Resolved: Brendan is a Buzz Kill

===Against Nate's Case=== C1) This argument is impotent. Nate is suggesting that because Brendan has impossible standards that this somehow trends to the ethereal ecstasy of a buzz, which couldn't be further from the truth. Brendan's unyielding political standards do not result in some childlike dream state with sunshine and farts, they result in his increasing pessimism because he is constantly left unsatisfied by every politician everywhere. This is like saying that a ravenous man doesn't ruin a dinner party because he has such an interest in food. But the resolution doesn't say that Brendan's liberal gluttony is feasting on the right topics, its saying that he leaves little for the rest of us and so ruins the mood. Therefore Brendan is responsible for the starvation of those kids in all the commercials with that guy who used to be "Meathead" in All in The Family. C2) I compare this to saying that a guy who gives you a boat load of money, then takes it away, isn't a buzz killer because of course he gave you that buzz in the first place. You've only implicitly admitted the only weighing mechanism of the resolution: that Brendan kills buzzes. Its irrelevant if he provided said buzz to begin with. You know what we call a person who gives you something nice but then takes it away? An Indian Giver. Do you know what American Indians are famous for? Drinking fire-water. Do you know who' life alcohol has destroyed? ...Buzz...Aldrin...yes the same Buzz Aldrin who landed on the moon, the American hero who delivered our country into a brighter future! Not only have you admitted that Brendan is a buzz killer, you've admitted he is a KGB operative hell bent on American destruction, shame on you both, sullying the good name of American icons. ===Defending My Case=== Good Intentions) Nate's arguments against my case are that Brendan has no intention of killing people's buzz when he kills their buzz, for which he unintentionally urges you to vote PRO because Brendan indeed kills buzzes. Also he argues that Brendan has been responsible for supplying buzz, even if he also later killed it. There's a word for a person killing something they created: Abortion. Nate parades his arrogant assertion that since Brendan is a baby-killing, American defaming communist we should all just look the other way and pretend our buzz isn't fizzling out like Obama's clout, WELL NOT I. NO I SHANT LOOK AWAY WHILE BRENDAN KILLS BABIES. And neither will our honest, hard-working, baby-loving, American judges. ===Nuclear Weapon Status: [Armed] Disarmed=== Finally I offer what I consider to be the logical dirty bomb of the debate. Brendan will be voting on this topic, which ensures a PRO vote for every other judge of this round. How do I know that? Because, as Admiral Akbar once said, "It's a trap!" See, if Brendan votes CON, he his intentionally voting against me in the very activity I was once excited about, the buzz of which he already mortally wounded. He would only be further killing any renewed buzz this debate may have caused me, and thus, affirms the resolution, demonstrating that he is in fact a buzz killer. The objective judges of this round would clearly award victory to the PRO. On the other hand, if Brendan votes PRO, the subject of the resolution has affirmed the resolution, rendering it true, and thus the objective, noble, handsome, sweet-smelling judges of our round would affirm, along with Brendan, that he is in fact a buzz killer. ===Conclusion=== Therefore I urge my opponent Nate, since he is the only one in the round not bound by logic to vote PRO, to also vote PRO, and to surrender his first born child, if and when said child is born, so I can prevent Brendan from raising the baby in the ways of Lenin, and then dashing the child upon the rocks in abortive delight, just as he has done to the buzz of so many innocent victims. I yield the balance of my characters to the honorable Senator from Delaware, Ms. Christine Odonnel.