Bad Newz from the ATL
Well I began kicking this post around a few weeks ago, but was never able to come to terms with myself on what sort of point it was I wanted to make.
The world of sports has had some pretty shaking stories bubble up in recent days, but none has quite struck me in the same way as the story of Michael Vick, aka Ookie. Rather than dig into the legal morass of this admittedly disgusting indictment, or bask in the luster of perhaps the best pure athlete in the NFL, I would like to focus this post on the reactions of an uninformed public. If you haven’t yet read the preliminary indictment you can access it here: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/07/18/ind.pdf.
Now, I admit I am a Falcons fan, 12 years in Atlanta left me tragically attached to the fate of both the ill-fated Falcons, and the just plain ill Hawks (as well as America’s Atlanta Braves!!!) And I have certainly been awed by the display of personal athleticism that he has shown in his time on the field in Atlanta. That being said, if he is as deeply involved in this heinous circus as the indictments allege I will have lost all respect for Vick, qua human. However, I must use this opportunity to rebuke the loose-tongued and chastise such reckless commentary. Hypocrisy abounds in this case.
I do adhere to some degree of a sort of cultural relativism, at least as it pertains to government. Personally, I find dogfighting to be reprehensible, I would never support it and if I knew of its presence in my immediate environment I would work to excise it by creating pariahs of its promoters and supporters, thus removing the profit incentive. Then again, I also find the culture surrounding legal dog racing to be highly questionable, and thus do not support it (except for the dogs, in this case I support the dogs, not the war, err sport.) I also have a quixotic love for the Triple Crown of horse racing, but I have enough sense to realize that earlier this year I watched a horse killed on national TV, (the horse was Mending Fences in the $250,000 Dixie Stakes before the Preakness.) Now in this case they had the decency to remove the animal from the track and hide it behind a little green curtain while they “destroyed” it, all the while ensuring the audience that the horse was getting top-notch medical attention. In fact, anyone who saw the 2+ hour telecast of the featured race that followed hardly heard mention of the horse (though they let us know the jockeys were okay a few times, and the rider of the horse went on to win the Preakness,) I had to search online afterwards to get the end of the story. Further, we live in a society, though I try to disconform as much as possible in this manner, that organizes its diet and lifestyle around industries with highly questionable morals. But just like the war on drugs (see the differences in sentencing for powdered versus crack cocaine,) purveyors of dogfighting suffer from joining an enterprise of poor urban people, whereas horse racing is the “Sport of Kings,” and is publicly celebrated by official acts of Congress.
As much as I have personal disdain for dogfighting, I can only wonder how much of the insidious elements have been exacerbated as the result of prohibition. What would happen to the world of dogfighting if it was brought into the bright lights of public disdain? I imagine it might be a little closer to the sanitized “green curtain” nature of horse racing, or beef and poultry production. Still deplorable, but more presentable, and probably slightly less prone to abuses like some of what is mentioned in the indictment.
The last bit of hypocrisy I want to point out revolves around the world of sports in general, but especially the NFL as it is becoming under new commissioner Roger Goodell. Sports are entertainment, they are not some higher calling that requires some higher moral character. The league has no place whatsoever in executing punishment on its players based on conduct grounds, this is clearly the job of the team (on this point I should mention Falcons owner Arthur Blank actually wanted to suspend Vick but was pressured to wait by the Commissioner’s Office.) A football team is a commercial enterprise, and should be treated as one, if a person dislikes the character of a team, which is a direct reflection on the character of the ownership and management, they can choose not to support it, and management then has to adapt of suffer catastrophic financial losses (an excellent case study on this is the Portland Trail Blazers, formerly known commonly as the Portland Jail Blazers, who completely lost the fan base after numerous player run-ins with police, including marijuana possession, traffic violations, domestic abuse, and of all things dogfighting.) Further, if management has a problem with the team character they have almost unlimited ability to change it given the NFL’s non-guaranteed contracts, and contractual morales clauses that allow for suspensions.
I have so much more to say on this matter that I think I will have to spin it off to a future post, especially in regards to the rampant hypocrisy from PETA, who publicly supports the measures of many localities to destroy pit bulls on admittance to any animal shelter, and institute bans on pit bull ownership and breeding. So stay tuned for that.
