CouchPotato

oooo, what's irontsone's agenda?

All lives matter.

Sure they complied, but isn't it horrible enough that they did it in the first place. We all know that 'honk honk' really means "Heil Hitler".

How old are you, robo?

I find it very encouraging that you are easily able to call that person loony, but I would like to point out that thus far you are the only person here on your side of the aisle to do so. We have one poster defending the lunacy and another calling it racist to point it out.

Well, on the one hand, I do agree with you. I am sure a lot of people on the Democrat side really have no interest in these ideas or maybe have no awareness of them. But the thing is even moderate leftists tend to come out in support of institutions and groups that promote such ideas. So maybe there is some ignorance about this. But radical racial ideology is taught in schools. When it's pointed out the common retort is to insist it isn't happening. Democrats also came out in support of groups like BLM. I remember reading a poll a few years back that said something like 90 percent of Democrats support the movement. This is a group whose founders have admitted they are Marxist.

Yeah, I agree absolutely. You can't just ignore it, but I think you can't let them rile you up either. Especially because there are a lot of people on the left that believe it. You end up in an endless game of whack-a-mole. It's important to debate lunacy, but sometimes it drags you into a vortex of nonsense. I assume that Piers and the two guests were there to talk about trans athlete stuff. Whether the guest did it intentionally or not, she was able to drag Piers off topic. That's why I agree with your original post where you say "we can't care what they say." Just yesterday I spent hours arguing with robosmith to the point of nonsense. Oddly, I kind of enjoy it, but then it gets to the point where I start thinking @Nationalist really has this whole thing figured out. Sometimes you just gotta say, "Yes, dear."

https://www.etymonline.com/word/racism

To be fair to the lady in this case, I don't think she actually was racist to Piers. I mean it seems he is arguing that she was racist for calling him a race hustler. Believing someone is a race hustler, whether warranted or not, does not mean you believe any particular race is superior to another. But at the same time a lot of white people would be called racist for making that accusation about someone from a minority group.

Yeah. I mean at some point you can't let yourself get too caught up in it. Sometimes it's better to just react like Riley Gaines in the video as opposed to Piers Morgan. I mean it's important to engage in the debate, but you can't let them fluster you.

That's a really good point. So, now they have to come up with a new rule that somehow excludes Biden.

But see in the leftist mindset racism now includes a clause that requires that one belong to a perceived privileged group in order to be racist. There are all kinds of arbitrary rules that leftists make up and expect everyone else to comply with. I'm pretty sure what happens in each of these cases is that some leftist somewhere is losing an argument and realizes he has to change the game itself in order to win it.

Yeah, you'd think there would be a law against this or something. If you think about it, the bastardization of the term woke is itself a societal injustice. And you, robosmith, have raised my 'awareness' to this injustice. I feel a bit more enlightened now. I might hesitate to call myself woke, but I do feel like I am stirring a little, as you shake me out of my slumber. Do you mean gobbledygook? That is a good suggestion. I think it is a perfect word to describe leftist ideology. But do you know gobbledygook's history? It was coined on March 30, 1944 by a Texas politician named Maury Maverick. No kidding. Look... https://www.etymonline.com/word/gobbledygook And it seems Maury was a Democrat, so we kind of have the same problem here.

I dunno, robosmith. I think they mean it wholeheartedly.

Right. So there was a word "woke". It was the past tense of wake. And then some people on the left started using it as a slang term to refer to their own self-perceived enlightenment about social justice. In order for it to get that context people had to begin using it that way. And then some people on the right took the same word, and started using it to refer to the people (and the ideology of the people) who call themselves woke.

The real definition of woke's history (whatever that means) is the past tense to wake. The definition you are referring to is a counter-culture slang term. People began using it a certain way and it gradually took on that meaning. Then people on the right started using it their own way and now it is also an insult for leftism whacked on crack. Simple as that.

What do you mean by roughly equal? Do you think it is just coincidence that Lea Thomas won four medals and set several records? Why don't we see women breaking records in men's sports?

I understand the English part. It's just not logical. The truth is I actually don't use the word 'woke' myself very much, if at all, but one can use it as an insult without condoning racism. It easy. You just use at as an insult and also don't condone racism. Where do I start? How about the idea that it is discriminatory to not allow a male to compete against women?

Well you can have injunctions to remove protestors. Though I suppose that is usually because they are breaking the law by being on private property. But as CdnFox pointed out if they were doing anything illegal an injunction could have been granted. They did stop the honking. Most large protests are disruptive to some degree, I don't think this one ranked among the worst.

He literally just pointed that out. But there was no injunction against the protest itself.

That makes no sense, robosmith. Sorry.

Once again, I just don't agree with every nonsensical thing people on the left consider to be racist or discrimination. Awwww. There there, now.

No. I just don't agree with all the things leftists consider injustice, and they damn me for that. But I couldn't really care less.

Sure we can redefine it, and we did. You don't own the word. The word "woke" was originally the past tense of "wake". And long before the political definition of "woke" found a place in Merriam Webster, it was basically a counterculture slang term. People invented this definition and tacked it on. If you can add your own meaning for the word "woke" so can we. Leftists redefine words all the time. But really we don't need to redefine it at all in order to use it as an insult. We just point to the people who fancy themselves woke and by that association alone it becomes an insult.

We all know that's what you mean by it. When you ask us to define what we mean when we say "woke" it's a sarcastic term of derision for ideology and for certain policies that go to far. You clearly understand this because you were able to explain it yourself. I would argue, though, that something is missing from your definition, because most people are aware that discrimination has existed and still exists, but leftists would not define most people as woke, now would they? This is because we often disagree on whether or not certain things meet the definition of discrimination. So, it's not really simply an awareness, is it?. If we are really honest about it, to be "woke" requires some acceptance of leftwing ideas of what discrimination is, or else most people would be woke. So, there is ideology behind it. It seems ironic to us (and perhaps a bit conceited) that people on the left consider themselves "woke", because we think that they are often pretty whacked and that things they view as examples of discrimination are often pretty whacked. This is why we have turned the term into an insult. And now that you have admitted that you understand this, you can no longer play dumb about it.