Maybe not. Rolando Valeasquez offers some compelling commentary in the Dallas Morning News‘ editorial section.

Like football players, debaters have to have quick reflexes. When debating and listening to our opponent’s arguments, we have seconds to process the information and develop counter-arguments. A few weeks ago, I debated at the nationally renowned debate hosted by St. Marks School of Texas, going up against some of the best debate teams in the nation. I was thoroughly exhausted, my brain and body drained of energy.

Like football, debate is intensively competitive. Rivalries develop, just like in any other sport. You know which teams you want to beat, yet you develop a begrudging admiration for their tactics and strategies.

Like in other sports, we debaters are scouted out and recruited by some of the most prestigious colleges and universities. Scouts frequently attend the high-profile tournaments to identify debaters. Scholarships are offered to those lucky and gifted debaters.

What do you think?

Woodring and Lux will still occupy the same offices in the Garrett Conference Center, but they’ll be in new positions. After two decades of directing WKU’s award-winning speech and debate programs, Woodring is retiring as director. Lux, who has been associate director for the past three years, is taking over as director.

“I’m incredibly happy that Jace is going to stay here and take over this program,” Woodring said. “He’s the ideal person. It takes a special person to work with coaches and students and he’s that special person.”

Lux, a native of Evansville, Ind., was a member of WKU’s Forensic Team from 1998 to 2000 and was a team coach for six years before becoming associate director. “Judy has done everything she can to make sure I’m prepared for this role,” he said. “You don’t often get the chance to work with the person who is the best in the world at their position, but I’ve done that for the past nine years. I’ve learned from the best.”

The National Forensic League recently honored Woodring with the Brother Gregory “Rene” Sterner Alumni Lifetime Service Award at the NFL National Tournament Awards Assembly in Kansas City, Mo. Woodring received the award for her decades-long commitment to speech and debate at both the high school and college levels. The award was presented by one of her standout alumni, recording artist and daytime television star Kassie DePaiva.

“I was truly surprised,” Woodring said of the award. “I was very honored.”

“This award is yet another recognition of Mrs. Woodring’s exceptional leadership in building and advancing forensics program opportunities for students,” WKU Provost Barbara Burch said. “She is widely recognized for her talent, dedication and exceptional achievements in building the forensics program at WKU, and this award affirms the impact of her influence and leadership nationally as well.”

President Gary Ransdell agrees. “Judy Woodring has, as much anyone at WKU, helped us understand that WKU can indeed become a leading American university,” he said. “She has taken a good forensics program and turned it into the best in American higher education.”

Woodring, a 1965 WKU graduate, taught speech and debate at Webster County Union County high schools before returning to the Hill in 1988 as director of the Kentucky High School Speech League then becoming director of the forensic program in 1989.

In the past two decades, the program has built a tradition of state, national and international championships.

Read the Full Story at the WKU News Blog

Kris Kracht isn’t a sports guy, but he’s made a habit of describing his life’s work in sports terms.

Kracht coaches the speech team at Gustavus Adolphus College, a private liberal arts school in Minnesota with a former football coach as president. And that president likes it when he can say Gustavus is No. 10 in the nation, just like a Division I football team.

Kracht explains speech recruiting in the terms of football recruiting, and he does it in similar ways as well — calling students he’s interested in, showing up at their tournaments and, most recently, attending the National Forensic League’s national tournament in Kansas City.

Kracht’s parallels between forensics and sports ring true.  At the nation’s most competitive collegiate programs, forensics can take up a large portion of a student’s time.  Many colleges value their forensics programs as hallmarks of student academic and competitive achievement.  While there are many high school coaches who would discourage continued participation in college forensics, I think it is certainly an avenue that more high school competitors should explore.  Membership in the American Forensic Association and National Forensic Association are growing.  You can check out the results from the 2010 NFA National Tournament, which highlights colleges and universities with successful programs.

Read the Full Article

The 2011 National Forensic League National Tournament (Web site) and the 2011 National Junior Forensic League National Tournament (Web site) will be held in Dallas, TX in June of 2011.  By the great start in place, it looks like things are going to be a blast.  What’s particularly interesting is that the NFL and NJFL Tournament will run parallel for the first time.

NFL Nationals: June 13-18
NJFL Nationals: June 16-18

The competition for all events, as well as the awards, will take place at one venue: The Dallas Sheraton (www.sheratondallashotel.com)  Consider this concept for a moment: one venue.  If your mind is not yet blown, click past the jump for a video produced by the host committee.

Blogging the Supplemental Events may prove a bit more tricky than the Main Events, as information has been a bit more hard to come by.  We apologize for any misspellings of names and welcome corrections from our readers.

