Now, the woke is even coming for actual competitive debate.....

[Strike 5,185]

https://www.thefp.com/p/judges-ruin-high-school-debate-tournaments

What a shame.

 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,236]

How ridiculous 

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. I don’t like the word “illegal” myself to describe undocumented immigrants. I try not to use it even though I still do from time to time. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting its use among high school debaters; it’s rude and offensive and inaccurate. A person can commit an illegal act (in this case a misdemeanor); a person cannot be illegal. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,481]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. I don’t like the word “illegal” myself to describe undocumented immigrants. I try not to use it even though I still do from time to time. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting its use among high school debaters; it’s rude and offensive and inaccurate. A person can commit an illegal act (in this case a misdemeanor); a person cannot be illegal. 

So you're confirming that we're at "Step 2: It's happening, but it's not wide spread"?

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,236]

8 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. I don’t like the word “illegal” myself to describe undocumented immigrants. I try not to use it even though I still do from time to time. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting its use among high school debaters; it’s rude and offensive and inaccurate. A person can commit an illegal act (in this case a misdemeanor); a person cannot be illegal. 

illegal alien defines it perfectly

 

[Strike 5,185]

14 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. I don’t like the word “illegal” myself to describe undocumented immigrants. I try not to use it even though I still do from time to time. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting its use among high school debaters; it’s rude and offensive and inaccurate. A person can commit an illegal act (in this case a misdemeanor); a person cannot be illegal. 

Who cares what you like?  If your job is to judge a debate you don't get to interject your personal preferences in to it.  I notice you don't even address the judge who used the N word in her synopsis and said black people don't have to share their evidence with non-black people but non-black people DO have to share with black people.   To refresh your memory even though you supposedly read the entire article, here is what I'm talking about:

 

Quote

But X Braithwaite, who’s judged 169 debate rounds with 340 students, has her own disclosure policy in her paradigm, which uses a racial epithet: “1. N****s don’t have to disclose to you. 2. Disclose to n****s.”

No racism there since only non-blacks can be racist, right middle of the road Timmy?  Why do I have the feeling you just read the first couple paragraphs and didn't even see this example? 

[TheNewGirl 1,342]

This reminds me of the video clip I saw of a student who got an F on an assignment about "Transgender Females and Biological Females in Sports." 

The teacher failed her for using the non-inclusive language like "biological female."  It's LITERALLY what her paper was about. 

https://poptopic.com.au/news/student-called-transphobic-and-failed-for-using-biological-women-in-project/#:~:text=The student was awarded a,media has sparked intense debate.

Quote

In her view, the controversy stems from her proposal’s final paragraph: “I intend to show how Title IX, which protects the equality of women in sports, is actively being violated in today’s world. Although a very controversial take, I will demonstrate the lack of support that is being shown for biological women who wish to compete fairly among other biological women while acknowledging the science behind the male figure having biological advantages regardless of hormone therapy, etc.”

The patriarchy will always win. 

[TheNewGirl 1,342]

14 minutes ago, Strike said:

Who cares what you like?  If your job is to judge a debate you don't get to interject your personal preferences in to it.  I notice you don't even address the judge who used the N word in her synopsis and said black people don't have to share their evidence with non-black people but non-black people DO have to share with black people.   To refresh your memory even though you supposedly read the entire article, here is what I'm talking about:

 

No racism there since only non-blacks can be racist, right middle of the road Timmy?  Why do I have the feeling you just read the first couple paragraphs and didn't even see this example? 

Tim is the biggest hypocrite on this board, IMO. 

 

[RogerDodger 797]

3 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

Tim is the biggest hypocrite on this board, IMO. 

 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

theyve been trying to quell debate on internet forums like FBGs for years.  no they are coming here trying to do the same.

[seafoam1 2,799]

31 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

Tim is the biggest hypocrite on this board, IMO. 

 

[Fireballer 2,639]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. I don’t like the word “illegal” myself to describe undocumented immigrants. I try not to use it even though I still do from time to time. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting its use among high school debaters; it’s rude and offensive and inaccurate. A person can commit an illegal act (in this case a misdemeanor); a person cannot be illegal. 

You never cease to amaze us

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

Who cares what you like?  If your job is to judge a debate you don't get to interject your personal preferences in to it.  I notice you don't even address the judge who used the N word in her synopsis and said black people don't have to share their evidence with non-black people but non-black people DO have to share with black people.   To refresh your memory even though you supposedly read the entire article, here is what I'm talking about:

 

No racism there since only non-blacks can be racist, right middle of the road Timmy?  Why do I have the feeling you just read the first couple paragraphs and didn't even see this example? 

You’re quite correct. I stopped reading about a third of the way through once I saw what the writer was doing. Why bother to read the rest? 
 

The woman you’re quoting is certainly racist. 

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

59 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

Tim is the biggest hypocrite on this board, IMO. 

 

Well damn that’s a tough list. 

[Strike 5,185]

8 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You’re quite correct. I stopped reading about a third of the way through once I saw what the writer was doing. Why bother to read the rest? 
 

The woman you’re quoting is certainly racist. 

Yeah, I figured.  What a focking idiot.