I would just like to close with a simple thought experiment. Think back to when you were growing up. Think of that real good friend from high school that you still keep in touch with, maybe think of a cousin, or a neighbor that you grew up with through the turbulence that is adolescence (think of how these bonds might even be stronger if you had grown up in a poverty-stricken neighborhood where you had to depend on your friends and family for the basic necessities of survival, similar to the one described in a recent article about Vick’s neighborhood from a local Richmond paper: http://www.timesdispatch.com/cva/ric/news/michael_vick.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2007-07-25-0162.html) Now imagine you’ve grown up, and out of this place. You’ve just signed an immense contract, which will provide you with more money than you ever imagined growing up in poverty. Surpassing your neighbors in many respects because of the role of chance or providence in developing an extraordinary natural ability, but in many more integral respects due to the intense support of your friends and family. Now think of a law that you find unjust, or at least unnecessary, and imagine this friend approaches you, and presents you with a business plan that though you know it is illegal, does not morally offend you, nor does it require an inordinate investment to repay the loyalty of childhood friends. I think from here one can imagine how easily a person can be drawn into an enterprise like this, and in many respects due to the illegal nature of it all, how even when faced with some of the grizzlier aspects it would be hard to bring yourself to stop it (which in this case would probably involve implicating yourself.) Again I am not trying to create apologies for Michael Vick, but I would suggest that everyone put themselves in his position and understand the complexities before you judge, and make this man more villified than alleged rapists (Kobe Bryant ring a bell?,) alleged murderers (anyone remember Ray Lewis?,) and admitted wife beaters (I’d run out of space if I tried to name them all here.) I’ve heard many sports reporters dismiss the issues of race in this case (as well as issues of class which are often overlooked entirely,) recently say things like ‘If this was Tom Brady or Peyton Manning the Federal Government would be prosecuting the case just as harshly.’ My response to that is: Peyton Manning and Tom Brady never had to deal with half the pressure that has been put on Mike Vick.
Thanks for reading. Anyone else following this case, or have general comments or reactions to it?
on August 5th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
1360 words later, haha… Well I read your essay, but I just don’t agree. I think you are trying to rectify your libertarianism, animal empathy and sports teams and are generally unsuccessful. (sorry if my response is rather disjointed)
Perhaps I would be willing to empathize with Vick if I already didn’t think that he was trash. Remember when he flipped off the entire Georgia Dome? He may be a great athlete, but then again my enthusiasm for baseball never returned after Barry Bonds invaded my Giants.
The bottom line for me is that if he is found guilty I hope he serves jail time, however, as a member of the upper class, he will most likely avoid it. In the long run I think this would benefit the falcons because then they might actually develop their team.
Where the hell is Evan when you need him?
on August 5th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
I finally drug an opinion out of Andrew! Never thought I would have such a hard time doing that…
What is it exactly that you don’t agree with me on? I made a lot of claims amongst my 1360 words…
To clarify, my personal opinion is that Michael Vick was probably approached, right after signing his first multi-million dollar contract with the Falcons, by old friends and a cousin who wanted him to help them out in starting a pit bull breeding operation that would provide them with a livelihood (if you read the indictment it appears that almost all gambling proceeds were split between the three others, not including Vick.) Whether it was the plan at the start, or if Vick knew of the plan from the start I don’t have a clue, but a slippery slope would soon lead to the full-fledged interstate operation that appears to have been functioning. Like I said, I don’t excuse this behavior, but I think people need to have a better understanding of the context before they make him into a monster, and burn him at the stake. Mike Vick, and his now co-defendants, clearly came from a childhood that I cannot even begin to understand. I’m sure that this whole case has had a strong affect on the character of Mike Vick, just as the initial reaction to Clinton Portis’ comments in support of Mike Vick quickly made an impact on him (if you missed that, Portis’ first comments in an impromptu mall interview were something along the line of ‘it’s his property he can do with it what he wants’ while his later recantation after a public outcry was more like ‘I had no idea that people loved their dogs so much,’) and I hope that Vick is able to rehabilitate his image and use his position of prominence for the many good things he has supported in the past (after school programs in urban areas, Va. Tech University and the victims of the recent tragedy there, etc) as well as to educate other poor young athletes on the transition to superstardom and its inherent pressures.
