Round 4: Franchize1990 -vs- Disarray

Discussion in 'Debater's League 2010' started by D-Man, Aug 22, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. D-Man

    D-Man Gone but never forgotten.

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    744
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    The organization, ‘Moms Opposing McMahon’ (M.O.M), is doing anything possible to try and pull the voters from getting Linda into the Senate by using her background in the WWE against her. Does M.O.M have every right to use this method of anti-campaigning against Linda?


    This is a fourth round match in the Debater's League. Franchize1990 is the home debater and gets to choose which side of the debate they will be on and who debates first, but they have 24 hours to make their choice.

    This thread is for DEBATERS ONLY and will end on Friday at 2pm EST.

    Anyone that posts in this thread besides the debaters, league admins, and judges will be infracted!

    Good luck.​
     
    #1
  2. Franchize1990

    Franchize1990 Pre-Show Stalwart

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    76
    I'll be posting 2nd and will be debating that they do have every right
     
    #2
  3. gd

    gd Plump, Juicy User

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    Thanks, Franchize. Appreciate that you were willing to give me the correct side.

    Why MOM Certainly Has No Right To Use Such Tatics Against Sweet Linda
    So for those who don't know, this group has been using WWE footage against Linda in her campaign, like Vince and Shane beating up Eugene and Trish barking like a dog. So this group of moms is doing whatever they can to ensure Linda doesn't win, including going so far as to make a Facebook page. Those sick bastards. Here's why what's they're doing is ludcirous.

    My main point - IT'S FAKE. They're criticizing Linda over what is clearly a fictional show, as if these things happened in real life. More than that, they're taking 1 minute video clips completely out of context, not showing the part where Eugene comes back to embarass Vince and Shane, or any of the happy and uplifting endings or wrestling for that matter. They're only focusing on the worst of worst, which is just a few minutes of over a decade of programming. And like I said, it's not real, it's scripted.

    This would be the same thing as people arguing that since Arnold Schwarzenegger killed a guy in that one movie, he definetly shouldn't be governor because he's a murderer. That's silly, no? Well it's exactly what this group of oversensitive housewives are doing.

    This group ignores all of the financial success Linda had while running the WWE, as well as all of the charity work and things that the WWE does overseas with the troops, the things she was directly involved in while running the company. It's not like she was the head writer of creative, or anything.

    In fact, this radical liberal group has done nothing more than slander Linda McMahon, calling the WWE nothing more than pornography as well as a myriad of other mud slinging techniques clearly not based in fact, all about a fictional TV. Stupid liberal mothers.
     
    #3
    DirtyJosé likes this.
  4. Franchize1990

    Franchize1990 Pre-Show Stalwart

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    76
    Why M.O.M is Wrong but Right at the Same Time​


    According to thier Facebook page, Mothers Opposing McMahon is "a group of concerned mothers and others that have joined together to give light to the graphic, steroid-fueled violence and sexually explicit WWE content marketed to kids under Linda McMahon’s watch as WWE CEO." These people feel very passionate about how they feel and are trying hard to get thier message out. Now, while I do not exactly find their views to be accurate or relevant to the Senate race, I believe that they have every right to do whatever they feel is nesscessary to win. These reasons below are the main points as to why I feel they have that right to use this method.

    1.) It's Politics

    In the world of politics, the people involved will use anything and everything to try and hurt the opponent's campaign. Everybody that has won a seat in office has had to go through certain political controversy, wether it be our current president Barack Obama when he had to deal with the entire Jeremiah Wright situation. Or, Spokane's former mayor, Jim West's sexual abuse charges in an attempt to try and get him out of office. People will spin things, bend the truth, and flat out lie to get what they wanted in the office.

    2.) It's not against the Law

    Mothers Opposing McMahon is protected by the first amendment plain and simple. As long as they aren't causing physical harm or threatning anybody, the organization has every right to say what they want. For example, my favorite wrestler at the moment is John Cena. Now you can go on the website and find probably hundreds of anti-Cena sites that try to get him off of the show or out of the main event. These anti-Cena sites slander, degrade, and are just terrible sites that are very misguided. However, we can't say that they don't have the right to share their opinion on the man and it's the same thing in Linda's case. She pretty much knew what she was getting into and I'm sure is well prepared to counter those arguments.