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

3 minutes ago, Strike said:

Yeah, I figured.  What a focking idiot.

You’re not that bad. Give yourself some credit. 

[RogerDodger 797]

20 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You’re not that bad. Give yourself some credit. 

Grown ass man with the "I know you are but what am I?" come back.  Pathetic. 

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

32 minutes ago, RogerDodger said:

Grown ass man with the "I know you are but what am I?" come back.  Pathetic. 

You don’t think calling someone a focking idiot is pathetic? Maybe not. For you it would be a step up; you’d see it as a compliment. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You don’t think calling someone a focking idiot is pathetic? 

Not when it's true. Like in your case for example. You fit the description very well.

[Voltaire 5,181]

So this is what Joe Bryant has been up to after detonating his forum.

[MLCKAA 540]

3 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. I don’t like the word “illegal” myself to describe undocumented immigrants. I try not to use it even though I still do from time to time. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting its use among high school debaters; it’s rude and offensive and inaccurate. A person can commit an illegal act (in this case a misdemeanor); a person cannot be illegal. 

Get off the semantics merry go round.  No one is saying their existence is illegal.  Their presence in this country is illegal.  They are illegal immigrants.  The term is perfectly appropriate.

[jerryskids 6,554]

5 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. I don’t like the word “illegal” myself to describe undocumented immigrants. I try not to use it even though I still do from time to time. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting its use among high school debaters; it’s rude and offensive and inaccurate. A person can commit an illegal act (in this case a misdemeanor); a person cannot be illegal. 

The word "illegal" in the phrase "illegal immigrant" is an adjective describing their immigration status, which is illegal.  It is completely accurate and if that bothers you, that is a you problem, go crawl into a little ball in your safe space and cry.

To call a person an "illegal" is a fair objection which is open for discussion.  

HTH

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,236]

5 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

The word "illegal" in the phrase "illegal immigrant" is an adjective describing their immigration status, which is illegal.  It is completely accurate and if that bothers you, that is a you problem, go crawl into a little ball in your safe space and cry.

To call a person an "illegal" is a fair objection which is open for discussion.  

HTH

its almost as if the opposite of LEGAL is ILLEGAL

Legal Immigrant I don't know what the opposite should be called, let me think a while

[Strike 5,185]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

You don’t think calling someone a focking idiot is pathetic? Maybe not. For you it would be a step up; you’d see it as a compliment. 

Example 50202099 of why I said when you got here that you would bring nothing of value and slowly destroy what's left of this forum, as you did at FBG's.  This is an excerpt of your first reply in this thread:
 

Quote

 

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. 

 

The assertion in the 2nd sentence is provably wrong, as you acknowledged when I posted another example from the article.  So, you made a provably wrong assertion because you literally didn't read the source material.  I mean, it's one thing for you to be completely ignorant on topics when someone makes an assertion in a thread without supporting evidence.  That's stupid too because you should do your own research.  But in this case, I gave you a link to a story I thought was worth discussing. You read two paragraphs and decided that was enough that you could make an assertion that was easily proven wrong by the very article you REFUSED to read.  So, you're either a focking idiot or a retard.  Take your pick.  I don't care. 

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

38 minutes ago, Strike said:

Example 50202099 of why I said when you got here that you would bring nothing of value and slowly destroy what's left of this forum, as you did at FBG's.  This is an excerpt of your first reply in this thread:
 

The assertion in the 2nd sentence is provably wrong, as you acknowledged when I posted another example from the article.  So, you made a provably wrong assertion because you literally didn't read the source material.  I mean, it's one thing for you to be completely ignorant on topics when someone makes an assertion in a thread without supporting evidence.  That's stupid too because you should do your own research.  But in this case, I gave you a link to a story I thought was worth discussing. You read two paragraphs and decided that was enough that you could make an assertion that was easily proven wrong by the very article you REFUSED to read.  So, you're either a focking idiot or a retard.  Take your pick.  I don't care. 

Lol I don’t care either. 
 

Your purpose, like that of the writer, is to argue that woke extremism is taking over all aspects of our lives. It’s a stupid argument. I can turn on any right wing talk radio idiot and hear the same garbage. It’s easy to dismiss (which I did) unless you’re pathetic, which you are. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Lol I don’t care either. 
 

Your purpose, like that of the writer, is to argue that woke extremism is taking over all aspects of our lives. It’s a stupid argument. I can turn on any right wing talk radio idiot and hear the same garbage. It’s easy to dismiss (which I did) unless you’re pathetic, which you are. 

Woke extremism is taking over the lives of you dumb ass liberals. In case you haven't noticed, the conservatives want none of it. 

It's you retards that keep pushing the crap and get all up in arms about a section of society calling you out for being the stupid liberal robots you are and accepting the hatred that you feed on. 

[5-Points 3,386]

6 hours ago, TheNewGirl said:

Tim is the biggest hypocrite on this board, IMO. 

 

You left out sanctimonious, self-righteous, doosh. 

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

33 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Woke extremism is taking over the lives of you dumb ass liberals. In case you haven't noticed, the conservatives want none of it. 