Topic Area: The United States of Anger and Demonization

Speaker 1 — Louis Lee
Topic: “Demagogues unite.  Democracy needs you.”
Talk show hosts have a substantial effect on discourse in America.  Democracy needs unity among the groups.
1.  They deter Americans from participating in the political process.
2.  They convey information to Americans, albeit in a biased way.  They are useful as a means to share information.

Speaker 2 — Eli Bernstein
Topic: “Just say no.  Always, no.”
Debate has come to an end.  Taking away the power of debate diminishes the power of the USA.
1.  How Republicans have transitioned further to the during Obama Administration.  Shouting down the opposition and the filibuster are the key tools for accomplishing their “no.”
2.  How this affects Average Joe voters by turning them off from voting.  Americans are quickly losing trust in both political parties.

Speaker 3 — Rohan Pi
Topic:  ”Don’t tax me, Bro.”
Ultimately, we have to acknowledge that taxes are the down-payments we make for an advanced society. The lifestyle we enjoy is not possible without taxes.
1.  They maintain the goods, services and entitlements we enjoy as a society.
2.  We are in debt to the idea of prosperity by utilizing increased taxes to bring down the deficit and provide a better future.  This can be accomplished through reduced spending and higher taxes.

Speaker 4 — Nathaniel Hass
Topic: “Glenn and Rush: Ranting all the way to the bank.”
There are voices that are willing to make offensive, harmful arguments in public that are based on cultural stereotypes.
1.  What these people say, which is just plain wrong.
2.  Why are there people who say this, and who in the world is employing them?
3.  These people are paid to say such racist, terrible and untrue things.

Speaker 5 — Davis Mattick
Topic: “Nattering Nebobs (sp?) of Negativism”
We’ve become a negative culture.  (As negative as Harry Potter in the fifth novel.)  Giving up on an idea before it’s given time is unfair.
1.  Americans, in general, have a fatalistic attitude.
2.  We’ve given up on the future; however, there’s no reason to maintain that negativity.

Speaker 6 — Trevor Griffin
Topic: “Internet Flamethrowers”
We forget that what we do on the internet and social networking websites is a metaphorical flame-thrower that can have serious ramifications.
1.  Social such as Facebook and other social media.
2.  The political napalm thrown via the traditional media (FOX, NBC, etc.)
3.  Solutions for political and social flame-throwing and their extremities.

It’s going to be a hectic 16 minutes.

The event began on Wednesday morning with a record 560 entries. That’s a record across the entire tournament.

The topic for the final round is “This House believes that Barack Obama is succeeding in ensuring the future prosperity of the United States.”

Affirmative: 451 — Erin Morris (Kickapoo HS, MO)

Negative: 741 —  Tejas Perdiv (Regis HS, NJ)

Author’s Note: The following statements represent the claims of the speakers to the best of my ability and should not be read as personal commentary on the round.

Proposition Constructive (2 min)

Education initiatives spur potential for future prosperity.  Key incentives are adding the opportunity for education and innovation through a better workforce.

Financial reform will stabilize the economy as well.  Regulation is needed, and is a key initiative of Obama.  TARP is used as the prime example with banks paying back funds and being held accountable.  Stabilizing one part of the economy has created a positive domino effect through free-market system.

CX of Proposition (1 min)

Q: Is there a difference between ensuring and net progress?
Q: How should we weigh today’s round?
Q: If your contentions are not long lasting, is that a vote for the Neg?

Opposition Constructive (2 min)

Clarification: the resolutions says that “ensuring future prosperity.”  Aff can give

1.  Idea of National Security.  Obama has not ensured this because fails to address corruption in Afghanistan, ethnic conflicts, and Taliban movement into Pakistan.  The risks still exist.  Increasing Anti-American Sentiment. More movement in Middle East means greater risk.

2.  Engergy Crisis.  While investing in some green tech, he is not making substantial progress to moving away from oil.

3.  Environment. His actions with BP and global warming have been minimal.  Moreover, he has little political capital to pass substantial legislation.

CX of Opposition (1 min)

Q:  What about the recent stimulus package for green energy?
Q:  We should live in an impractical world where we don’t use oil?
Q:  Does it have to happen immediately?
Q:  What is your standard of ensuring prosperity in general?

Mandatory Prep Time (1 min)

Proposition Rebuttal (2 min)

1.  Energy Crisis.  Neg fails to ignore economics stimulus for solar, wind and algae in addition to other green jobs.  We are creating energy independence while creating new and more jobs, underscoring the need for innovation.  Technology is not only becoming better but also creating small biz opportunities.

2.  Foreign Affairs.  Ignores current efforts to combat cocaine and opium trades in Columbia and Afghanistan.

3.  Financial Reform is Key.  Because we have such a connected free-market system, that money will be invested and stabilize other industries.  We help the American people.  We help foreign relations.  We ensure future prosperity.