All in all, despite my personal disgust of the alleged actions I have a hard time thinking of Vick as a menace to society, and I cannot think of much to be gained by throwing the man in jail (of course there are very few cases where I see jail as a useful tool.) I think it would be much more fitting to have him pay some hefty fines, placed on probation, and sentenced to a near lifetime of community service with animal shelters and rehab programs where he can use his position of prominence to bring attention to animal abuse and neglect throughout the country.
As the most prominent black player in the NFL, at the most scrutinized (and traditionally white) position, playing for a team in the deep South, Vick has undoubtedly been subject to amazing pressures and oversight. If flipping a couple middle fingers to a stadium of boos is the worst you can come up with in six years as a pro (plus three at a prominent athletic university, Virginia Tech,) and in a game that he ran for 166 yards and threw at least five passes that were dropped including a 4th quarter bomb that would’ve given the Falcons a chance for a 2-point conversion to tie no less, I would have a hard time putting him in the bottom 10% of moral characters in the NFL, and an even harder time in calling him “trash” without any personal experience to back that up. That being said, I can guarantee you that I won’t entertain the idea of buying any Vick merchandise until he has made huge steps to make amends for his behavior, and I’m pretty certain that I’m not alone here.
The most important aspect of my “essay,” however, was to bring to light the excessive hypocrisy that surrounds this case, and the problems that arise when people are tried and convicted solely in the court of a barely informed public opinon. I certainly understand that I, and I would be willing to bet all of you readers, take part in industry and commercial activity that people from other cultures and backgrounds find unsustainable, self-serving, or downright abhorrent (take a trip to the nearest poultry “farm” if you want a good firsthand look at one of them.) When the public rushes to an uninformed judgment, ignoring the intricate nuances, it creates the sort of mob rule that threatens to cheapen American democracy. Let us not focus so much on the sawdust in Michael Vick’s eyes while we still have planks in our own. (And you never thought I would bust out a bible quote, so there! I win!)
on August 6th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
I’m no dog-fighting proponent or anything, but I think this issue has become a tad overblown. People only care about these dogs because they are cute and cuddly, no one gives a rip about animal rights when they are chowing down on a hamburger. Sure, dog fighting is horrible, but are the everyday operations of the meat industry altogether that much worse? I guess the difference is that dog fighting is just a cruel sport for our entertainment, while consuming meat has credible utility. Still, the difference in what the animal feels is probably not all that great, so to me it seems hypocritical that there is a massive outcry about what affected a small number of animals (10,20??). Also, I’m surprised that Andrew is so offended by Vick’s middle finger, is it really so personally offensive? Maybe I already have the mindset that the vast majority of athletes are overpaid douche bags, but I could really care less about his gesture. By the way, I realize I am opening myself up to a lot of criticism here since I spent multiple hours today researching fantasy sports, and I can’t wait to go home and eat some hot dogs.
on August 6th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Using a fallacious argument (the straw-man) “at least it’s not the poultry industry” to justify or excuse the actions of Vick is absurd. Dogs are different than other animals, because they have been bread for companionship. Besides, I’m not a proponent of factory farms (Jeffersonian Communitarianism has always had an appeal).
I comprehend and appreciate the rough background he came from and the extraordinary talent he posses. I can even give him the benefit of the doubt that he wasn’t directly managing the ring on a day to day basis. Lets face it though, at the end of the week/month or season - this clown would go back to his property and watch “man’s best friend” tear themselves to pieces. Often times both the winner and loser would need to be “capped”.
If I were a Falcon’s fan at the audience in the Georgia Dome and had been flipped off, I doubt I would want to watch another game. I am however, a 49er fan and if that franchise wants to continue on this pathetic and self-destructive track, well that’s one less team to beat, in the meantime the whole NFL suffers from this bad press.
But Greyson, I do notice in your first argument you play the class card about how rough it was for him growing up. In your response you say, now that he is a member of the elite (especially as an African American elite), he should no longer be subject to the criminal law. So if the law doesn’t apply to the rich or poor is this another area where the middle class in the country “takes one for the team”?
Lastly, I want to say that I don’t actually watch the news where most of this nonsense is playing out. I voluntarily put these blinders on myself, because on a personal level I don’t care what Michael Vick or Paris Hilton are doing. As much as possible I do not buy into the celebrity worship fanaticism. To me, Vick is just another piece of trash; I wish the rule of law applied, but I wont hold my breath.
on August 7th, 2007 at 9:53 pm
Warning: this is another long one, 2012 words to be exact. Suffice it to say that the position I’m defending is a highly nuanced one. I don’t want to misrepresent myself, so please forgive me if I have been excessively thorough.
