[Hoot Gibson]

Apparently you have debated with RV long enough to know the history and tactics he relies on in his attempts to persuade. I agree!!
RV is great at assuming facts not in evidence, combining objective with subjective material, drawing conclusions based on air then piously brow beating folks that he considers ignorant Republicans who do not agree. He does not appear to be interested in sharing ideas, learning facts about situations or changing his mind.....even when proven wrong. He has proven himself to be great at "crawdadding"....indeed. (wish I could learn how to multiple quote!!):biggrin:

I don't think of RV as a liberal. I like to debate liberals. I like to debate conservatives, too. Many times I find out facts of which I was not aware, or at least hear about a different view points slanted perspectives, etc. I believe those are the kinds of things that help one to grow as a person.

Bottom line is RV is not a liberal, as he likes to define himself....RV is nothing more than a pious bully. No exchange of ideas welcomed there...agree with RV or forever be damned.

Well said, Granny Bear. The only point that I take issue is your statement that RV is not a liberal. RV is a typical liberal. Like you, I also have liberal friends who are open minded and willing to listen to and make arguments based on facts, but they are the exception to the rule.

This is not, or at least it should not be a political issue. Famed defense attorney, Alan Dershowitz, who is as liberal as anybody in this country, is no friend of mine, but he is a person that I admire and respect for his intellectual honesty and integrity. Dershowitz believes that no matter who is on trial, they deserve a vigorous defense by a competent lawyer. I think the man would have defended Hitler against charges that he murdered 6 million fellow Jews. It is not something that I could have done, but it is one of Dershowitz's core beliefs. Dershowitz would have made an excellent Supreme Court justice, IMO, although I would not have agreed with many of his position. At least he would not have been an intellectually and morally flyweight like the Clinton and Obama appointees have been.

Dershowitz does not let his left wing political beliefs cloud his judgment. If I were to make a short list of famous people who I actually like to meet in person - and it would be a very short list, Dershowitz would be the only liberal on that list. (Christopher Hitchens would have been on it too, but he succumbed to cancer before I had the pleasure of discussing political issues with him.)

I enjoy debating liberals who are knowledgable on the issues and capable of defending their opinions with facts. They are a rare breed. We are usually stuck arguing with ignorant liberals with short fuses, who resort to name calling when proven wrong.

[INDENT]

[COLOR="Blue"]
Dershowitz: Drop Zimmerman Murder Charge
New evidence suggests Trayvon Martin's killer acted in self-defense

A medical report by George Zimmerman’s doctor has disclosed that Zimmerman had a fractured nose, two black eyes, two lacerations on the back of his head and a back injury on the day after the fatal shooting. If this evidence turns out to be valid, the prosecutor will have no choice but to drop the second-degree murder charge against Zimmerman — if she wants to act ethically, lawfully and professionally.

There is, of course, no assurance that the special prosecutor handling the case, State Attorney Angela Corey, will do the right thing. Because until now, her actions have been anything but ethical, lawful and professional.

She was aware when she submitted an affidavit that it did not contain the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. She deliberately withheld evidence that supported Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense. The New York Times has reported that the police had “a full face picture” of Zimmerman, before paramedics treated him, that showed “a bloodied nose.” The prosecutor also had photographic evidence of bruises to the back of his head.

[Image: http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_f.../image.jpg]

But none of this was included in any affidavit.

Now there is much more extensive medical evidence that would tend to support Zimmerman’s version of events. This version, if true, would establish self-defense even if Zimmerman had improperly followed, harassed and provoked Martin.

A defendant, under Florida law, loses his “stand your ground” defense if he provoked the encounter — but he retains traditional self-defense if he reasonably believed his life was in danger and his only recourse was to employ deadly force.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-...z1vKoqWhyX


Read more on Newsmax.com: Dershowitz: Drop Zimmerman Murder Charge
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
[/COLOR]

[/INDENT]