    Like the title says in my opinion, Mothers Opposing McMahon is wrong in their views towards Linda but, they have the right to say pretty much whatever they want.
     
    #4
  5. gd

    gd Plump, Juicy User

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    Their Facebook page, the extent of their officiality. We'll get back to that, hold on.

    Sure, a lot of shit happens in politics, but by no means does that make this ok. A lot of the stuff that people do when it comes to politics is slimy and illegal. This group certainly doesn't have to right to perform the same activities, just because other dirtbags have done the same things.

    Now I'm no lawyer, so it's not like I'm going to go about this perfectly, but the first amendment doesn't mean you can say whatever the fuck you want to without no reprocussions. It's not like people are saying Cena killed babies or anything, they're just saying he isn't a good wrestler, which is an opinion that can't be proven either way.

    Take a look at this list of what defines libel and slander.

    I'd say what this radical group is doing fits the bill for all of these requirments. For instance, the MOM group mentions how Linda promoted pornography to children as head of the WWE. Wrestling certainly isn't pornographic material, and to suggest that Linda participated in such activity is certainly slanderous.

    The fact that it's a fake show that they're more or less portraying as real may fit fall under the slander/libel umbrella as well. Like I said, I'm not lawyer, but I'm pretty sure there's a good chance that what these women are doing it illegal.

    Most campaign ads are highly organized and run by people with a bunch of experience in the political game. This group? Not so much. It's just a group of suburban housewives who thought it'd be cool to make a Facebook page. Do you think they safeguarded against any legal action that may come to them before they made their ridiculous claims? I don't think so.

    The McMahon's have a history of libel suits as well, successfully filing them back in 1992 regarding molestation charges from former employee Tom Cole, meaning they certainly know what they're doing when it comes to this kind of stuff.

    The law doesn't give people the right to say anything they want, as I said above. We both agree this is a ridiculous, makeshift group making slanderous claims against Linda. Based on all the information surrounding this group and their goals, it's entirely possible, in fact, rather likely, that they are breaking the law and have no right to be making such claims.
     
    #5
  6. Phoenix

    Phoenix WZCW's First Triple Crown Champion

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    704
    Clarity of debate: Disarray
    While both had a good opening, Disarray at least replied and kept on target.

    Punctuality: Disarray
    Franchize never responded after his initial post.

    Informative: Draw
    Both gave an equal amount of information, some of which I actually didn't know.

    Persuasion: Disarray
    More of a default victory as Disarray responded and Franchize disappeared, which is a shame as I thought this debate would really get good had it continued.

    Final Score
    Disarray: 4.5
    Franchize1990: 0.5
     
    #6
  7. CH David

    CH David A Jock That Loves Pepsi

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Messages:
    896
    Likes Received:
    768
    Clarity: I'll agree with Phoenix. I love Franchize's opening posts, but Disarray replied and kept on track.

    Point: General Disarray

    Punctuality: Franchize didn't come back after his open.

    Point: General Disarray

    Informative: I've got to give this to Disarray. His second post and quoting about slander and libel give him this point. A rebuttal from Franchize would've helped immensely.

    Point: General Disarray

    Persuasion: Again, Franchize not returning all but gave this to Disarray. He is a solid debater so this would've been fun. Shame.

    Points: General Disarray

    CH David scores this General Disarray 5, Franchize1990 0
     
    #7
  8. BooCocky

    BooCocky On A Nature walk with Daniel Bryan

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,536
    Likes Received:
    687
    Even though both competitors had an OP. GD wins by default. He attempted to keep the debate moving. Franchize failed to reply. It's not GD's fault it didn't last. GD wins persuasion, informative, punctuality and clarity. He posted more, provided more information. New his stance, was on time.

    GD-5
    Franchize- 0
     
    #8
  9. Cena's Little Helper

    Cena's Little Helper Mid-Card Championship Winner

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    1,498
    Franchize1990, as is almost always the case, had the clearer opening argument, and he used his information efficiently. I'm giving him the points for clarity and informativeness. GD gets punctuality and persuasion, though, and the win.

    Final Score
    Franchize1990 -2
    GD - 3
     
    #9
  10. Phoenix

    Phoenix WZCW's First Triple Crown Champion

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    704
    After a complete judge's tally, General Disarray is the victor on 17.5 points to Franchize1990's 2.5.

    Congratulations and great debating from the both of you!
     
    #10
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"