You Call It Stubborn; I Call It Persistent

I don't think I shall post again on this subject, at least until the time of Zimmerman's trial when, no doubt, a lot of arguments will once again be made questioning his ability to get a fair trial.

The question I wanted to ask in the first post was not about Zimmerman's character or motivation. Specifically, it was not to call him a racist. All of that will supposedly come out in his trial. My question had to do with the reasons that would motivate a person who can't possibly know anything about what happened, to say they “support” Zimmerman. Although I didn't specifically make this point, I wanted to imply that Zimmerman's website soliciting assistance from supporters is more than a bit bizarre, and I wanted to question who it would appeal to. Since the only known fact of any importance at this point is that Zimmerman fired the shot that killed Martin, on what basis can anyone say they “support” Zimmerman. I said the answer that makes the most sense to me is racism. I still think that is the case.

There have been, and will continue to be, discussions about Zimmerman's ability to get a fair trial, but I don't give them much credence. Probably most people assume that they, personally, would be able to ignore media hype and render a fair judgment but they simultaneously think it is impossible to find twelve other people who could be just as impartial. Those same people, on the othe hand, if they know they are biased, assume they would be honest enough to admit to that fact under oath, and thereby be dismissed from the jury pool, but they presume other people would be less honest.

All discussion about violence in the black community in general, about whether hoodies shout to the world“come shoot me,” about Zimmerman's past police record, about Trayvon Martin's suspension from school, whatever....these are distractions and a change of the subject.