Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Chase Hutchinson (Wood River High School) vs. Opposition: Skyler Wu (NEI Education)

Judge: Joe Leeson-Schatz (Binghamton University)

Resolution: RESOLVED: The United Nations should adopt a resolution decrying or demanding an end to the annual dolphin hunt in Taiji, Japan.

  • Chase Hutchinson
    Chase Hutchinson

    Skyler Wu
    Skyler Wu
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at May 6, 2014 12:40:32AM EST by Chase Hutchinson



    I apologize that the audio didn't synch up correctly. If you have trouble with the video, I can always email you the original video file. Sorry about that.

    Resolutional Analysis

    United Nations Resolution:
    "United Nations Resolution." Wikipedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 May 2014. <>.

    Chapter VII of the UN Charter:
    "United Nations Security Council Sanctions Committees, Committee Resolutions." UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web. 05 May 2014. <>.

    Contention 1:

    Messenger, Stephen. "Japan's Dolphin Hunt Likely Violates Japanese Law." N.p., 27 Jan. 2014. Web. <>.

    Contention 2:

    Sacirbey, Ambassador Muhamed. "Is Animal Rights the Next Human Rights?" The Huffington Post. N.p., 09 Jan. 2014. Web. <>.

    Contention 3:

    Zhou, Kelly. "Mercury Poisoning From Dolphin Meat Remains a Major Concern for 'Cove' Activists." TakePart, 27 Aug. 2012. Web. <>.

    Contention 4:

    Subpoint A:

    Drezner, Daniel W. "Five Myths about Sanctions." The Washington Post. N.p., 2 May 2014. Web. 5 May 2014. <>.

    Subpoint B:

    Daniel J. "United Nations Security Council: Impose Economic Sanctions on Japan." N.p., 22 Jan. 2014. Web. 5 May 2014. <>.

    Posted at May 7, 2014 02:13:35AM EST by Skyler Wu



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 7, 2014 03:16:14PM EST by Chase Hutchinson



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 9, 2014 02:25:10AM EST by Skyler Wu



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 9, 2014 06:54:36PM EST by Chase Hutchinson



    None available for this speech.


    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at May 13, 2014 12:03:03PM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Category Chase Hutchinson Skyler Wu
    Use of evidence: 5.1 2
    Delivery skill: 4.2 4
    Coherence of arguments: 4 4.5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 5 4.7
    Identification of key points: 4.5 3.6
    Comments: Good job leading off with a specific plan and creating separate advantages that are clearly outlined. Also great job with your citations. I think your George Carlin quote could be cut. It isn't as funny and exciting of an intro as you were hoping it would be. Getting right to your point or making it more humorous would be better.

    I would rather see answers to the CP than just a theory debate at the start. You outline the procedural standard very well. Also good job on keeping it clear on the flow where you are.

    Good job on the extending your sanctions offense and answering each of the opposition's arguments. I think you should have more offense against the CP. I think what you put there is good but that you should have more. You should also have cites for your argument.
    You should have citations for your speech. Good job at explaining exclusivity with the proposition. However, I think an alternative agent CP would be better since you would better able to avoid the link to the UN credibility DA. You should have some case defense as well so the proposition will have to debate it. Then in your closing speech you can kick out of the defense and case and just go for your CP.

    Great job at responding to the prop's rebuttal in your speech. You really should have citations, especially for your WW3 impact. Beyond that you do a good job at pointing out where the prop drops CP solvency. You should have more answers on the perm. Reading evidence on the question of timeframe.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Chase Hutchinson

    Reason for Decision:

    Short version: Without the last 1:30 it's tough to vote on the CP since that's where the majority of the opposition's perm arguments are.

    See the video for more comments. Good job by both sides.

    Video from the judge:

    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by: