Sacred Heart Tomasi Aff Sunvite RR Round5

LW Irony Aff Sacred Heart High School

AC

Presume aff and prefer aff interps because of the structural swag skew as confirmed by a sample size of 1000 Adam Tomasi rounds by Fantasy Debate1. If I trigger presumption we play rock-paper-scissors but that game is difficult so assume I did a better job. Also give the aff both rock and scissors choice because otherwise the neg has a 2-1 skew where I’ll choose rock and they can either go for scissors or paper. Also presume aff because all statements are assumed TRU when I and/or 2Chainz say them.

Resume aff and prefer aff resumption choices because the aff choosing which layers of the debate to focus on in later speeches addresses neg messiness. Negs are the root cause of muddled debates because I speak in the dark so my aff can be nice and pretty.

Be patient while I finish my theory spikesWeissmann 13 writes2

Just tell me if the minimum wage kills jobs or not. Patience, young grasshopper. We'll get to that question. But let's ease in with some basics first. Fine. What is the minimum wage anyway? Ah, good place to start. The federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, which means that depending on the city you're in, 60 minutes of work will just about buy you a Chipoltle burrito (without guac). By historical standards, it's fairly low. Thanks to inflation, the minimum today wage is worth a few dollars less than when its real value peaked in 1968. (Graph from CNN)

All neg interps are counter-interps and all neg counter-interps are interps which are really just counter-interps. If squares are rectangles, are rectangles squares?

Aff gets RVIs on everything because(a) Vote for me because I’m fair. (b) I’m too time crunched to explain why there’s a time skew.(c) Pizza.(d) Have I told you that I was fair?

Neg must defend the Converses™ of the resolution. Key to reciprocity. Resolutions don’t wear shoes so I win!

Affs about Adam Tomasi are predictable. He’s on the Wiki.

Affs should only be about Adam Tomasi. Large limits mean I can’t take care of my children!Harris 13 writes3

1 httpswag//: www.tomasiswagisarealthing.gov2 Jordan Weissmann (senior associate editor for The Atlantic). “Should We Raise the Minimum Wage? 11 Questions and Answers.” The Atlantic. December 16th, 2013. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/12/should-we-raise-the-minimum-wage-11-questions-and-answers/282326/


I understand that there has been some criticism of Northwestern’s strategy in this debate round. This criticism is premised on the idea that they ran framework instead of engaging Emporia’s argument about home and the Wiz. I think this criticism is unfair. Northwestern’s framework argument did engage Emporia’s argument. Emporia said that you should vote for the team that performatively and methodologically made debate a home. Northwestern’s argument directly clashed with that contention. My problem in this debate was with aspects of the execution of the argument rather than with the strategy itself. It has always made me angry in debates when people have treated topicality as if it were a less important argument than other arguments in debate. Topicality is a real argument. It is a researched strategy. It is an argument that challenges many affirmatives. The fact that other arguments could be run in a debate or are run in a debate does not make topicality somehow a less important argument. In reality, for many of you that go on to law school you will spend much of your life running topicality arguments because you will find that words in the law matter. The rest of us will experience the ways that word choices matter in contracts, in leases, in writing laws and in many aspects of our lives. Kansas ran an affirmative a few years ago about how the location of a comma in a law led a couple of districts to misinterpret the law into allowing individuals to be incarcerated in jail for two days without having any formal charges filed against them. For those individuals the location of the comma in the law had major consequences. Debates about words are not insignificant. Debates about what kinds of arguments we should or should not be making in debates

are not insignificant either. The limits debate is an argument that has real pragmatic consequences. I found myself earlier this year judging Harvard’s eco-pedagogy aff and thought to myself—I could stay up tonight and put a strategy together on eco-

pedagogy, but then I thought to myself—why should I have to? Yes, I could put together a strategy against any random argument somebody makes employing an energy metaphor but the reality is there are only so many nights to stay up all night researching. I would like to actually spend time playing ca tch with my children occasionally or maybe even read a book or go to a movie or spend some time with my wife. A world where there are an infinite number of

affirmatives is a world where the demand to have a specific strategy and not run framework is a world that says this community doesn’t care whether its participants have a life or do well in school or spend time with their families. I know there is a new call abounding for interpreting this NDT as a mandate for broader more diverse topics. The reality is that will create more work to prepare for the teams that choose to debate the topic but will have little to no effect on the teams that refuse to debate the topic. Broader topics that do not require positive government action or are bidirectional will not make teams that won’t debate the topic choose to debate the topic. I think that is a con job. I am not opposed to broader topics necessarily. I tend to like the way high school topics are written more than the way college topics are written. I just think people who take the meaning of the outcome of this NDT as proof that we need to make it so people get to talk about anything they want to talk about without having to debate against topicality or framework arguments are

interested in constructing a world that might make debate an unending nightmare and not a very good home in which to live. Limits, to me,

are a real impact because I feel their impact in my everyday existence.

