"The whole distinction between one element of a set and a whole set seems to be incomprehensible to modern liberals."
Because obviously, one person with a certain ideological bent speaks for every person with that same ideology.
By the way, you should have spoken up if you knew unequivocally that the black thug was the attacker, especially when there was absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever, besides the testimony of accused. You could have really helped your guy's case.
I've only brought up the recent events to show that it's not a singular case. The whole liberal community is engaging in this.
PS. As for your suggestion for me to speak up - luckily prosecution brought a witness who testified that TM had been attacking GZ, so no need for me to do the same.
There are people of all sorts of political leanings that realize that the state's case was extremely weak because of the lack of hard evidence. Maybe that's because it isn't a political issue. I mean, how would you frame the question, if you wanted to glean a person's political affiliation from the single issue of Zimmerman killing Martin?
This square peg of a criminal case was jammed into the round hole of a political issue when Obama made his statement about if Trayvon was his son. Since there are millions of people in this country whose stances on various issues consist singularly of the opposing view of whatever Obama's view on the issue is, George Zimmerman became a conservative hero.
So to paint overreaction and the abandonment of logic and reason as a tenet of liberalism is downright ludicrous.
Because obviously, one person with a certain ideological bent speaks for every person with that same ideology.
By the way, you should have spoken up if you knew unequivocally that the black thug was the attacker, especially when there was absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever, besides the testimony of accused. You could have really helped your guy's case.