Hope

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

"For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace."

"For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act - not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do."

"The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works."

Pride's a funny thing, innit?

Still Alive

Huge success... Eh, not really, but the song is still catchy. I'm not dead yet, nor have I entered the ranks of the undead. I will be returning from Winter Break tomorrow, and from there back into the world of debate and coding. Not much has happened on the Python front, as I am still stuck with learning Java for now, but I am going to try returning to it soon. Oh, yeah. I almost forgot. I wrote a "Fortunes" script in Python over break. It can stand alone, but I combine it with Samurize to display the current quote selection on screen. For your convenience: the script. The zip file contains the script, as well as a custom Fortunes file that I've been building over time. If I could figure out how to have a special format for code, I'd display it so that I could dissect it and show how it works. Here is the Samurize script as well. It has a todo list, an attractive date and time display, as well as the Fortunes display. You'll have to edit it some to point to the proper files, but besides that it should be pretty self-sufficient.

On the forensics front, not much is brewing. I've learned about IPDA debate, which is new to the Oregon college circuit, and I've been to my first tournament. IPDA is pretty much Lincoln-Douglass debate with public-style topics. Anyways, for ye few readers, keep on reading. I should be posting much more often here soon.

Epitaph of Man

Insidious maw, twisting and corrupting
All within its dusty reach.
As seconds slither by,
minutes vanish on the fetid breeze
waiting, waiting, waiting
forever.

Under huddle of cold comfort
Blankets pile high as futile bulwarks
Against creeping tendrils of frigid air.
Simple barriers of the familiar
Become cloth prisons
a holding cell
within
Me.

Time’s damned visage stares in perpetuity
Boring steadily through the mind,
embedded in the skull.
Sanity lies in oblivion,
The null æther beckons.
“Come hither.” It says,
whispering soft lullabies:
simple nothings
which taste
so sweet.


Cold in body and mind,
Embittered of man’s promises,
I wait for empty sleep
to overtake me
and grant me
peace.

For the good of one,
I must deceive another.
For the good of another,
I must betray one.

“Because of man’s lies, so must I lie here.”
So say these words:
An epitaph to man.
His resting place
In a cold, dark world.

And so I sleep,
An eternity in a night.
“And let the world know
that here, man lies forever.”
Good night.

Entering College Forensics

Woo! That aside, I'm starting to settle into the land of college debate for now.
We meet weekly (from 6 pm to 8pm, blargh), and our first tournament is either in November or December.

My first impression: College debate is far more systemically ruthless. Apparently a standard tactic for the Negation (or opposition, since there is no negation any more...) is to refute the Affirmation (or Proposition, for the same reason)'s case in the first speech, and to hold off on the counter-case until the second speech.

Now, this may not sound completely evil, but realize that this forces the Affirmation (I refuse to become the Prop. and Opp.) to refute an entire case in their rebuttal. And this is accepted as being standard fare. Bah. Whatever happened to debate being about communication and sharing of ideas? I, for one, refuse to degrade myself with these tactics. I hold myself to be an ethical debater, and I will not compromise myself for material gain.

Besides that, I'm going to be doing an oratory on the American Dream. I'll talk more about that when I finish writing it.

Finally, apparently we get food stipends for tournaments. Woot!

LD Sept. - Oct. 2008 Topic: Woot!

Resolved: It is morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people.

Yeah. Freaking awesome topic, and I don't get to do it. Beh. This is perhaps one of the most distilled 'value' topics I've ever seen. Why the NFL didn't use it for NatQuals or Nationals is completely beyond me. There is no crack for policy or statistics to enter. There is no odd loophole such as "Justice" to frame it oddly. It is just "morally permissible".

Even though I don't actually compete with this topic, I'll post various bits about it to help any new or seasoned LDers to victory.

First of all is a breakdown of the topic and some first-look musings as to potential problems or ideas.

1. "Morally permissible": This is the big frame which the entire round hangs upon. Key things to remember is that this is not justice, or legal, or constitutional. This is 'permissible'. Is it allowed within your moral framework, and why is your framework best?

2. Utilitarianism: There's more to it, but that's effectively what it is. It ought to be straightforward, but there'll always be some ex-CXer with a bone to pick who will attempt to screw this topic up by defining everything to hell and back.
Remember, definitions are like salt. Use them wisely and to taste. Don't let your opponent define your case for you. You don't need a strict definition of what and how the killing will be. LD is about abstractions and values. Don't muddle a topic this good with statistics and plans.


Ideas:

Aff: Pretty much, you have the default easy ground. It isn't the high ground, but it's going to be many debaters' strongest cases. I'm not going to give away some secret case idea, (that goes to my team), but pretty standard and pretty strong cases will come off of utility and practicality. Don't use hypothetical examples. Judges are like tigers. Poke them with knives, and you'll get your arm mauled off by an angry tiger.
As an Aff, answer me this: Why is murder morally acceptable because you feel you have a good reason? Murder is the killing of an innocent person. Why is it acceptable?

Neg: You've got the fun part. You're going to have to delve deeply into Deontological systems to figure this one out. Remember, don't let your opponent use flashy examples. Latch onto the inherent value of a person. If the Aff tries to bring up the dirty bomb scenerio or some sort, ask where the bright line is. If they bring up the value of a certain person (family, politicians, and the like) figure out the subjectivity of human value.


Anyways, I'll post more later. I'm tired.