All neg theory interps must be weighed against the 15% you could save on your car insurance by talking to Geico. The interp is neg specific because I can’t talk with Geico for 15 minutes due to the 6-7-4 time skew.

The standard is maximizing swag. Reasons to prefer:

1. Swag is key to being cool. It’s also key to epistemological rethinking and it’s action-guidingWikiHow no date writes4

Having swag isn't about having the perfect wardrobe -- it's about having the right mindset and attitude. Yeah, a great pair of kicks or the right pair of

sunglasses can help, but having swag is about having the attitude that makes everything you do, say, and wear look cool. If you want to have swag, you have to adjust your

attitude -- and then you can start stepping your wardrobe up. If you want to know how to have

swag, then just follow these steps .

This is a contingent standard. If swag isn’t cool, it’s hot. If swag is hot, it’s on fire. If swag is on fire, it’s the most legit thing ever.

2. Swaghood is developed by looking to role models

3 Scott Harris (Director of Debate at U Kansas, 2006 National Debate Coach of the Year, Vice President of the American Forensic Association, 2nd speaker at the NDT in 1981). “This ballot.” 5 April 2013. CEDA Forums. http://www.cedadebate.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4762.0;attach=1655 4 WikiHow. “3 Ways to Have Swag.” No date. http://www.wikihow.com/Have-Swag

http://www.cedadebate.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4762.0;attach=1655


WikiHow no date writes5

5Get inspired by your role models. Pick a few people that you admire, and let them guide you in your path to swaghood. They don't have to be the coolest people in

the world, but they do have to inspire you in some way, whether it's because they make you want to

pursue your dreams, kick your style up a notch, or even to improve on your lack of patience. Here are some role models that can inspire you: Someone in your family. Do you wish you had your mom's sense of humor or your grandma's ability to make anyone in the world feel better? Maybe you've always admired your older brother's work ethic. Do what you can to try to

develop these qualities. Favorite musician. Do you love Mariah, Kanye, or Lady Gaga? Or are you more into the retro artists like Mick Jagger or Otis Redding? Whoever your favorite artist is, see what you can learn from him or her apart from the musical talent -- you can probably

learn to be more independent, to have more fun, and to walk with style. Favorite athlete. What can you learn from LeBron, Serena Williams, Derek Jeter, or Coco Crisp that you can't find in the halls of

your own school? Watch these athletes both on and off the field and find something you admire about them. Favorite public figure. Do you admire Obama, Wendy Davis, or even more outlandish figures like Snooki from the Jersey Shore or the comedian Bill Burr? Whoever you like, figure out what qualities you like about that person and what you can do to achieve them. Someone in your social circle. Find a role model right in your own friend group or community who can teach you a thing or two about life.

This is also a theoretically justified framework warrant. Following role models is key to learning from Coco Crisp in ways that you can’t learn in academic spaces. Coco Crisp is also a portable skill.

Moral theories are incoherent. Ethics should instead be a practical field where we learn from example.Foster 6 writes6

Baier’s objective is to “attack the whole idea of a moral ‘theory,’ which systematizes and extends a body of moral judgments, and attacks in particular the idea that the theorist might accept a theory with controversial implications” (Baier 1985: 232) Baier argues against the philosophical, “don’t leave

the armchair” intellectual sort of moral theory in favor of practical, reflective approaches. According to Baier, ethical guides correlate to a practical field because such guides advise people on how best to act. Baier uses the example of cooking as comparable to the sort of practice involved with ethics. She explains, In practical fields, like engineering or cooking, we do not find theories of how to do what

such practitioners do, merely schools to train people to do it. There may perhaps be theories of nutrition, or of taste, which a cook might consult, and there certainly are recipe books, but it would be a very odd enterprise to try and find “principles” applied in such recipes, or to unify the rules of cooking into a grand system, from which we might deduce some new recipes, or menus for new occasions. (1985: 232)