Andrew, I am deeply sorry that you are a ‘9ers fan, but I won’t hold it against you, except to tell you that the Falcons will beat the ‘9ers on November 4th even if I have to fill in under center (though I think Joey Harrington or DJ Shockley would probably fair better.) As for your distaste of the mainstream news, I tend to agree, but when it involves issues of criminal justice I think it deserves attention and scrutiny, and ultimately the mainstream news has an immense impact on mainstream society and cannot be safely ignored. Personally, I wish the news would focus on issues of justice when it doesn’t involve a big name like Vick or Hilton, but we have to take what we can get.
Again, I am not trying to make excuses for Vick, don’t look for me to be leading a protest if he is jailed, there are many who are more worthy of such efforts… but I do think people need to take a step back, understand the complexity here, and not focus on the mostly one-sided appeals to pathos that the media has inundated this story with. What really inspired me to start this post was a conversation with a close friend who said he would want to hurt Vick if given the chance. This, coming from someone who is far from informed as to the details, really worried me, and I worry that he isn’t the only one to think this way. This cuts to the very foundation of our democracy, a well-informed society. As I said before, if our society is ready to pillory this man, based on these cursory allegations that are being expressed by a sensationalist media, then we are really devolving into the kind of mob rule that Aristotle, J.S. Mill, and Tocqueville warned us about. This is why I initiated this discourse.
Certainly some of my earlier comments may have focused on one leg of the anti-Vick argument, the moral argument, but this wasn’t a straw man. The other leg of the argument, the legal argument, I agree with in principle, if I were the judge I would certainly apply the law as written, treating this case different only in proportion to its differences (on that note I will mention that a large interstate dogfighting operation was broken up earlier this year in Dayton, Ohio, all 7 accused in that case faced state charges, so this case is clearly already being handled differently.) However, I would suggest we take a closer look at the inherent problems of prohibition and look for more effective ways of governing this atrocity than the current legislation. As much as I cringe at the thought of dogfighting, qua entertainment, I also understand that I cringe at aspects of many other legal and even state-sponsored activities (not only the poultry and beef industry, but also horse racing, dog racing, animal control, the physical and psychological abuse of some police dogs and even some, though certainly far from most, rescue or assistance dogs, the war on drugs, the war in Iraq, chemical-intensive agriculture and horticulture…) I can’t imagine how atrocious the poultry or beef industries would become if they were forced underground into a black market situation. In the end, I wish we could wise up as a society and treat ALL animals, and people for that matter, with respect, but I’m not going to hold my breath either. Until then we’re stuck with our current paradigm, which places the rights of people above all other organisms in every situation (except I guess we are making exceptions for cute and cuddly ones, unless they’ve no longer serve our purpose.)
Every day hundreds, if not thousands, of dogs around our country are killed. They’ve come up with plenty of euphemisms (destroyed, euthanized, or my personal favorite “put to sleep,”) but the final outcome is the same, the human-directed termination of life. (I would also note: I find it interesting how many people are abhorred by the methods of execution that are alleged here, especially since they are all just primitive forms of the methods our various states use to execute criminals. I would argue that legalizing dogfighting would bring their methods more inline with those of our criminal justice system, as well as legal sports like horse and dog racing.) Some of these lives are ended out of mercy, such as the one that I personally witnessed when my Sadie’s excretory functions no longer functioned, but many of them are primarily the result of human ego. Most are destroyed simply because they have been abandoned and have become a strain on the resources of a shelter, or a perceived danger to a community. As I mentioned earlier, it is the policy in many animal shelters across the country to destroy ALL pit bulls on arrival, and this is a policy PETA, the king of the hypocrites in the case, supports. Further, PETA and other groups have worked to institute breed-specific bans, or heavy restrictions on pit bull breeding or ownership throughout many cities, counties and even entire countries (Norway and Australia ban them completely, while the UK, France, New Zealand and others put stringent restrictions on them.) Apparently PETA’s stance on ethically treating animals is to prevent their existence in the first place. C’mon PETA don’t hate the players, hate the game!