It's you retards that keep pushing the crap and get all up in arms about a section of society calling you out for being the stupid liberal robots you are and accepting the hatred that you feed on. 

In case you didn’t notice, it wasn’t any of us dumb ass retards who started this discussion. IT NEVER IS. Because we know that in the real world the extremists on the left are a tiny minority. They don’t make a bit of difference to anyone’s life, and if you idiots would stop talking about them, NOBODY WOULD. 
 

FWIW the right wing extremists are a small minority as well, and they would be equally insignificant if they didn’t unfortunately include a former President of the United States, trying to be one again, and his biggest supporters. So alas we have to take them a little more seriously. I wish it wasn’t so. 

[RLLD 4,143]

7 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

So you're confirming that we're at "Step 2: It's happening, but it's not wide spread"?

Dood, cite me when you use my sh!y. fock, I am duink....

[seafoam1 2,799]

6 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

In case you didn’t notice, it wasn’t any of us dumb ass retards who started this discussion. IT NEVER IS. Because we know that in the real world the extremists on the left are a tiny minority. They don’t make a bit of difference to anyone’s life, and if you idiots would stop talking about them, NOBODY WOULD. 
 

FWIW the right wing extremists are a small minority as well, and they would be equally insignificant if they didn’t unfortunately include a former President of the United States, trying to be one again, and his biggest supporters. So alas we have to take them a little more seriously. I wish it wasn’t so. 

Wrong. It takes a lot to be woke and push the agenda into ads, movies, commercials, stores, corporations, etc., and to go out of your way to support it by watching your p's and q's wherever you go in life.

It takes nothing to post a thread pointing out your liberal stupidity and having a good laugh at it. You and generalpimpledoosh need to get some therapy, even if there is no cure for the extreme TDS you fools succumbed to.

[Bill E. 703]

7 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

 

But drawing them as a judge could lose someone their scholorship. 

[crackattack 520]

7 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

The first example the author gives is extreme and ridiculous and I strongly doubt representative of anyone but the woman that wrote it.

But after that, the author attempts to combine it with other judges who make much more reasonable restrictions. I don’t like the word “illegal” myself to describe undocumented immigrants. I try not to use it even though I still do from time to time. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting its use among high school debaters; it’s rude and offensive and inaccurate. A person can commit an illegal act (in this case a misdemeanor); a person cannot be illegal. 

Can a human being cross over our boarder illegally, and be considered an illegal immigrant? Is that not factual by it's very definition? How is truth considered rude and offensive? They are literally here illegally. 

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

51 minutes ago, crackattack said:

Can a human being cross over our boarder illegally, and be considered an illegal immigrant? Is that not factual by it's very definition? How is truth considered rude and offensive? They are literally here illegally. 

It’s dehumanizing. They’re guilty of a misdemeanor at worse, and you’re treating them like rapists or murderers. They’re not even criminals. 
 

Surely we can use more civilized terms. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

10 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s dehumanizing. They’re guilty of a misdemeanor at worse, and you’re treating them like rapists or murderers. They’re not even criminals. 
 

Surely we can use more civilized terms. 

Fock you. Chick would be alive if creepy joe didn't completely open the border. Do you want 1000 more of these stories? They aren't hard to find.

‘I Don’t Want Any Other Parent to Live Nightmare That I Am Living,’ Woman Tells House Panel of Daughter, 20, Killed by Illegal Alien

https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/05/23/i-dont-want-any-other-parent-live-nightmare-i-am-living-mother-daughter-killed-illegal-alien-says/

[dogcows 1,030]

Who cares about debate team? A club for nerds who are also pricks. Worst of the worst.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,236]

30 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s dehumanizing. They’re guilty of a misdemeanor at worse, and you’re treating them like rapists or murderers. They’re not even criminals. 
 

Surely we can use more civilized terms. 

There are plenty of murderers And rapists in those groups. Come here legally. 
 

it’s illegal to steal and a misdemeanor too in some cases so we should use a different term. That’s what you libtards continually do. Change the meanings of words to fit whatever criteria you want or for some political correctness nonsense 

[Engorgeous George 2,123]

10 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s dehumanizing. They’re guilty of a misdemeanor at worse, and you’re treating them like rapists or murderers. They’re not even criminals. 
 

Surely we can use more civilized terms. 

How about Future Tim Exploitees?

[Engorgeous George 2,123]

10 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s dehumanizing. They’re guilty of a misdemeanor at worse, and you’re treating them like rapists or murderers. They’re not even criminals. 
 

Surely we can use more civilized terms. 

Curious how misdemeanants are not even criminals.

[crackattack 520]

10 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s dehumanizing. They’re guilty of a misdemeanor at worse, and you’re treating them like rapists or murderers. They’re not even criminals. 
 

Surely we can use more civilized terms. 

I'm not treating them like murderers and rapists. That's liberal logic equating illegal immigrants to murderers and rapists. I call them what they are. Illegal immigrants or asylum seeking immigrants. If they murder or rape someone then they're called those terms. You guys are trying to twist language again to suit your interests.

[Reality 3,092]

10 hours ago, dogcows said:

Who cares about debate team? A club for nerds who are also pricks. Worst of the worst.

This guy.