Like cooking, Baier considers ethics to be part of a practical field, and so she questions why philosophers have resorted to theory in ethics. Moral theorists, according to Baier, have constructed ethical theories because there is a void where a comprehensive framework should be. “This void is of course a temptation to the moral philosopher, who constructs utilitarianism or contractarianism to fill the free space, and not merely to supplement a

given moral guide, so as to get decisions in difficult cases” (Baier 1985: 234). Thus according to Baier, the absence of objectivity in religious or traditional frameworks has led modern philosophers to formulate general, abstract theories to fill this empty space. The problem with moral theories, according to Baier, is that they are not practicably learnable, they

unrealistically aim at universality, and the only motive to follow them is in the avoidance of punishment. But there is no need to resort to such theories because the

alternatives are not only more realistic , but also more compatible as part of an ethical guide. She explains, For

any moral guide to be passed on it must be learnable, but one can learn from

5 WikiHow. “3 Ways to Have Swag.” No date. http://www.wikihow.com/Have-Swag6 Isabel Foster (client advisor at the Atlanta office of J.P. Morgan Private Banking. Her undergraduate major was philosophy, and she completed advanced studies at the University of Virginia’s McIntire Business Institute). “A Defense of Confucianism and Non-Theoretical Ethical Systems.” 2006. http://www.sewanee.edu/philosophy/Capstone/2006/Foster.pdf


example . For any such guide to be of general use, its precepts must apply fairly generally, but generality is not universality. For any such guide to be accepted as a guide, there must be some motive to accept it.

But the motive need not be the avoidance of sanctions. (1985: 235) Baier accuses moral theorists of deriving personal utopian universal theories, “that are not expected to be shared, even by other utopia-fanciers, or rationality-admirers” (Baier 1985: 235). These theorists ignore the need for real-world applications and they “assume that morality consists in a set of general principles or rules or laws” (Baier 1985: 236). Baier articulates her clear dislike for theoretical approaches to practical ventures, and she concludes, “It remains mere prejudice to demand explicitness, universality, and coercive backing, in any moral guide” (Baier 1985:235).

Examples are importantConstant Content 7 writes7

Using examples to back up statements of fact can add value to your writing. Making a statement without using examples can make your writing muddy, as well as create more work for the reader. Examples make statements clearer, give readers more

information, and decrease the chances that the fact or idea to be wrongly applied to real-life situations. Examples are most successful when integrated into the text: Warm paint colors, like red or pink, can have a stimulating effect on a room's inhabitants. When going to a formal dinner, it is important to wear your best suit, tie, and shoes. (Rather than: When going to a formal dinner, it is important to wear your best clothing.) Examples can also be added in parenthetical phrases, using Latin abbreviations: When you go camping, always make sure to pack first-aid supplies (e. g. [exempli gratia or "for example"] bandages, antiseptic cream, pain medication). Workers in the United states (i.e. [id est or "that is"] legal and illegal workers) are concerned about healthcare for their families. Note: "I. e." is not interchangeable with "e. g." "I. e." clarifies or expands upon an idea. Examples can also be illustrated by describing hypothetical situations, relating real-life situations, or giving the reader possibilities to imagine within the context of the article.

3. Only swag is unconditionally binding. I can always ask, “Why should I act for swag?” but that concedes the swag-thority of swag.

Thus the plan: Adam Tomasi should be paid a living wage at Dunkin Donuts adjusted for cost of swaggin’. I reserve the right to clarify.

7 Constant Content (they constantly provide you content). “The Importance of Using Examples.” December 2007. https://www.constant-content.com/blog/2007/12/the-importance-of-using-examples/


The aff meets T-plural. There are many Adam Tomasis in many universes because the Many Worlds Interpretation is true. Nature doesn’t play dice.Vaidman 2 writes8

The reason for adopting the MWI is that it avoids the collapse of the quantum wave. (Other non-collapse theories are not better than MWI for various reasons, e.g., nonlocality of Bohmian mechanics; and

the disadvantage of all of them is that they have some additional structure.) The collapse postulate is a physical law that

differs from all known physics in two aspects: it is genuinely random and it involves some kind of action at a distance. According to the collapse postulate the outcome of a quantum experiment is not determined by the initial conditions of the Universe prior to the experiment: only the probabilities are governed by the initial

state. Moreover, Bell 1964 has shown that there cannot be a compatible local-variables theory that will make deterministic predictions. There is no experimental evidence in favor of collapse and against the MWI. We need not assume that Nature plays dice. The MWI is a deterministic theory for a physical Universe and it explains why a world appears to

be indeterministic for human observers

If nature does play dice, affirm because nature would role a seven which is a lucky number.

