Documents

Fuck Yo Jive Ass Xo Cp

Categories
Published
of 59
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Description
s
Transcript
  Document1 Dartmouth 2012 1 Last printed 10/23/2014 10:02:00 AM 1 FUCK YO JIVE ASS XO CP Ptx theory  Document1 Dartmouth 2012 1 Last printed 10/23/2014 10:02:00 AM 2 Politics DAs Bad They‘re repetitive –    they run the exact same politics shell every round, which doesn‘t give good education for the debaters. They detract from topic focus  –   politics are super-generic, so the negative never needs to read on-case or research ocean policy, which hurts education and is against framer‘s intent.  It moots the resolution  –   the resolution is supposed to be a guide to negative debating as well, they defeat the purpose of having a new resolution each year by always running the same arguments. The ‗should‘ in the resolution means plan is passed in a vacuum –   should means that plan ought   to occur, not that it will, so we‘re eff  ectively just debating over the plan, not what may occur while plan is being passed, because passage is never assumed. Encourages poor evidence quality  –    look at their cards, they all suck, there aren‘t any warrants and most of them are taken out of context. This type of citing would not be acceptable for any forum besides debate  –    people can get kicked out of college for misreporting sources, it shouldn‘t be encouraged in debate. It hurts political activism  –    their large but unlikely impacts wouldn‘t be used in any forum but debate, for example, the city council won‘t be convinced that passing an ocean policy will lead to a republican takeover that allows Bush to destroy the world. That makes us less effective at political activism in the outside world. Those are all reasons to vote aff, and reject the team, not just the argument to send a message that this type of argumentation won‘t be tolerated and to discourage future violations.   Pic theory  Document1 Dartmouth 2012 1 Last printed 10/23/2014 10:02:00 AM 3 PICs Bad Steals aff ground  –    we can‘t argue directly against the counterplan, because it‘s the same as plan. We can‘t debate against our own advocacy –   the aff gets no ground. Inflates trivial net benefits  –    the neg could counterplan ―do plan minus one penny‖ with the net benefit of a penny saved is a penny earned. This makes normally irrelevant issues round-winners, which destroys case-focused education. Infinitely regressive  –    there‘s always another part of plan the neg could sever out of or modify to get a net benefit  –    we can‘t predict them all, and a s soon as we research one they move onto another, so the aff can never be prepared. It leads to vague plan writing  –   affs will try to avoid PICs by writing one sentence, meaningless plans then refusing to clarify in cross-x, which ultimately destroys all neg ground to aff shifts of advocacy or reclarification. It justifies severance perms  –    we can‘t do a legit perm because of their abusive counterplan –   severance permutations are our only way to compete with the neg‘s counterplan.  Vote on it for fairness and education. ANTI-XO XOs create numerous intra-governmental problems Cooper, Gund Professor 2 Phillip J. Cooper, Gund Professor of Liberal Arts at the University of Vermont and was the first recipient of the Charles Levin Award given by the American Society for Public Administration and the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration. By Order of the President: The Use & Abuse of Executive Direct Action pg.71 University Press of Kansas, 2002 Significant problems can accompany the use of executive orders. In general terms, they include creating or exacerbating interbranch and intergovernmental tensions, inviting external criticism of the White House, weakening cabinet department credibility and effectiveness, undermining the administrative law system, possibly exposing administrators and the government tmore broadly to liability, and being seen in certain instances as taking the easy way out. The practice of using executive orders to make an end run around Congress has a mixed record of success, as the saga of the Clinton striker replacement order demonstrates. Indeed, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Nixon, and Johnson, among recent  presidents, encountered significant difficulties, both political and legal, by challenging the legislature using executive orders. It is true that if an administration‘s primary purpose is to put up a symbolic fight in defense of a constituent group,  Document1 Dartmouth 2012 1 Last printed 10/23/2014 10:02:00 AM 4 the White House may not consider it all bad to wage a battle, knowing full well that the administration will ultimately lose. (71)
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks