TrollsDay #3

Beneath the neon 2011-2012 spaceTrollsDay File #3 11/20/13K - Neg1nc taco(shell)We begin from a place far from home. One could call this place a different epic-taco starting point. This place is the taco struggle, one that has lead to economic improvements in the US, while demolishing the culture of Latin America, and more specifically, Mexico. Before we can economically engage through the affirmatives manner of politics, me must first regress and analyze the effects that US engagement has had on this place, beneath the tacos.Listen to the anti-american words of Jeffrey Pilcher 12 (Jeffrey, Mexican Food history teacher at the University of Minnesota, July 16, 2012, The Messy Business of Tacos excerpt from Planet Taco: A Global History of Mexican Food, http://www.guernicamag.com/features/the-messy-business-of-tacos/) OT***We do not support the authors use of classist, racist, or gendered language. OR DO WE???***The search for authentic Mexican foodor rather, the struggle to define what that meanthas been going on for two hundred years, and some of the most important battles have been fought outside of Mexico. Notions of authenticity have been contested through interactions between insiders and outsiders, they have changed over time, and they have contributed to broader power relations. The very idea of Mexico was first conceived by Creoles, people of European descent born in the Americas, who imagined a shared past with Aztec monarchs to claim political autonomy within the Spanish empire, but who scorned the native foods made of corn. When independence came in the nineteenth century, attempts to forge a national cuisine were torn between nostalgia for Creole traditions and the allure of European fashions. Foods considered to be Indian were largely ignored, along with yet another variant of Mexican cooking that emerged in the northern territories conquered by Yankee invaders. With the U.S. rise to global power in the twentieth century, this Tex-Mex cooking was industrialized and carried around the world. Mexican elites, confronted with the potential loss of their culinary identity to this powerful neighbor, then sought to ground their national cuisine in the pre-Hispanic past. The struggle between industrialized Tex-Mex foods and Mexican peasant cuisines is a battle between globalization and national sovereignty. But an exclusive focus on this national rivalry ignores important chapters in the history of Mexican food, notably the food processing corporations that were made in Mexico and the home cooking of Mexican Americans. There is no single authentic cuisine, but rather multiple variations of Mexican food. People have been eating corn tortillas with bits of meat or beans rolled up inside for more than a millennium, but the taco achieved national hegemony only in the twentieth century. Traditionally, every region in Mexico had its own distinctive snack foods, collectively known asanto-jitos (little whimsies), made of corn dough, formed in countless ingenious shapes, and called by a wide variety of local names. The now-ubiquitous label of taco is a modern usage, probably deriving from a Spanish root, in contrast to such dishes as tamales and pozole, which have a clear lineage to indigenous languages. European meats, including beef, pork, and chicken, are the most common taco fillings, which would seem to make it part of Mexicos mestizo, or mixed Spanish-Indian heritage, a central tenet of modern nationalist ideology. Indeed, Salvador Novos national history of Mexican food imagined that this process of culinary mixing began with the first taco, a combination of Spanish pork and Indian corncarnitas in taco, with hot tortillasserved to the conquistador Corts. National histories offer little insight on the taco until the late nineteenth century. Cookbooks of the time reflected the elite preference for Spanish and French cuisine over indigenous dishes, although El Cocinero Mexicano (The Mexican Chef, 1831) provided a long list of street foods including quesadillas and chalupas (canoes), enchiladas and their rustic kin chilaquiles, andenvueltos. The envuelto (Spanish for wrap) comes closest to what would now be called a taco, but crossed with an enchilada, having chile sauce poured over the fried tortilla. Most extravagant were the envueltos de Nana Rosa (Granny Rosas wraps), stuffed with pica dillo (chopped meat) and garnished profusely. Mexicos costumbrista literature of social manners provides additional information about nineteenth-century street foods. The first national novel, Jos Joaqun Fernndez de Lizardis El Periquillo Sarniento (The mangy parrot, 1816), likewise made no mention of tacos but did describe a lunch cooked by Nana Rosa consisting of envueltos, chicken stew, adobo [marinated meat], and pulque [a native wine made of fermented maguey] flavored with prickly pears and pineapple. In retrospect, it is easy to see the similarity between a chicken taquito with hot sauce and a stick of dynamite. To understand how a Spanish word, newly used for a generic snack, became associated with a particular form of rolled tortilla, requires a shift to the silver mines