Advantage 1 is Rap Albums

Drake needs to make the Forbes list. It’s key to his swag. Greenburg 13 writes9

Cash Money Records’ party on the eve of last week’s Grammys was a perfect reflection of its materialistic moniker, from the retro Cadillac convertible at the door to the half-dozen scantily-clad dancers gyrating above the bar. Just as fitting were the words of the company’s No. 2 earner, Aubrey

“Drake” Graham, who pulled in an estimated $20.5 million last year. When asked if he’d make FORBES’ list of hip-hop’s top earners once again in 2013, he seemed confident. “Every year, we just want to get more

prepared and better at touring and better at things that make money,” he said. “If I’m not on your list this year, I’d be gravely disappointed.” Drake’s prospects are looking good, considering his past history. He earned $10 million in 2010 and $11 million in 2011 before nearly doubling that figure to

land at No. 5 on last year’s Cash Kings rankings. Just how important is inclusion on that list? “That’s pretty much my objective every year,” Drake says. “Other than making good music.” The latter may well help him achieve the former in the coming year. His latest album, Take Care, earned the Grammy for Best Rap Album—and has sold nearly 2 million copies in the U.S. alone. Drake appears set to follow his sophomore effort with Nothing Was the Same sometime in 2013. Its first single, “Started From The Bottom,” was released earlier this month. Meanwhile, his nightly concert gross has soared past $500,000, according to Pollstar. The former DeGrassi star can certainly count on support from his label—as evidenced by the fact that boss Bryan “Birdman” Williams showed up in L.A. for the Grammys for one main reason. “I really don’t know who’s nominated,” he said. “We come here to support Drake.”

Drake needs Adam Tomasi to buy more of his music so he can get on the Forbes list. Higher minimum wage is key to Tomasi purchasing power. Hanauer 13 writes10

The fundamental law of capitalism is that if workers have no money, businesses have no customers. That’s why the extreme, and widening, wealth gap in our economy presents not just a moral challenge, but an economic one,

8 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2002. "Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics."9 Zack O’Malley Greenburg (staff writer). “Drake: Making The Forbes List Is My Objective Every Year.” Forbes. February 14th, 2013. http://www.forbes.com/sites/zackomalleygreenburg/2013/02/14/drake-making-the-forbes-list-is-my-objective-every-year/10 Nick Hanauer (billionaire). “The Capitalist’s Case for a $15 Minimum Wage.” Bloomberg View. June 19th, 2013. http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2013-06-19/the-capitalist-s-case-for-a-15-minimum-wage


too. In a capitalist system, rising inequality creates a death spiral of falling demand that ultimately takes everyone down. Low-wage jobs are fast replacing middle-class ones in the U.S. economy. Sixty percent of the jobs lost in the last recession were middle-income, while 59 percent of the new positions during the past two years of recovery were in low-wage industries that continue to expand such as retail, food services, cleaning and health-care support. By 2020, 48 percent of jobs will be in those service sectors. Policy makers debate incremental changes for arresting this vicious cycle. But perhaps the most powerful and elegant antidote is sitting right before us: a spike in the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. True, that sounds like a lot. When President Barack Obama called in February for an increase to $9 an hour from $7.25, he was accused of being a dangerous redistributionist. Yet consider this: If the minimum wage had simply tracked U.S. productivity gains since 1968, it would be $21.72 an hour -- three times what it is now. CULTIVATING CONSUMERS Traditionally, arguments for

big minimum-wage increases come from labor unions and advocates for the poor. I make the case as a businessman and entrepreneur who sees our millions of low-paid workers as customers to be cultivated and not as costs to be cut. Here’s a bottom-line example: My investment portfolio includes Pacific Coast Feather Co., one of the largest U.S. manufacturers of bed pillows. Like many other manufacturers, pillow-makers are struggling because of weak demand. The problem comes down to this: My annual earnings equal about 1,000 times the U.S. median wage, but I don’t consume 1,000 times more pillows than the average American. Even the richest among us only need one or two to rest their heads at night. An economy such as ours that increasingly concentrates wealth in the top 1 percent, and where most

workers must rely on stagnant or falling wages, isn’t a place to build much of a pillow business, or any other business for that matter. Raising

the minimum wage to $15 an hour would inject about $450 billion into the economy each year. That would give more purchasing power to millions of poor and lower-middle-class Americans, and would stimulate buying, production and hiring. Studies by the Economic Policy Institute show that a $15 minimum wage would directly affect 51 million workers and indirectly benefit an additional 30 million. That’s 81 million people, or about 64 percent of the workforce, and their families who would be more able to buy cars,