Andrew, your point about the breeding is an important distinction, but you haven’t fully fleshed it out. Douglas firs, the state tree of Oregon, generally grow to more than 100’ and create breathtaking images for anyone who travels through the forests of the Pacific Northwest. Despite, or perhaps as a result of this beauty, Doug firs have been domesticated and turned into one of the most popular Christmas trees in the U.S. Now I’m not a huge fan of deforestation, and I’d prefer that we better utilize good forest growing soils and their products, but I understand that commercially sold Christmas trees are grown specifically to be cut down, decorated, enjoyed, and thrown out, and thus I don’t see this as an excessive waste (unfortunate maybe, but I doubt I’m in the majority in that opinion.) Similarly, pit bulls, and their close relatives, have been selectively bred for centuries, and they do make excellent companions, recently garnering a reputation as “nanny dogs” for their fierce loyalty in protecting children in their families, and adopting other orphaned baby animals. However, from the start they have been bred to possess traits, including this extreme loyalty, that tend to make them more prone to violence and more suitable for defense and animal control (they were initially bred to control field pests, but also for guarding and as their name suggests helping to control domestic bulls.) Unfortunately, pits have been used in violent sports for hundreds of years, entertaining dignitaries such as Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, which certainly doesn’t excuse it but clearly shows their predisposition to the activity (again I believe if dogfighting wasn’t prohibited there would be more transparent oversight into the rearing of all pit bulls, which would work to stifle these aggressive tendencies in the general population.) On the other hand is Tucker, one of the world’s best dogs and my personal best friend, a yellow lab. Labradors were initially bred to retrieve cork floats and netting from the icy waters off the coast of Canada. Even since two debilitating knee ligament tears, which he suffered last summer due to excessive Frisbee playing, retrieving is by far his favorite activity and he gladly fights through the pain and discomfort without any regard for further injury. I will never forget Sadie in the last day of her life, loyally following me on a walk through the yard and valiantly attempting a shortened game of ball despite the obvious pain. I can still remember her last moments lying on the vet’s floor looking into my eyes for approval and comfort. She lived to serve me until I granted her leave (ironically the only time she ever sought my permission before leaving.) Have I been abusing my dogs? Or is it more likely that through years of breeding they have grown to love something that most humans would see as an imposition. I’m not saying these dogs had enjoyable lives, but if you were given the choice to live your next life like one of these fighting dogs, or to live it like a chicken who has its legs cut off because they can no longer support your hormone-gorged breasts, or a cow bound in a stall with an udder near bursting with hormone-gorged milk, I find it hard to believe you would choose either of the latter.
Senator Byrd, one of the great Congressional speakers of all-time, was right in his assessment of this bloodsport: “Dog fighting is a brutal, sadistic event motivated by barbarism of the worst sort and cruelty of the worst, worst, worst sadistic kind. One is left wondering, who are the real animals…the creatures inside the ring, or the creatures outside the ring.” If I can answer Mr. Byrd’s question: we are ALL animals, and until we put aside our egos and understand that morality is something that must be practiced, and cannot be legislated, we will continue to find ourselves appaled by the depths of human brutality.
I know I’ve gone on way too long here, and that would’ve made a good ending, but it always irks me when someone responds to me and doesn’t directly address a direct question, so I won’t make that offense and I will work to answer yours. Unfortunately, I wasn’t clear enough in my argumentation, and it appears you misread me. I wasn’t saying that Vick or his co-defendants’ rough background should excuse them from the law. What I was attempting was to provide context, and suggest that their background didn’t inculcate within them the same respect for dogs that you, or I have gained through personal relationships with animals. To a poor kid living in Vick’s neighborhood the few dogs that were around weren’t “man’s best friend,” they were cheap alarm systems. I have a great deal of pity for any person who has been robbed of even the basic, most synthetic community with nature, that is raising or at least knowing a pet, or tending or at least seeing a garden. Add to this the poor track record of the American prison system for rehabilitating criminals, and its propensity to lead convicts to worse transgressions, and I really see little justification to throw a first-time offender, like Michael Vick, in prison, nor first-time violent offenders like his co-defendants. Nor did I mean to suggest Vick shouldn’t go to jail solely because he is famous, or rich, but only because I see no good that can come of it. Whereas, especially in Vick (though I expect he could inspire his co-defendants,) I see an intelligent grown man that is capable of penitence, and could become a leader in the urban community, and in fighting animal abuse throughout the country. As for football, if he maintains the image he has now been painted with, and does nothing to rehabilitate it, I’m pretty sure we won’t see him suiting up anytime in the near future, but if he recognizes the errors of his ways, and sincerely makes amends, I see no reason why Falcons fans and the city of Atlanta shouldn’t embrace #7. To err is human, and so is Vick, which may come as a shock to his fans…
Thanks to JDizzle for sharing his thoughts too. Some free advice: I wouldn’t fantasy draft Vick anywhere before round 50, and stick to Hebrew Nationals they answer to a higher power.