that connected colonial Mexico with the global economy. Mexican and Peruvian silver formed the lifeblood not just for the Spanish empire, but for world trade in the early modern era. Endless chests of treasure passed successively from the Spanish crown to German and Genoese bankers, Dutch and Portuguese merchants, and finally Indian and Chinese workshops. The fabled Manila galleon also shipped Mexican silver pesos directly across the Pacific from Acapulco. Although the early boomtowns of Zacatecas and Potos had gone bust by the mid-seventeenth century, the newly installed Bourbon dynasty mobilized technicians and workers from Europe and the Americas to revive the industry in the late-eighteenth century. Real del Monte, the greatest of these new mines, was discovered near the town of Pachuca, sixty miles north of Mexico City. By a linguistic chance, mine workers called their explosive charges of gunpowder wrapped in paper tacos, a reference that derived both from the specific usage of a powder charge for a firearm and from the more general meaning of plug, since they prepared the blast by carving a hole in the rock before inserting the explosive taco. In retrospect, it is easy to see the similarity between a chicken taquito with hot sauce and a stick of dynamite. *** Understanding Mexican food requires not only global and local perspectives but also ethnic and business histories. The postwar association of Mexican food with the taco shell was determined as much by material considerations as by ethnic stereotypes. Making tortillas by hand involves skilled labor, even with the assistance of mechanical nixtamalmills and folding presses. Moreover, tortillas, like donuts, are best eaten fresh, preferably within a few hours off the griddle. In Mexico, tortilla factories have been largely a cottage industry, conveniently located on any street corner, and operating sporadically throughout the day for customers who line up before breakfast, lunch, and dinner. This just-in-time business model, however, fit poorly in the postwar Fordist era of giant factories pursuing economies of scale. Mass production was needed to achieve profits on low-value commodities, and there are few consumer goods cheaper than a corn tortilla. Commercial supplies of fresh tortillas were simply uneconomical in markets without regular demand from knowledgeable consumers, which basically meant everywhere except Mexico, Central America, and a few cities in the United States. By contrast, taco shells could be produced in bulk, wrapped in plastic, stored in warehouses, and shipped around the world, albeit with some breakage. They were also easier to eat than fresh corn tortillas, at least for consumers unpracticed in the deft art of rolling their own tacos. Octavio Paz famously declared, the melting pot is a social idea that, when applied to culinary art, produces abominations. These considerations of technological efficiency and gendered labor suggest the usefulness of approaching Mexican food from a commodity chain analysis, with its comprehensive perspective on production, distribution, and consumption. Commodity chains have become still more lengthy and contentious in the present era of globalization. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), implemented in 1994, allowed the free entry of subsidized Midwestern maize to Mexico, undermining family farms and forcing many to migrate north in search of work. Then, in 2007, a rush to convert corn into bio-fuel caused sudden inflation in the cost of tortillas to the poorest Mexican consumers. In a tragic irony of global capitalism, the loss of food security in Mexico coincided with the increasing presence of fresh corn tortillas in markets around the world. The Mexican poet Octavio Paz famously declared, the melting pot is a social idea that, when applied to culinary art, produces abominations. In exalting Mexican regional cuisine as authentic and scorning Tex-Mex as a bastard, he denounced the Mexican Americans who blend two cultures in their everyday lives. By contrast, the Chicana poet Gloria Anzalda called for an awareness of people who live between or across the borders that separate nations and races. The term Tex-Mex, which has been used to denote any form of inauthentic Mexican food, more properly describes a regional variant of Mexican culture from Texas, with Anglo Saxon and Central European influences, just as Veracruz is a melting pot of Afro-Mexican culture and Sonora has a taste of Chinese. Such a consciousness allows for the recognition of endless varieties of Mexican food. Norteo cooks often make soft tacos with tortillas of wheat flour instead of corn because of regional patterns of agriculture. Ground beef, iceberg lettuce, and cheddar cheese were the most readily available ingredients from the U.S. food processing industry. Contrary to corporate myth, Mexican Americans even invented the taco shell, back when Glen Bell was still boiling weenies. Instead of the fast food taco, it should be called the Mexican American taco, as a tribute to the creativity of hard-working ethnic cooks. People use food to think about others, and popular views of