clothing and food from our nation’s businesses. This virtuous cycle effect is described in the research of

economists David Card and Alan Krueger (the current chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers) showing that,

contrary to conventional economic orthodoxy, increases in the minimum wage increase employment. In 60 percent of the

states that raised the minimum wage during periods of high unemployment, job growth was faster than the national average. Some business people oppose an increase in the minimum wage as needless government interference in the workings of the market. In fact, a big increase would substantially reduce government intervention and dependency on public assistance programs. FEDERAL BENEFITS No one earning the current minimum wage of about $15,000 per year can aspire to live decently, much less raise a family. As a result, almost all workers subsisting on those low earnings need panoply of taxpayer-supported benefits, including the earned income tax credit, food stamps, Medicaid or housing subsidies. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal government spent $316 billion on programs designed to help the poor in 2012. That means the current $7.25 minimum wage forces taxpayers to subsidize Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and other large employers, effectively socializing their labor costs. This is great for Wal-Mart and its shareholders, but terrible for America. It is both unjust and inefficient. A higher minimum wage would also make low-income families less dependent on government programs: The CBO report shows that the federal government gives about $8,800 in annual assistance to the lowest-income households but only $4,000 to households earning $35,500, which would be about the level of earnings of a worker making $15 an hour. An objection to a significant wage increase is that it would force employers to shed workers. Yet the evidence points the other way: Workers earn more and spend more, increasing demand and helping businesses grow. Critics of raising the minimum wage also say it will lead to more outsourcing and job loss. Yet virtually all of these low-wage jobs are service jobs that can neither be outsourced nor automated. Raising the earnings of all American workers would provide all businesses with more customers with more to spend. Seeing the economy as Henry Ford did would redirect our country toward a high-growth future that works for all.

No econ disad. Adam Tomasi only works three hours a week.

Hip hop precludes all other frameworks. It’s a prerequisite to truth.Darby et al. 5 writes11

Grandmaster Flash, who perfected the craft of cuttin’ n’ scratchin’ and who united DJ-ing with MC-ing to take hip hop to a higher level, drops this gem

on us: “hip hop is the only genre of music that allows us to talk about almost anything…It’s highly

controversial, but that’s the way the game is.” The same thing can be said about philosophy. It allows us to reflect on and argue about almost anything, and it too is highly controversial. As a matter of fact, philosophy was so controversial in ancient Athens that its most influential philosopher, Socrates, caught a case for “corrupting the youth” with it and was sent to death row for droppin’ science on the streets. Socrates’s intricate arguments, not unlike the much sweated lyrical technique of Rakim, frustrated his interlocutors, often tying them up in

knots before they were able to reach a higher state of enlightenment. And since the haterz couldn’t understand him and the young headz couldn’t get enough of him, the government smoked the greatest philosopher of his time. Yeah,

11 Edited by Derrick Darby, Tommie Shelby, and William Irvin. Hip Hop and Philosophy: Rhyme 2 Reason. Fall 2005. http://books.google.com/books?id=IG8ufdGSmIYC&pg=PA148&lpg=PA148&dq=hip+hop+and+moral+philosophy&source=bl&ots=Txyuh1pRse&sig=4mzs40zmf89E8JXR2_64PdA9yCY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oamBUfihGfTE4AOG8oDwDA&ved=0CEgQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=hip%20hop%20and%20moral%20philosophy&f=false


that’s the way the game is! Philosophy is an ancient discipline devoted to the pursuit of wisdom. But how should we pursue it? Well, like Notorious B.I.G., Supernatural, and Mos Def, Socrates let his knowledge flow straight from his dome in mental battles with lesser minds. He engineered the pursuit of wisdom by asking people about the grounds of their beliefs and then dropped a strategic series of probing questions on them to test the validity of their answers. This Socratic elenchus, or cross-examination freestyle as it

came to be known, suggests that true wisdom about God, love, virtue, truth, justice, or whatever, is best pursued by modifying one’s beliefs in response to interrogation and counterexamples. Fans of hip hop will peep the fact

that Socrates’s steelo is similar to the call-and-response style used by talented MCs puttin’ in work to

answer life’s pressing questions by engaging in epic lyrical battles that sometimes turn into beefs.