on August 17th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Cohorts Say Vick’s A Dog Killer “Phillips and Peace each told investigators that Vick participated in killing the dogs, which were hung or drowned, and that the animals “died as a result of the collective efforts” of the trio.” (Source)
If he was as heavily involved as the other defendants seem to indicate, at what point do you consider him guilty? Is he just another O.J. to you, guilty in reality, not guilty by criminal law?
on August 17th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
As I’ve said, I am not defending Vick as innocent, I’m simply trying to shed some light so that close-minded people, which abound in this case, can see all sides off this story. However, the statements of Phillips and Peace don’t sway me in the least. Both of these guys have criminal histories, lack the high priced defense team that Vick enjoys, and are clearly more closely connected to the operation. They were guilty, so they pleaded as such, and if they can throw Vick under the bus it only increases their chances for leniency.
The trio of guilty pleas surprises me, however. It makes me wonder how strong a case they really have. It now seems like Vick is being strong-armed by the feds who are threatening to file RICO charges if he doesn’t agree to cop a plea (the deadline was set for this morning at 9 Eastern.) Of course the RICO charges would have almost no chance of sticking, but the mere chance of a conviction forces Vick and his defense team to weigh the possibility of spending as many as 20 years in federal prison, and an almost certain lifetime ban from the NFL. Yet another stereotypical case of the abuse of police powers.
So what I have been saying, if I may: is that we are all guilty of animal cruelty. We ALL use animals to further our own agenda, some of us just use them in a way that the powers that be have outlawed (the same difference between alcohol and marijuana, or the difference in sentencing between cocaine and crack.) Vick’s alleged actions in this case are abhorrent, but I see nothing to be gained from trumping up charges, demonizing the man, throwing him in prison for years, or banning him from the league (dogfighting bets are a far cry from gambling, these were allegedly his dogs, which makes it competition not gambling. Just like Vick competes in a league that is gambled on by millions in legal and illegal ways throughout the country. If he does well he gets more money, if he does poorly he loses it. No difference.)
I think the court and the NFL should get together and offer Vick a deal to spend 6-10 months in prison, agree to community service and probation for a longer period, pay a hefty restitution and fine, and suspend him from the league for two years (served concurrent with the jail time,) with a conduct review before mini-camps next season where the suspension could be truncated for good behavior.
That being said, if Vick beats the charges, and I think he will beat out the majority of them if not all if he doesn’t plea out, he has still been severely punished, taking big hits to the wallet and his reputation. Much more punishment than corporate execs at Tyson Foods, or the fat cats at the race track, and in Nome, Alaska will face.
on August 20th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
This just in:
Vick has agreed to a plea deal, the hearing will occur next Monday, August 27th. The two co-defendants that pleaded out last week have a sentencing hearing set for November 30th, so we can assume that Vick’s sentence won’t be handed down until at least that time as well, though I’d expect action from the league or team to come sooner.
We’ll see what Vick will do with the time he has before sentencing.
on September 5th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
The talking heads are at it again… Whoopi Goldberg made her debut on ABC’s The View yesterday, and as expected she starting making waves from the get-go. Obviously Whoopi is not a reader of our blog, or she would’ve known better than to try to provide context to Mike Vick’s actions. Unfortunately, she faced the same fate that many of us have, she’s been decried and pilloried from all corners of today’s 24 hour media culture for daring to try and explain that Mike Vick is not evil. Not surprisingly she had to spend a bit of today’s program explaining that what she said: ‘What Mike Vick did was a result of people’s different opinions and relationships with animals’ (and I’m paraphrasing here) is slightly different from what the media heard: ‘Mike Vick is a freedom fighter who shouldn’t be punished for what he’s done.’ Has our society really reached the point where non-conformance with the prevalent mob-rule-sanctioned talking points leads to this?
By the way the change from one day to the next in the headlines of the hyperlinked articles is hilarious, and shows the ignorance that has seeped into our culture through 24-hour media outlets… way to go Fox News…