the taco as cheap, hot, and potentially dangerous have reinforced racist images of Mexico as a land of tequila, migrants, and tourists diarrhea. Moreover, colonial stereotypes about Mexicans and their food that took shape in the southwestern United States have been transmitted around the world. But it also makes no sense to exchange the Anglo mythology of chili queens and the Taco Bell dog for a Manichean nationalist ideology prescribing romanticized peasant food as an antidote to McDonaldization. The origins of the flour tortilla are lost, but the meanings that it had for the people of northern New Spain need not be. From a material perspective, it was a relatively easy way for rural women to prepare wheat without the time and expense of making either risen bread or corn tortillas, as folklorist Arthur Campa has noted. Wheat tortillas replaced the corn product in Hispanic homes in northern Mexico and most of the Southwest. It was considerably easier and faster for the housewife to prepare the biscuit-like dough and roll it out than go through the long process of making nixtamal, he explained. With wheat tortillas she could have bread on the table in a matter of minutes. Convenience was certainly important for hardworking frontier women, but such a calculation was valid only when both grains were affordable, a late colonial phenomenon at best. Symbolically, wheat and corn held very different meanings; the former as the food of Spanish conquistadors, the latter associated with lower-class Indians. Even today in New Mexico, the choice of tortillas can be a political statementmany status-conscious Hispanic women would not be caught dead making them out of Indian corn. Moreover, these associations vary across the north; flour tortillas may have arrived last in northeastern New Spain, the leading center of Jewish settlement in the colonial period. Home economists found that Mexicans in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas were just making the transition from corn to flour tortillas in the 1930s. Border residents often take great pride in their Hispanic origins, but Indians also made vital contributions to the cuisines of northern Mexico. Despite the priests tireless proselytism of wheat bread and wine, pioneer women of Mesoamerican origin were just as successful in spreading corn tortillas and chile pepper stews to the region. Spaniards were also influenced by native cooking practices, for example, during a famine of 1590 in which a Spanish official ordered two oxen to be pit-roasted in an indigenous manner as barbacoa de mezcal. Nor were the native inhabitants of the frontier passive in these cultural exchanges. They provided crucial knowledge of local foods to both Spaniards and Mesoamerican Indians alike. While adapting new foods and practices to survive in a landscape irrevocably changed by colonialism, the Pueblos, Rarmuri, Cuncaac and others succeeded in preserving their cultural integrity. Even Spaniards lived simply on the colonial frontier, with few luxuries beyond the inevitable cup of chocolate. Wealthy mining towns absorbed the bulk of agricultural surpluses, and most settlers depended on maize for subsistence. Only at the end of the eighteenth century did the wheat flour tortilla emerge as a product of an artistic renaissance in the borderlands. These cooking practices eventually coalesced into distinct regional cuisines through a process of selective historical memory that assigned iconic foods to local identitiesdried beef as symbolic of Sonoran vaqueros, lamb adobo emblemizing New Mexican shepherdseven though colonial New Mexicans salted beef and Sonorans also used adobo. Nor was there an authentic Mexican food in pre-Hispanic times. Although the Creoles who first conceived of the idea of Mexico considered themselves to be the heirs of Aztec emperors, they had no desire to inherit Moctezumas dinner. The indigenous cuisine of maize, while nutritious, diverse, and sophisticated, was more often associated with poor Indians living in the countryside than with the grandeur of pre-Hispanic civilizations. There were a few exceptions; Creoles eagerly adopted chocolate, the drink of Maize in the Making of Mexico by the ancient nobility, and chiles, with their addictive spicy flavors. But ambivalence about the indigenous culinary heritage continued to frustrate efforts to define a Mexican national cuisine throughout the nineteenth century. Meanwhile, corn and chiles spread widely around the world.While the affirmative has proposed that the United States federal government develop Mexico to meet the needs of the western world, history has shown that they must mention tacos.It may have been MSN user spell Czech who said (Former car rental company worker, The 10 worst foods to eat while driving, http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/the-10-worst-foods-to-eat-while-driving.aspx?cp-documentid=6788363&page=2&ucpg=4) OTAlso, I can't believe they didn't mention tacos. I know a lot of people who will eat tacos while driving, but not with me in the car!Tacos are good talking about them can only help value to lifemaldroid18 13 (15-year old