Advantage 2 is Heg

Dunkin Donuts has an empirically proven record of being the foundation on which America runsIPG 13 writes12

In 1998, Dunkin’ Donuts was a regional bakery shop represented by “Fred the Baker” and “time to make the donuts.” It was time to transform the brand

into a national powerhouse that could successfully challenge breakfast heavyweights Starbucks and McDonald’s -- no small task. “America Runs on Dunkin’” became much bigger than an ad campaign. It’s a rallying cry for the brand, at headquarters, with franchisees, and in-store. And the results have been astonishing: Dunkin’ Donuts eclipsed Starbucks as #1 in customer loyalty in the coffee category for five years running. And Dunkin’ is now the #1 retailer of hot and iced

regular coffee-by-the-cup in the United States.

Tomasi is key to Dunkin Donuts nationwide because coffee cannot be made without swag.

Heg solves cannibalism. The cannibals will eat ‘Murica last in a multipolar world.Romney 14 writes13

The president asserts that we must move to “a new order that’s based on a different set of principles, that’s based on a sense of common humanity.” The old order, he is saying, where America’s disproportionate strength holds tyrants in check and preserves the sovereignty of nations, is to be replaced. It is said that the first rule of wing-walking is to not let go with one hand until the other hand has a firm grip. So, too, before we jettison our reliance on U.S. strength, there must be something effective in its place — if such a thing is even possible. Further, the appeal to “common humanity” as the foundation of this new world order ignores the reality that humanity is far from common in values and views. Humanity may commonly agree that there

is evil, but what one people calls evil another calls good. There are those who claim that a multipolar world is preferable to one led by a strong United States. Were these other poles nations such as

Australia, Canada, France and Britain, I might concur. But with emerging poles being China, Russia and Iran, the world would not see peace; it would see bullying, invasion and regional

wars. And ultimately, one would seek to conquer the others, unleashing world war. Some argue that the United States should simply withdraw its military strength from the world — get out of the Middle East, accept nuclear weapons in Iran and elsewhere, let China and Russia have their way with their neighbors and watch from the sidelines as jihadists storm on two or three

continents. Do this, they contend, and the United States would be left alone. No, we would not. The history of the 20th century teaches that power-hungry tyrants ultimately feast on the appeasers — to use former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour’s phrase, we would be paying the

cannibals to eat us last . And in the meantime, our economy would be devastated by the disruption of trade routes, the turmoil in global markets and the

tumult of conflict across the world. Global peace and stability are very much in our immediate national interest. Some insist that our military is already so much stronger than that of any other nation that we can safely cut it back, again and again. Their evidence: the relative size of our defense budget. But these comparisons are nearly meaningless: Russia and China don’t report their actual defense spending, they pay their servicemen a tiny fraction of what we pay ours and their cost to build military armament is also a fraction of ours. More relevant is the fact that Russia’s nuclear arsenal is significantly greater than our own and that, within six years, China will have more ships in its navy than we do. China already has more service members. Further, our military is tasked with many more missions than those of other nations: preserving the freedom of the seas, the air and space; combating radical jihadists; and preserving order and stability around the world as well as defending the United States. The most ludicrous excuse for shrinking our military derives from the president’s thinking: “Things are much less dangerous now than they were 20 years ago, 25 years ago or 30 years ago.” The “safer world” trial balloon has been punctured by recent events in Ukraine, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Gaza, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria and Iraq. “Failures of imagination” led to tragedy 13 years ago; today, no imagination is required to picture what would descend on the United States if we let down our guard. The arguments for shrinking our military fall aside to reveal the real reason for the cuts: Politicians, and many of the people who elect them, want to keep up spending here at home. Entitlements and programs are putting pressure on the federal budget: We either cut defense, or we cut spending on ourselves. That, or raise our taxes. To date, the politicians have predictably voted to slash defense. As Bret Stephens noted in Commentary magazine this month, the Army is on track to be the size it was in 1940, the Navy to be the size it was in 1917, the Air Force to be

12 Interpublic Group. “America Runs on Dunkin’.” September 29th, 2013. http://www.interpublic.com/our-agencies/recent-works?work_id=550&casename=America+Runs+on+Dunkin%2713 Mitt Romney (possesses binders full of women). “The need for a mighty U.S. military.” Washington Post. September 4th, 2014. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-the-world-needs-a-mighty-us-military/2014/09/04/f5234064-342d-11e4-a723-fa3895a25d02_story.html


smaller than in 1947 and our nuclear arsenal to be no larger than it was under President Harry S. Truman. Washington politicians are poised to make a historic decision, for us, for our descendants and for the world. Freedom and peace are in the balance. They will choose whether to succumb to the easy path of continued military hollowing or to honor their constitutional pledge to protect the United States.


Advantage 3 is Light Pollution

The living wage is indexed to the cost of swaggin’, so it’s the solution to the pollution.

