The article is straight lying about judges, though. They're cherry-picking ones (which they know, so they specifically claim otherwise without then explaining h

The article is straight lying about judges, though. They're cherry-picking ones (which they know, so they specifically claim otherwise without then explaining how they're not) that they can use as left-wing bogeymen. > Based the article, the usage of these kritiks seems to sometimes be quite damaging to productive debate There is a very valid discussion that the community itself is having about K-Aff *solvency thresholds*, but that is not what this bad-faith author is talking about. I live in the Bay Area, and no one in even the hyper-liberal debate circuits here would blank and eye, much less automatically vote against you, if you ran Cap-good. Most people outside of the debate community are probably unaware of the specific round that sparked off all these right-wing "debate is indoctrinating kids with leftist ideas!" articles, but this reaction is hilariously proving the point of many Critical arguments.