male, possibly batman, Are tacos delicious?, http://www.debate.org/opinions/are-tacos-delicious) OTAre tacos delicious? No. Im actually just messing with you all. Tacos are a god given gift. The only reason I posted no was to make people go insane. Tacos are like happiness. You just ate happiness. The happiness is inside you. You are happy now. You just pooped out a turd of happiness hours later. You still think that taco was awesome and want to have a Taco Bell bed and breakfast. :3The Role of The Ballot is to vote for the team that best represents authentic Mexican foodThe affs definitive Crunchy Shell form of politics is no good and is aggressive towards mouths. To protect my mouth I will now read this card slowly. Also, our Soft Shell approach is pretty cool. Oh and you cant do both.vgabs 13 (19-year old female, in college for computer science, Are soft shell tacos better than crunchy shell tacos?, http://www.debate.org/opinions/are-soft-shell-tacos-better-than-crunchy-shell-tacos) OTAre soft shell tacos better than crunchy shell tacos? 100% Say Yes. Aw man YES! I love soft shell tacos! I always end up cutting the side of my mouth on the crunchy shell ones. These have a protective layer. I always get a combo though, the soft on top of the crunchy shell. I get it like that because it stays together much better than just the tortilla by itself. *PLEASE DO NOT READ SMALL FONT*AT: PERMUTATIONsThe perm costs over 5 times more than the PIK in the end, all we want is the taco. Why bother with the aff?Fast Food Menu Prices 13 ( Taco Bell Prices, http://www.fastfoodmenuprices.com/taco-bell-prices/) OT

Crunchy Taco$0.99

Burrito Supreme, Crunchy Taco, and Large Drink$5.29

AT: FRAMEWORKFrame Working is bad risks firesCambridge Chronicle 1874 (Volume XXIX, Number 16, April 18, 1874, The Frame Factory Fire., http://cambridge.dlconsulting.com/cgi-bin/cambridge?a=d&d=Chronicle18740418-01.2.33#) OTAt 7 oclock Friday morning an alarm was given, on account of fire in the picture frame factory at 61 Broadway. The business was owned by J. J. Gray, and the buildings by Micah Dyer, Jr. The loss was total, and will reach nearly $50,000. Several buildings in the vicinity were slightly injured. Over 100 workmen are temporarily out of employment by the fire. The burning building was in the vicinity of numerous inflammable material, and, the firemen deserve praise for confining it to the locality where it originated.AT Realism/HEGHEG??? HEG????? WERE A KRITIK OF HEG WITHOUT FIRST CONSIDERING THE IMPLICATIONS OF TACOS. THE AFF IS LIKE PLAYING CALL OF DUTY ON AN EMPTY STOMACH EVERYONE KNOWS YOU NEED A 2 LITRE AND A PALLET OF OREOSAT UtilI dont know what util is so please vote negative in this round good judge.AT Case O/WCase cant Outweigh Were a buried PIK the K doesnt preclude the action of the 1AC, it just reposes the question of the aff without the intent to anti-taco literally solves the entirety of the aff plus the net benefit K - AffLink TurnNot mentioning tacos is good! Solves obesity because nobody will get their hopes up and eat a tonMister ExploringLife 13 (Level 5 (yep, FIVE) Yahoo Answers member, possibly Chuck Norris, I am cooking breakfast tacos for 50 people. How much should I buy?, http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130911104532AAtHXHs) OTEggs cook down, so 2 min per person, probably closer to three, unless you add volume described below. A pound or potato per person for the potatoes would be another minimum: 50lbs, 5lbs onions, 5lbs peppers. You didn't mention tacos, two tacos per person, some will eat one, some more. A gallon of salsa, 1/2 gallon of fresh cilantro finely chopped, I like the stems too, it's where the flavor is. Picture cooking for 5, double it, and multiply it by 5: a dozen eggs, a medium potato each, and so forth.Malthus DA UpdatesLink to Give Back the LandExterminating the natives is the only way to control the populationMalthus 98 (Thomas Malthus, greatest human ever alive, published 1798, An Essay on the Principle of Population, http://www.esp.org/books/malthus/population/malthus.pdf) OTIn these savage contests many tribes must have been utterly exterminated. Some, probably, perished by hardship and famine. Others, whose leading star had given them a happier direction, became great and powerful tribes, and, in their turns, sent off fresh adventurers in search of still more fertile seats. The prodigious waste of human life occasioned by this perpetual struggle for room and food was more than supplied by the mighty power of population, acting, in some degree, unshackled from the consent habit of emigration. The tribes that migrated towards the South, though they won these more fruitful regions by continual battles, rapidly increased in number and power, from the increased means of subsistence. Till at length the whole territory, from the confines of China to the shores of the Baltic, was peopled by a various race of Barbarians, brave, robust, and enterprising, inured to hardship, and delighting in war. Some tribes maintained their independence. Others ranged themselves under the standard of some barbaric chieftain who led them to victory after