Light pollution is a serious problem. It destroys nature and deprives people of wondrous sights Abel 13 writes14

It's only in recent times that light pollution has been considered a serious issue. The culprit is not so much lighting as it is bad lighting; lights from

shops, industries and gardens dumping vast amounts of light upwards, rather than down on to the ground. Apart from depriving us of proper dark sky, light pollution can interrupt the

natural cycles of wildlife and is a monumental waste of energy. I'm not suggesting we should turn out all of the lights, but having them situated properly and made effective would be a vast improvement. Perhaps supermarkets could lead the way – rather than charging for carrier bags, they could improve their lighting schemes so their lights illuminate their

grounds rather than the sky. Towns and cities will continue to grow and with such expansion comes responsibility. Light pollution is just as serious as other man-made problems. I have met so many people who have never even managed to see The Plough, much less the Milky Way or a stunning meteor shower. If we're not careful, the night sky and all of its natural wonders will become something

of an urban legend.

Clear night skies inspire people to be astronomersAbel 13 writes15

The night sky has played an important part in human culture: before TV,

books and the internet, it was the theater where the human race played out their mythologies and legends. On a more personal note, this view of

the night sky reminded me why I became an astronomer in the first place, and of the deep connections we can have with the universe just by looking at it. Finding a dark sky in Britain is difficult, but its not impossible.

Astronomy is cool—5 warrantsSpells 10 writes16

It’s beautiful If you go out on a dark moonless night, you will immediately know what I mean. The Milky Way,

stretching its jagged course across the heavens, is quite a sight to behold. The constellations, particularly the winter constellations, have an elegance and familiarity to them. The Moon is also an appealing object, with its ever changing phases and frequent conjunctions with other planets in the sky. Through a small telescope, planetary disks, galaxies, nebulae and open clusters come into view, often startling in their majesty. Of course, the beauty of the universe is not limited to what is immediately visible to our eyes. Deep space objects, seen through the largest of telescopes, are candidates for some of the most beautiful things ever seen by human eyes. Who could not fail to be impressed by the wonderful Hubble photos of the Crab and Eagle nebulas, or the views of the outer planets and moons from space probes such as Voyager and Cassini? To see for yourself, each day

NASA publishes it’s Astronomy Picture of the Day. Few images ever fail to impress. It’s extreme. Nothing can be taken for granted about space. Most of it is unimaginably cold, interspersed occasionally by blisteringly hot stars with coronal temperatures of millions of degrees. Almost everything is racing around at breakneck speed: barreling through space at velocities of hundreds or thousands of kilometers a second relative to us. That’s enough to cause quite an impact if we were to get in

their way. All around us catastrophic convulsions are taking place, with vast explosions and unconscionably high energies. This is a Universe of 14 Paul Abel (astronomer at the Center for Interdisciplinary Science, University of Leicester). “Why we must tackle issue of light pollution.” Leicester Mercury. December 28th, 2013. http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/tackle-issue-light-pollution/story-20374867-detail/story.html15 Paul Abel (astronomer at the Center for Interdisciplinary Science, University of Leicester). “Why we must tackle issue of light pollution.” Leicester Mercury. December 28th, 2013. http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/tackle-issue-light-pollution/story-20374867-detail/story.html16 Sunny Spells. “Five reasons why astronomy is cool.” September 10th, 2010. http://sunnyspells.wordpress.com/2010/09/10/five-reasons-why-astronomy-is-cool/


supernovas, neutron stars, magnetars, pulsars and Gamma Ray Bursts – beams of high energy radiation that would eliminate all life on our planet in an instant were our Earth unfortunate enough to stray too close. Black holes exist that can compress the mass of whole stars into volumes a few kilometers wide, creating gravitational fields that nothing, not even light itself, can escape from. This is the stuff of childhood fantasies. Superpowers. Forcefields. Instantaneous death. The destruction of worlds. It is no wonder that space features so prominently in the minds of the young.

