework, then their advocacy could be quite different than their framework, and probably is.
  9. My opinion? Both. Either option here will be topical. Without the resolution specifying beyond "alternative energy incentives", it will be up to the Negative to come up with a solid reason why excluding one of these would be desirable. Although, to be honest, this could very well change from region to region, tournement to tournement, and from the start of the year to the end. Your best bet here is to prepare for both, and see which direction camps take it. I think it will be both. With all that said, it all comes down to what the Aff can win on. If the Aff wins that "incentive to produce" is topical, then it's topical. If the Aff wins that "incentive to use" is topical, then it's topical. Not a very convincing T argument for the Neg to make when it comes to the standards debate. I see no reason why either interp is better/worse than the other. There's that oh so wonderful "in means throughout" definition that forces the Aff to defend incentives to the entire United States. Expect to see this run against Aff's that specify a subset of the United States, such as the Tribes Aff (only on Indian Reservations). I'm always a fan of limiting out plans that are location-specific. Forcing the Aff to defend the entire United States just seems more fair to me. See this thread for additional information. http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=984492
  10. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Sorry. This thread just made me laugh.
  11. I love Hersh's use of, you know, sources.
  12. As long as it lowers my gas prices in the short- to mid- term... Now we just need people to start thinking about 25 years down the road.
  13. Wait, when did McCain pledge to the FEC that he would take Federal funds? That message only mentions a pledge to the American people... So... they're filing a lawsuit... to sue a politician... for lying to the American people?
  14. That's not humidity you're feeling. That's what it feels like to be in an oven... It's the strange sensation of being cooked alive. Have fun all.
  15. Has anyone stopped to consider that many of these charges lack even the remotest shred of evidence for criminal charge, much less impeachement? As we learned in 98-99, these impeachement debates focus around what is thought about the man, and not whether or not there is a case beyond a reasonable doubt against the President's action. Heck, many people still think Clinton was impeached because he had sexual relations with Lewenski, not for lying under oath.
  16. Hilary's campaign debt will be an interesting issue, though. As Clinton's fundraising slacked off due to having so many maxed out donors, it could be a huge challenge for her to pay it all off. Obama could end up helping her out (in exchange for a VP slot?), and thus (possibly) cement party unity, but that would set him back $30 Million, give or take. I really don't think Obama could realistically raise a hundred million in a month. By November, sure, but one month? The author's 3 main points are (a) enthusiasm, ( Hilary's donors, and © donors that have held back. a.) How much more excited can Obama's donors be? And how does that translate into increased donations? He has long had the popular vote and has been recieving consistant funds. This point just doesn't seem well warranted. b.) Somehow, I just can't see Hilary's donors giving to Obama. After many of them maxing out for Hilary, and seeing her campaign crash and burn, the prospect of contributing to Hilary's rival can't be a popular idea. c.) I guess I can understand the prospect of donors who have not yet given donating to Obama, but somehow, I think of these people as the one's who have been actively giving to the DNC. This soft money could definitely give Obama a boost, but the numbers just seem too inflated to be true. Additionally, one of McCain's big issues is campaign financing. If Obama refuses public funding, and therefore out-spends McCain, Old Johnny Boy could paint Obama as trying to buy the election. I could see Obama's increased spending backfiring on him. Just my two cents.
  17. Ah! The answer is clearly revealed now. The fictional literature reference gave it away. Should I post the answer?
  18. If Bush gets impeached and removed (which he won't), you're still left with Cheney.
  19. So how long will I be paying $4.00 a gallon for gas for, and will it go up?
  20. Did the whistler die? (more of a clarification question, I guess) Did the man with the cane die? Was the light source natural or man-made? If natural, did it come from the Sun? Was it a reflection? If man-made, was the source of electricity nearby? If man-made, was it a flashlight?
  21. Somehow, I think Shuman would fit that bill perfectly. The distance problem does arise, though.
  22. Parentetical citation of obscure acronyms would satisfy me just fine
×
×
  • Create New...