victory, and what was of more importance, to regions abounding in corn, wine, and oil, the long wished for consummation, and great reward of their labours. An Alaric, an Attila, or a Zingis Khan, and the chiefs around them, might fight for glory, for the fame of extensive conquests, but the true cause that set in motion the great tide of northern emigration, and that continued to propel it till it rolled at different periods against China, Persia, Italy, and even Egypt, was a scarcity of food, a population extended beyond the means of supporting it.THE BOTTOM OF THE DOCKETGoldfish CounterplanInherency1. The Border Patrol SucksActual Border Patrol Agents 13 Border Patrol: The Ugly Truth http://border_patrol_rancor.tripod.com/index5.htm MPThe Border Patrol is a sloppy, unorganized, and totally rogue force of federal goons. Problems start at the top and snowball down the chain. Supervisors are provided with no management training and many have little or no previous experience. For those who do feel a sense of responsibility early in their careers, it is soon quelled by their own superiors. The average field agent couldn't be any less motivated, and supervisors couldn't possibly care any less. Deficiencies in management are not the only problems, but they are the root cause of many of the others. For example, supervisors teach agents the difference between right and wrong and then turn around and encourage improper and even illegal behavior. Agents routinely perform vehicle stops and illegal searches without having the required level of probable cause. Such actions are against the law! Why do they do it? Because they can! Why do they get away with it? Usually because the people they are harrassing are both unfamiliar with their rights and with the law. Border Patrol Agents encounter a lot of drugs since they work so close to the international boundary. It has been said that they seize more dope than the DEA! While this may be true, at least along the border, did you ever wonder why the majority of the smugglers are never apprehended? Agents are taught and encouraged by their supervisors to not catch the bad guys! Why? Because it generates more paperwork. We have heard many stories about men who were caught with drugs in their possession by Border Patrol Agents and were forced to flee the scene. Agents screamed and yelled at them, often at gunpoint, to run back to Mexico. Some of them even fired bullets into the air or ground around the surrendering drug smugglers to scare them away. Much of this activity is done because of supervisory admonitions. Others do this out of fear because they expect the smugglers to have weapons. An agent in Arizona was killed in 1998 when he attempted to apprehend a group of narcotics smugglers. Agents admit that the Border Patrol suffers a lot of internal problems. In addition to having major deficiencis in the area of management, they also have no decent adminitrative or personnel support. They have secretaries who refuse to answer the phone and truly haven't got a clue what their jobs are supposed to entail. Personnel? HA! Other than an office and job title it is non-existent. If it weren't for the 'Welfare to Work' program it could be shut-down and no one would ever notice the difference. The 'Welfare to Work' cases who fill the personnel specialist slots are absolutely worthless. Worst of all, they knowit, their supervisors know it, and no one can be bothered to make any changes. The people in the positions who could (and should) take the lead in bringing about changes to this unorganized organization do not care. They are a bunch of individuals concerned only with their own affairs. Many Border Patrol supervisors share a common phrase. "I've got mine!" Translated, this means that as long as they have their job, position, and pay, then anyone elses problems are of no concern. Its every man for himself! That kind of attitude runs rampid throughout the Border Patrol, spreading like an uncontrollable cancer, destroying the agency from within.Thus the plan: The United States Federal Government should put 50,000 cops on the border between the breathtaking, marvelous, wonderful, awe-inspiring, fantastic United States of Americas and Mexico.Advantage One is MarijuanaYou heard me. Kush. Weed. Pot. Ganja. Mary Jane. Bud. Herb. Buddha. That stuff Bob Marley used. Cannabis. Dope. Hash. Laughing Grass. Jedi. Puff. Yoda.1. Cops support the legalization of marijuanaGwynne 6/13 Kristen: associate editor and drug policy reporter for AlterNet and the New York Times Five Reasons Cops Want to Legalize Marijuana MPMost people don't think "cops" when they think about who supports marijuana legalization. Police are, after all, the ones cuffing stoners, and law enforcement groups have a long history of lobbying against marijuana policy reform. Many see this as a major factor in preventing the federal government from recognizing that a historic majority of Americans 52 percent favors legalizing weed But the landscape is changing fast. Today, a growing number of cops are part of America's "marijuana majority." Members of the non-profit group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) say