It ignites our curiosity. Astronomy confronts us with some of the biggest and most challenging problems about the nature of ourselves and the fabric of

reality. As a science, it has lead the way in overturning ancient notions of how nature should behave. At one time we believed ourselves to be at the centre of the Universe, with all objects, including the Sun, revolving around the Earth. Astronomers through the ages slowly revealed a different truth. Our star and our home planet are among countless billions in a very ancient Universe. Everything we do ultimately only affects an infinitesimally small piece of real-estate in the cosmos. This discovery, while deeply humbling, is enlightening. It tells us that we will never know everything. Our quest for knowledge is unlimited. We are ants in a cathedral, and what a cathedral it is. The study of the stars and planets has pushed out the frontiers of knowledge in every direction. It’s contribution to science and mathematics cannot be underestimated. Without astronomy, the modern world as we know it would not exist. Astronomy continues to confound us and guide us right to this day. Gigantic accelerators are busy smashing sub-atomic particles into smithereens to gain greater insights into the nature of matter because objects in space do not always behave the way our current scientific models

expect them to. Astronomy has revolutionised our understanding of nature and it will continue to do so. It tells us about our

past. When you look into space , at any star you care to mention, you are looking into history. You are not seeing the star as it is now, but as it was when the

photons of light left its photosphere many years ago. If you can find the Andromeda Galaxy in the sky, you are getting a picture of how it looked two million years ago, long before humans ever roamed our planet. The largest telescopes can see back billions of years ago, to galaxies in their infancy, still in the process of being formed. History is about ourselves, how we got here, why things are how they are. Astronomy opens history even further by explaining the origins of our planet, our sun, our galaxy – even providing insights into our Universe and how it all started some 13 odd billion years ago. Astronomy is fascinating even when applied to our own modest human story. We have had an intense relationship with the stars and planets for thousands of years. It guided the ancient cycles of sowing and harvesting. It provided the raw material for belief systems, rituals and religions. It contributed to our language. It assisted with navigation and discovery. In living memory, we have witnessed men walking on the Moon and robot probes being flung out of the solar system – events likely to be celebrated for millennia to come. Our relationship with

the stars has shaped the culture of today. It’s our future. Astronomy is important to our future, from the short term to the distant long term. Over the coming decades, private companies will take over much of the heavy lifting

formerly associated with government agencies such as NASA and ESA. This will create new jobs and new wealth. Bigger telescopes and better equipment will provide insights into reality that will stretch our technological capabilities. Over the coming centuries perhaps we will explore and colonise deep space for ourselves, using technologies yet undreamt of. In the end, billions of years from now, our sun will expand, frying everything on this planet before diminishing in size itself, its fuel spent, its job done. Perhaps there is a large asteroid or comet out there in space with our name on it. Perhaps

our planet will eventually turn against us, forcing us to find a new home. Perhaps we will find a way to cross the

enormous gulfs separating us from other stars in our galaxy. All of these possibilities lead us to the conclusion that the stars will feature prominently in the future of the human race. Astronomy is available to all, from the small child with his toy

rocketship, to the octogenarian peering through her telescope at a crater on the Moon. Few endeavours are so wide in scope,

so rich in detail, or so marvelous in implication. I invite you to join in.

Advantage 4 is Haikus

Living wages areImportant for solving somePoverty for real

A turtle jumps inThrough the river and intoThe ocean, he’s free

Being Top SpeakerWould be really awesome soPlease make that happen


Shout out to myselfCan you shout out in that way?Yo I make the rules

Haikus are the biggest impactDrew 12 writes17

A good haiku is a marble of dense meaning and exact language – it uses

economy of expression to create maximum impact . The extreme constraints of

the form require the perfect word, the best metaphor, the most precise image. At their best, haikus are powerful nuggets of intense emotion.

1AR

[Written during prep time]

Counter-interpretation—the aff can say all neg interps are counter-interps if they’re Adam Tomasi

1. Solves Florida kids. I’m not one; only I can make this argument.

2. Geometry. Rectangles and squares. Geometry is a portable skill.

3. Coco Crisp. He agrees with the counter-interp, that’s Crisp 14. Coco Crisp is a portable skill and is key to education, that’s WikiHow no date.

4. I’ll impact turn negs not running theory. Theory trades off with astronomy education.

5. Things you can do besides theory:BasketballTable tennisRappingHorseback ridingWatching paint dry

6. Fairness not a voter, that’s Branse 14.

7. Hip hop is a prereq to truth

Theory is whack/My crew has my back/Sharp like a tack/The haters getting smacked17 Drew (he likes haikus). “Haiku and the Value of Constraints.” The Barbershop, a Myriad Media blog. August 24th, 2012. http://www.myriadmedia.net/haiku-and-the-value-of-constraints


8. All neg interps ARE implicit counter-interps cuz I have interps in the aff.

9. Structural swag skew means more ground for me is good

10. Infinite abuse impossible. Infinity only possible in space.

11. Can’t solve the abuse. MWI

Documents

Sacred Heart Tomasi Aff Sunvite RR Round5