Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 124,962
- 86,230
- 2,635
You stated it as fact in that being with whom the president sided. Changing your position now to it being nothing more than ypur opinion affirms my observation that you were indeed hallucinating.Do you ever debate without building up strawmen? I did not say it was the most likely scenario. I inferred it's a possibility, which you even agreed with.That's not necessarily a crime -- depending on the circumstances, it could be self defense. And again, the only one with a criminal record was Zimmerman. The only conclusion I can logically reach when you said there was a "young black criminal" is that you were hallucinating.No, you're not making sensr. Between the two, the only one with a criminal record was Zimmerman. But he's not black. So who are you talking about?
It only doesn't make sense if you don't understand that sitting on a man and beating him while he screams for help is a crime.
Is that the problem you are having with understanding me? DO you not know that beating people is illegal?
Or are you giving him a pass because his skin was black?
THat is a lie.
You could logically reach the conclusion that I find the idea that Martin was defending himself while sitting on top of Zimmerman and beating him while he screamed for help very unlikely.
It is possible.
One could imagine a scenario where Zimmerman started the fight and was beating the crap out of Martin, until Martin managed to turn the tables.
Except that there is no evidence of that. Martin had no injuries that suggest that Zimmerman ever had the upper hand in the physical fight.
And there were no witnesses reporting that.
So why do you think that is the most likely scenario?
Because you don't. From the beginning you libs have been on the side of the black guy and looking for scenarios to rationalize your conclusion.
Because you NEED to find support for your belief that America is a racist land where Whites are out to get Blacks.
Nor did I make it about race. That too is a strawman of your own creation.
Ignoring your strawmen, what remains is the simple fact that between the two, the only one with a criminal record was Zimmerman.
You not only inferred it, you stated that the only reason I could hold my dissenting opinion was if I was hallucinating.
Which is nonsense.
I did admit that it was a possible scenario.
Of course you failed to note or respond to my point about the complete lack of evidence or witnesses supporting that scenario.
Thus, my conclusion that the young who was witnessed sitting on top of a man beating him while he screamed for help, and would not stop even when told the cops were coming, was committing a crime and was thus a criminal, is certainly a completely reasonable one.
Which is you had an once of moral courage or intellectual honestly you would admit.
That is the black criminal that Obama identified with.
You lib supported that.
THus, the thread tiltle which identified Obama with another black criminal(s) to draw forth the outrage from libs, to reveal them as complete hypocrites, was completely called for and completely correct.
There was no need to respond to the lack of evidence since the same also applies to who started the physical altercation. And again, the only one with a criminal record was Zimmerman. You can keep repeating Martin was a criminal, but that will never make it so.