that loosening our pot policy wouldn't necessarily condone drug use, but control it, while helping cops to achieve their ultimate goal of increasing public safety. Here are the five biggest reasons why even cops are starting to say, "Legalize It!"2. Arresting peeps using weed isnt real work Gwynne 6/13 Kristen: associate editor and drug policy reporter for AlterNet and the New York Times Five Reasons Cops Want to Legalize Marijuana MPIn the past decade, police made more than 7 million marijuana arrests, 88 percent of them for possession alone. In 2010, states spent $3.6 billion enforcing the war on pot, with blacks nearly four times as likely as whites to be arrested. That's a lot of police time and resources wasted, says former Seattle Chief of Police Norm Stamper, who had an "aha moment" about marijuana policy while working for the San Diego Police Department in the late 1960s. "I had arrested a 19-year-old in his parents' home for the possession of a very small quantity of marijuana, and put him in the backseat of a caged police car, after having kicked down his door," recalls Stamper. While driving the prisoner to jail, he says, "I realized, mainly, that I could have been doing real police work, but instead I'm going to be out of service for several hours impounding the weed, impounding him, and writing arrest, impound, and narcotics reports. I was away from the people I had been hired to serve and in no position to stop a reckless drunk driver swerving all over the road, or to respond to a burglary in progress, or intervene in domestic violence situation." Cops have limited resources, and spending them on marijuana arrests will inevitably divert them from other policing. Adds Stamper, "In short, making a marijuana arrest for a simple possession case was no longer, for me, real police work." 3. Legalizing weed would increase relations with Cops and their communities Gwynne 6/13 Kristen: associate editor and drug policy reporter for AlterNet and the New York Times Five Reasons Cops Want to Legalize Marijuana MPBaltimore narcotics veteran Neil Franklin says the prevalence of marijuana arrests, especially among communities of color, creates a "hostile environment" between police and the communities they serve. "Marijuana is the number one reason right now that police use to search people in this country," he says. "The odor of marijuana alone gives a police officers probable cause to search you, your person, your car, or your home." Legalizing pot, says Franklin, could lead to "hundreds of thousands of fewer negative police and citizen contacts across this country. That's a hell of an opportunity for law enforcement to rebuild some bridges in our communities mainly our poor, black and Latino communities." Franklin adds that this would increase citizens' trust in police, making them more likely to communicate and help solve more serious crimes. Building mutual respect would also protect cops on the job. Adds Franklin, "Too many police officers are killed or injured serving the War on Drugs as opposed to protecting and serving their communities."4. The war on pot is against our Constitutional rights!!!!! Legalizing it would allow cops to view everyone respectfully Gwynne 6/13 Kristen: associate editor and drug policy reporter for AlterNet and the New York Times Five Reasons Cops Want to Legalize Marijuana MP Downing says that monetary incentives for drug arrests, like asset forfeiture and federal grants, encourage an attitude where police will make drug arrests by any means necessary, from militarized SWAT raids to paid informants who admit to lying. "The overall effect is that we are losing ground in terms of the traditional peace officer role of protecting public safety, and morphing our local police officers into federal drug warriors," Downing says. Quotas and pressure for officers to make drug arrests which profit police departments via federal funding and asset forfeiture also encourage routine violations of the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. The NYPD, for example, stops and sometimes frisks well over 500,000 people a year, the vast majority of them youths of color the basis for a pending federal lawsuit challenging the policy on constitutional grounds. While New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has defended stop-and-frisk as a way to get guns off the street, in fact, it's more often used to arrest kids with small amounts of weed. Stamper adds that legalization would allow police officers "to see young adults not as criminals, but members of their community" and start respecting those young people's civil liberties. 