Opposition Rebuttal (2 min)

Affirmative has to prove solvency.  The Aff has to show it’s actually doing something.

Education. The problem with education funding is that high school dropouts are increasing and we’re dwindling in the international pack.  No politician is going to pass something without good intentions but nothing is happening and no prosperity is ensured.

Financial Reform.  The economy is based on cycles.  You cannot prove causation based on ebb.  Deficit levels are at the highest ever.

All Aff points are speculative.  Until she proves what they are doing and how they are long term.

Moreover, Aff drops international sentiment against US.

Mandatory Prep Time (1 min)

Proposition Rebuttal (2 min)

Obama has been in office for 1.5 years.  That’s not enough time to prove long term is going to work out.  We must look at the prospect not empirical evidence because the future hasn’t happened yet.

Says Neg drops foreign relations and drug trade argument.

Says TARP prop falls but holds to line that Obama was vital in keeping economic recovery on track.

Key voter comes down to innovation and future prospects for improved economic and social prosperity, better jobs, and innovation.  Obama is indicating signs of success and future prosperity.

Opposition Rebuttal (2 min)

Aff drops the need for solvency by saying that Obama is new on the job.  The crux is that it’s not doing anything.  That’s all we can evaluate in the round.

Education was nullified and later dropped by the Prop.

Says our efforts are doing more harm than good because of the substantial risks inherent in what they do.  Everything Obama is doing is having negative effects, devaluting of the dollar and inflation, etc.

The green movement isn’t doing anything yet and he doesn’t have the political capital for a full-on energy use shift.

Blogging the Supplemental Events may prove a bit more tricky than the Main Events, as information has been a bit more hard to come by.  We apologize for any misspellings of names and welcome corrections from our readers.

Speaker 1 —  A. J. Tallow
performing “Being that Guy” a program by Tony Damico

Speaker 2 — Malcom Minor
performing “Knock, Knock” by Daniel Beaty

Speaker 3 — James Videl
performing “The Butter Battle”  by Theodor (Dr. Seuss) Geisel

Speaker 4 — Durrell Jamerson
performing “Fallen Heroes” a program by Will Bell and (unknown).

Speaker 5 — Taylor Walker
performing “Somewhere There is a Poem” by Gina Loring

Speaker 6 — Andrea Platt
performing  ”My Thick Heritage” by Barry Solas (sp?)

Blogging the Supplemental Events may prove a bit more tricky than the Main Events, as information has been a bit more hard to come by.  We apologize for any misspellings of names and welcome corrections from our readers.

Speaker 1 — Michael Mosella
performing “Commercial Break” by Augustin Burrows

Speaker 2 — Zachary Eisenstein
performing “Rest Area” by Clay Chapman

Speaker 3 — John Reynolds
performing  ”Under the Wolf, Under the Dog” by Adam Rapp

Speaker 4 — Johari Mackey
performing “Show Business” by Martha Southgate

Speaker 5 — Robert Jackson
performing “I, Dred Scott” by Sheila Moses

Speaker 6 — Nat Zegree
performing  ”The Santaland Diaries” by David Sedaris

SpeechGeek Postings is proud to announce the final placing of the national semifinalists in Original Oratory. You can also check out the speeches performed by the finalists and their speaker order.

National Finalists

Speaker 1 — Vinay Nayak
delivering the oration “A Sensitive Kind of Guy”
topic overview: problems, causes and solutions related to a lack of racial sensitivity (racial stereotyping) in American culture

Speaker 2 — Joe Nelson
delivering the oration “Do Over”
topic overview: definitions of “do over,” why they are ungraceful and solutions to our hesitation to admit mistakes and make a second attempt

Speaker 3 — Miles Bridges
delivering the oration “Klina Khumsen” (sp? German phrase meaning  ”No Crumbs”)
topic overview:  how leaders of the nation fail to finish the people’s business, how individuals fail to recognize unfinished business, how we can profit from finishing what we start

Speaker 4 — Alphonce Mshomba
delivering the oration “Can You Hear Me Now?”
topic overview: how we turn the mute button on life by not listening to others

Speaker 5 — Chris Moncrief
delivering the oration “Roll with Me”
topic overview:  social role playing and the parts we take on each day; what we do when the role for us hasn’t been written and what we can do to find or create just our role

Speaker 6 — Amy Shackleford
delivering the oration “Stuck in a Moment”
topic overview: moments where we feel we are stuck and fixating on the past; getting stuck by replaying the past, getting stuck by repeating past mistakes, and solutions

National Semifinalists

7.  Nicholas Gilyard
8.  Taylor Misiak
9.  Caroline Anne Kitchener
10.  Ola Abiose
11.  Haben Ghebregergish
12.  Kurt Alberson
13.  Brian A Castelloe
14.  Nina Desarro