I concede your points, but interestingly, all of them can be convincingly traced back to issues involving Dershowitz's fanatical support for Israel. In my own circle of friends, I have seen Jewish solidarity with Israel contort their otherwise liberal sensibilities, and Dershowtz is a case study in this phenomenon. As I wrote... wacko-land
In the interest of fairness, I must take issue with the way you have characterized the "results" of the debate, and also your characterization of Alan Dershowitz as a "rightwing lawyer" The last first - Dershowitz has been one of the most ardent supporters of civil rights and civil liberties issues of this generation, and any examination of his contributions to these fields will show that he has been anything but rightwing. It is true that on the current issue he holds a seemingly contradictory view. And on the question of Israel he is, in my judgement, firmly in wacko-land.
On the second question, the results of the debate were not nearly so lopsided as the figures you site. The pre-debate survey included an "undecided" option, which was quite a considerable number - 21%. This choice was not available in the post debate vote - only yes or no votes were allowed, and the anti side gained 12 points, while the pro side gained 9, hardly a "slam dunk" of the undecided vote, which are the only ones that really mattered.
I have been a follower of Glenn since he began his blog, Uncharted Territory, in 2005, and have almost uniformly agreed with his positions, and admired his tenacity and principled stand on controversial issues. We do not need to shade the numbers, or mischaracterize the opposition to win the final tally. This only grants extra ammunition to the opposition.
I concede your points, but interestingly, all of them can be convincingly traced back to issues involving Dershowitz's fanatical support for Israel. In my own circle of friends, I have seen Jewish solidarity with Israel contort their otherwise liberal sensibilities, and Dershowtz is a case study in this phenomenon. As I wrote... wacko-land
In the interest of fairness, I must take issue with the way you have characterized the "results" of the debate, and also your characterization of Alan Dershowitz as a "rightwing lawyer" The last first - Dershowitz has been one of the most ardent supporters of civil rights and civil liberties issues of this generation, and any examination of his contributions to these fields will show that he has been anything but rightwing. It is true that on the current issue he holds a seemingly contradictory view. And on the question of Israel he is, in my judgement, firmly in wacko-land.
On the second question, the results of the debate were not nearly so lopsided as the figures you site. The pre-debate survey included an "undecided" option, which was quite a considerable number - 21%. This choice was not available in the post debate vote - only yes or no votes were allowed, and the anti side gained 12 points, while the pro side gained 9, hardly a "slam dunk" of the undecided vote, which are the only ones that really mattered.
I have been a follower of Glenn since he began his blog, Uncharted Territory, in 2005, and have almost uniformly agreed with his positions, and admired his tenacity and principled stand on controversial issues. We do not need to shade the numbers, or mischaracterize the opposition to win the final tally. This only grants extra ammunition to the opposition.
btmac