5. If you want to be safe, legalize the dank green. If you dont legalize it, join the cartels nowGwynne 6/13 Kristen: associate editor and drug policy reporter for AlterNet and the New York Times Five Reasons Cops Want to Legalize Marijuana MP Marijuana's illegality has done very little to stop its use. A recent survey by the National Institutes of Health found that 36 percent of high school seniors had smoked marijuana in the past year. Legalization would most likely involve age restrictions on marijuana purchases, while at the same time providing quality control over product. "The only way we can effectively control drugs is to create a regulatory system for all of them," says Stamper. "If you are truly a proponent of public safety, if you truly want safer communities, then it's a no-brainer that we have to end drug prohibition and treat [marijuana] as a health issue, like we did with tobacco," says Franklin. "Education and treatment is the most effective and cost-efficient way to reduce drug use." On the other hand, adds Franklin, "If you support a current system of drug prohibition, then you support the very same thing that the cartel and neighborhood gangs support. You might as well be standing next to them, shaking hands. Because they don't want an end to prohibition, either." 6. Scientists say that all the negative stuff about Weed are myths. By the way, President Obama did it. Why cant we?Vosick-Levinson 6/20/13 (SO CLOSE) Simon Collumnist for The New York Times Is Weed Really Bad For You? http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/is-weed-really-bad-for-you-20130610#ixzz2l3LkNzpYMPAs pot activists fight for full legalization, the drug warriors who oppose them have long sought their own elusive grail: conclusive, scientific proof that marijuana poses significant health risks. The only problem? An unshakable dependence on flawed studies. "Much of what we believe in this society about drugs is just bullshit," says Columbia University professor Carl Hart. "And we as scientists have been complicit." Luckily, there's a new generation of researchers pushing back against these oft-repeated prohibitionist canards. MYTH: Pot ruins the teenage brain This drug-warrior talking point has gained such traction recently that even respectable liberals like New York Times columnist Bill Keller regurgitate it as a self-evident truth. The only basis for this are shoddy reports like a recent international study purporting to link adolescent marijuana use with long-term IQ decline. "Do the authors believe that cannabis is the only thing that could affect your IQ between the ages of 13 and 38?" asks Norwegian economist Ole Rgeberg. "That puzzled me." MYTH: Pot can make you schizophrenic or depressed Other studies have tried to engineer even bigger scares, claiming to demonstrate a connection between smoking pot as a teen and serious mental illnesses like depression or schizophrenia later on. "Give me a break," says Hart. "You look at these studies and see how they determine psychosis it's a joke." The same old logical fallacies show up here, too. "Which came first?" asks Suzi Gage, a Ph.D. student at the University of Bristol. "Did the cannabis use precede the mental-health problems, or is it that people who are psychotic use cannabis to self-medicate?" MYTH: Pot destroys your memory Hart's research actually suggests the opposite: Temporary short-term memory loss was worst among inexperienced smokers, but regular stoners showed no serious decrease in cognitive function. "Just like any other drug, if you let tolerance develop, you decrease a lot of the negative effects," he says. MYTH: Pot is a gateway to harder drugs Anti-drug zealots want you to think that if your honors-student daughter takes a couple of hits off a joint over spring break, she'll probably be passed out in an alley with a needle sticking out of her arm by Labor Day. "Most people who try it don't even continue smoking marijuana," says Hart. "You might as well argue that pot is a gateway drug to get in the White House." President Obama. MYTH: Pot is dangerous even in moderationColumbia University professor Meg Haney has been studying marijuana addiction since the Nineties, focusing on the relatively small fraction of smokers who do become dependent. The good news for everyone else: "If somebody is smoking one or two joints a week," says Haney, "the consequences are probably going to be very, very, very minimal." MYTH: Pot has no medical benefitsDismissing the very idea of marijuana as medicine is key to the prohibitionist agenda. Leaving aside years of anecdotal and clinical support for pot's effectiveness in relieving chronic pain, nausea, glaucoma and more, there is fresh evidence that the active compounds in marijuana can actually kill cancer cells. Guillermo Velasco, a professor at Madrid's Complutense University, has found that THC has a powerful tumor-shrinking effect in rodents with breast, liver, pancreatic and brain cancers. Next, he hopes to test the hypothesis on people. "I think we'll see clinical trials in the next five years," says Velasco. "Cannabinoids also ameliorate the side effects of chemotherapy, so they could make patients feel better in general."

7. Herb is the healing of a nation, alcohol is the destructionBob Marley brainyquotes.com MPHerb is the healing of a nation, alcohol is the destructionAdvantage 2 is MURICAWe increase MURICAN pride by having MURICAN cops on the border instead of border patrol agents who are protecting both countries. PERM: You must say MURICA for the rest of this debate round instead of America to increase pride in our flawless country. StartingNOW!

