It's Debatable

Or is it?

In the Battle of Brookhaven the latest gauntlet cast down is The Great Debate.

Old School.

Face to Face.

The challenge is offered by one of the most vocal advocates of Cityhood, who just happens to be a lawyer. A lawyer skilled in weaving a story around any given set of facts to support his view and his agenda. And a lawyer blessed with oratory skills, a dollop of charisma, and those skills have been honed to a razor sharp edge by years of courtroom practice.

The proposed opponent in the face to face Texas Cage Match will be equipped with virtually no oratory skills and little practice. Were it his choice, The Advocate would like a retired librarian with a speech impediment and preferably Tourette's Syndrome. But certainly not a skilled public speaker who might understand that it isn't what you say, it is how you say it.

But why the challenge? Because the "facts", even spun out like cotton candy, may not carry the day. And these "facts" seem to change on a daily basis, and while they generally change to support The Advocate, after a while this "flexibility" calls into question the veracity of any claim. If the facts are so malleable now, how amorphous will they become after the vote?

So now The Advocate is forced to fall back on Shyster 101:

1. Pound the Facts and when that doesn't work, 
2. Pound the Law and when that fails,
3. Pound the Table

We are now at the point of "Pound the Table".

But what happens when evasiveness, charisma and oratory skills overcome uncontested facts and common sense? Well, we'll just have to wait and see.

But while we wait perhaps we can get a clue...