tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post1682335726463980295..comments2024-03-22T22:33:42.207-04:00Comments on Everyday Debate: PF Jan 2017 - Increase Military Spending - Pro PositionJames Kellamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09983375909180219240noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-6489603433003148262017-01-13T13:15:05.158-05:002017-01-13T13:15:05.158-05:00There are two steps. Spending is key to heg. Heg i...There are two steps. Spending is key to heg. Heg is key to conflict resolution.James Kellamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09983375909180219240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-30607905494877050272017-01-08T10:26:46.700-05:002017-01-08T10:26:46.700-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11867117844158450888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-15974138220639962622017-01-08T10:25:56.228-05:002017-01-08T10:25:56.228-05:00YESS. I also need this answer
YESS. I also need this answer <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11867117844158450888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-19417248029075032162017-01-06T07:01:10.271-05:002017-01-06T07:01:10.271-05:00Source wars can be a pain. Of course one should ch...Source wars can be a pain. Of course one should check their sources. Heritage Fdn is a conservative source and the current President is a former Sen from South Carolina and Tea Party member, so one may expect an extreme right bias. Having said that, your actual source was written by an author and the author has credentials and it is those creds which count, not so much the group which sponsored the research. One could claim many academic journals are biased since they are peer reviewed by individuals who bear specific academic biases but they are seldom disputed. It is the author's work which is reviewed and scrutinized and that is what you are citing. Bottom line, debaters will sometimes attack sources and sometimes judges will side with them. All you can do is defend your authors and trust the judge to accept their credentials. You do well to include the author's short bio or curriculum vitae with the sources so you can reference it if needed. Finally, one other key to winning, in my opinion, is ALWAYS have more than one source for every claim. Then you can say, "even if you don't accept this source, we have this other source which confirms..." Good luck.James Kellamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09983375909180219240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-36304099639571786922017-01-05T21:24:57.590-05:002017-01-05T21:24:57.590-05:00Thank you for the great analysis every month. It r...Thank you for the great analysis every month. It really is a huge help. Last year in a debate I used a source from the Heritage Foundation and my opponent criticized it simply based on the fact that it is from the Heritage Foundation and that source is "heavily biased". We argued against this and said that you can't discount an entire source of information just based on reputation and that the specific study we were using was well received etc. The judge sided with our opponents. Do you have any suggestions on how to better combat this tactic? Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07898427655088041418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-31064813398706796022017-01-04T22:08:57.613-05:002017-01-04T22:08:57.613-05:00Glad to be of some benefit. Good luck this season....Glad to be of some benefit. Good luck this season.James Kellamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09983375909180219240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-39017828626655976802017-01-04T19:41:29.121-05:002017-01-04T19:41:29.121-05:00Thanks a lot to the author. I always end up writin...Thanks a lot to the author. I always end up writing both cases and it saves me a monstrous amount of time when I am writing to have evidence and contentions right there in one place! Please continue to write these for the well-being of those who are unfortunate enough to get "those partners!" Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-63428773637732690392017-01-04T12:09:27.072-05:002017-01-04T12:09:27.072-05:00I'm glad to hear of your success. Thanks for t...I'm glad to hear of your success. Thanks for the encouragement.James Kellamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09983375909180219240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-55779781303603962772017-01-03T23:05:21.286-05:002017-01-03T23:05:21.286-05:00I would just like to say that I really appreciate ...I would just like to say that I really appreciate you taking your time to write these detailed analysis and arguments. It has really helped me tons and my partner and I are undefeated so far this season. I hope you realize how much this helps people out. You write in simple, yet detailed and descriptive, terms that make the arguments easy to understand. I hope you continue to write these convenient and useful resources. Thanks again!<br />Sincerely,<br />Grateful DebatorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-68920823393412071462017-01-02T21:19:37.492-05:002017-01-02T21:19:37.492-05:00I think/hope I get your point. For my purposes, th...I think/hope I get your point. For my purposes, the intent of the Katz card is, since potential enemies and NATO allies are increasing arms, the U.S. will need to follow suit to maintain superiority. I believe an observation should be used as a weighing mechanism for framework, not to make contentions or claims which would require evidence. Squo decreasing requires its own card so make that point in the constructive, not an observation.James Kellamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09983375909180219240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-11028404740683388582016-12-31T11:08:49.963-05:002016-12-31T11:08:49.963-05:00To run the Katz card, wouldn't you need and ob...To run the Katz card, wouldn't you need and observation with a card saying the squo is a reduction in funding for the US military. Otherwise they can say, "we will leave funding for the military the same, no decrease." But with that card, you cut down their counter plan by saying, that isn't gonna happen bc the squo is a decrease. Sorry if this is kinda confusing. Is that necessary?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407860233068036900.post-80988802266425544982016-12-28T13:29:05.303-05:002016-12-28T13:29:05.303-05:00What are some examples of how increased spending i...What are some examples of how increased spending in the past has increased the military's ability to reduce conflict efficiently? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01297868227267021036noreply@blogger.com