1. MURICA is pure due to the divine intervention of God. Oh, and COPS. (Gods a cop btw)uncyclopedia.com 13 America is the BEST!!! http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/America_is_the_best!!! MPChapter 1 (God Chooses America) And then God sent his spirit into the world to separate the goats from the sheep. The goats, namely blacks and homosexuals, were cast into the lake of fire. However, the sheep, a.k.a. Conservatives, were given the most holy land on earth: America. ~ The Gospel of James Dobson 3:15-16 on the founding of America Chapter 3 (Here come the Jews! and the Blacks! and the Beaners!) And Jesus said unto his disciples, 'God only has enough love in his heart for one race. And unless a black chick starts giving me head right now, I'm thinking that He still loves the whites. ~ The Gospel of James Dobson 30:2 Unfortunately, the only thing keeping America from exploding with flavor is the fact that minorities are still stinking up my country! We have Jewseverywhere, Blacks in our schools, and Mexicans running across our borders! What did we do about it? We turned to our Fearless Leader, George W. Bush. He came up with such wonderful ideas, such as 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, and the Iraq Warto send these dirty animals to their graves, leaving our nation pure, just as God wanted it.2. 15 Reasons why MURICA is so effing awesome Strachan et.al. 11/11/13 Maxwell Strachan, Alissa Scheller, Jan Diehm 15 Ways the United States is the best (at being the worst) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/29/american-exceptionalism_n_4170683.html MP1. The US in one of four countries in the world that does not mandate paid leave for mothers of newborns. 2. Were also the only advanced economy that doesnt require companies to give workers paid vacation. 3. We dont even guarantee workers paid sick days. 4. We spend the most per student on education, but outcomes arent great. 5. We spend more on our military than any other country. 6. We export more weapons than any country in the world. 7. We incarcerate more of our population than any other country. 8. No many country has nearly as many guns as people. 9. Americans consume more calories from sweeteners on average each day than anyone else in the world. 10. We also consume the most calories a whopping 3770 on average a day. 11. The US spends more on health care than other industrialized countries. 12. Prescription drug costs are just one reason health care costs so much. 13. More babies die the day they are born in the US than in any industrialized country. 14. Were best at creating super-rich people, at the expense of everyone else. 15. Inequality in the US is the worst in the industrialized world.3. Mexicans like cops and need cops and not border agentsN/A 12 Stupid crap Mexicans do http://wpww88.com/2012/02/13/stupid-crap-mexicans-do/ MPWalk through a desert to get here, only to be left by their coyote and group to die in the scorching heat Silly beaners. Have gang banger kids who sell drugs, shoot people and cause problems for everyone, but the parents say, Felipe is a good boy. Even when they do nothing wrong, when they see a cop they run.4. PATRIOTS OF MURICA UNITE@thedancingbanana 13 Is Patriotism a good thing? http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-patriotism-a-good-thing MPAmerican values, have taught us to this day that being an American is an honor! For those who are not American, they're is no need to get angry for this post. Now, patriotism is what started this country. Patriotism is what brings this country together. Without patriotism, America would explode in pandemonium, and everyone will feel indignant! Why do we celebrate these American holidays? Why do we stuff ourselves with turkey on Thanksgiving? Patriotism is what our founding fathers supported! Our country is a proud one. We are a nation that others look up to. Patriotism also explains that you are a true American citizen. So my answer is.....Yes.....Patriotism is a GREAT thing!5. Lets reflect on this advantage with a stirring rendition of God Bless MURICA Berlin, Irving MPGod Bless America.Land that I loveStand beside her, and guide herThru the night with a light from above.From the mountains, to the prairies ,To the oceans, white with foamGod bless AmericaMy home sweet home."

Solvency1. Border Patrol does nothing, cops solve for unruly crowdsCorello 10/9 Hipolito, a reporter. Dozens Confront Border Patrol Agents During Tucson Traffic Stop http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/dozens-confront-border-patrol-agents-during-tucson-traffic-stop/article_977b6e76-309d-11e3-b3be-001a4bcf887a.html MPA total of seven TPD personnel responded to the scene, Hawke said. She did not know how many Border Patrol agents were there. Some activists estimated it was more than 15 agents. When the activists tried again to keep the agents from leaving, a Tucson police force commander there authorized the use of pepper spray to disperse the crowd.2. PoPo Protect PeepsN/A N/D What does a Police Officer do? http://rde.nsw.edu.au/rm/stage1_Modules/helpers/police_officer.htm MPA police officer's main job is to protect his or her fellow citizens. They uphold the laws which are made for the benefit of everybody.3. Cops save the world DUH N/A 13 Green Police http://savetheworldclub.org/services/green-police/ MPGreen Police started in Glastonbury in 1976 to encourage litter picking. Volunteers carried out ad hoc campaigns on behalf of Save the World Club. Spearheaded by alternative comedian and eco activist Professor Kayoss (Des Kay), they successfully distributed recycling bags and collected various items with a performance based approach to social and ecological learning.