ONYX Posted August 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Hooky' post='523026' date='Aug 7 2007, 11:57 AM']You're welcome. My big problem with the reporting is that they don't entertain the notion that the Vick supporters would be defending him just because he's black and that they're worried that the man is going to put Vick away because he's black. 40 years ago in Atlanta, maybe. Now, and with the legal protection Vick can afford, no way. And is he really comparing this to a lynching?[/quote] [color="#FF0000"][b]I think the article is basically about perceptions. The article trys to give the reader some historical context about Atlanta and the people who live there. With that understanding, you can see why many in Atlanta feel that there is a racial factor about the Vick case. A twenty-something year old white person from Ohio or Kansas is not going to look at the Vick situation like Juanita Abernathy does. It doesn't mean their opinion is completley wrong, but it doesnt mean it's completley right either. Same goes for Mrs. Abernathy. Personally, I think there is a little bit of truth from both perspectives.[/b][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooky Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='sneaky' post='523508' date='Aug 8 2007, 09:21 AM'][color="#FF0000"][b]I think the article is basically about perceptions. The article trys to give the reader some historical context about Atlanta and the people who live there. With that understanding, you can see why many in Atlanta feel that there is a racial factor about the Vick case. A twenty-something year old white person from Ohio or Kansas is not going to look at the Vick situation like Juanita Abernathy does. It doesn't mean their opinion is completley wrong, but it doesnt mean it's completley right either. Same goes for Mrs. Abernathy. Personally, I think there is a little bit of truth from both perspectives.[/b][/color][/quote] I just don't understand the point of the protesters screaming for due process. Is there really any question that a millionaire of any race will get a fair trial? And like OJ, he'll probably get above and beyond a fair trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Could someone please explain why Don Imus getting fired for his comments is any different than sponsers pulling out from Vick? Imus was FIRED, Vick is still an employee of the NFL and is still making millions. Please explain how sponsers pulling endorsements is somehow an violation of due process. This is what I really don't get. Vick doesn't have the inalienable RIGHT to be a spokesman for Nike. He doesn't even have the right to work for the NFL, but he still does. How exactly is Vick being lynched? And how exactly has his right to due process in ANY WAY been violated? This whole thing is starting to make me very sick. Please sneaky, explain how these feelings are "justified", since I am as open minded as they come when it comes to these things and I really don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montecore Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Another thing that makes this case stand out is the unusual nature of the crime. People are accused of domestic violence, rape, drunk driving all the time ...even an occasional case of vehicular manslaughter is not all too uncommon. But how many times lately have you heard about dog fighting? Not too many. Sadly, we've become desensitized to seemingly everyday crimes against humans. Only the unusual ones get play anymore. sneaky, I totally agree with you, the outrage about Vick’s alleged actions is completely out of proportion when compared to what others have done. But because it’s a rather novel crime, people are jumping at the chance to speak out against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Montecore' post='523522' date='Aug 8 2007, 10:15 AM']Another thing that makes this case stand out is the unusual nature of the crime. People are accused of domestic violence, rape, drunk driving all the time ...even an occasional case of vehicular manslaughter is not all too uncommon. But how many times lately have you heard about dog fighting? Not too many. [b]Sadly, we've become desensitized to seemingly everyday crimes against humans. Only the unusual ones get play anymore.[/b] sneaky, I totally agree with you, the outrage about Vick’s alleged actions is completely out of proportion when compared to what others have done. But because it’s a rather novel crime, people are jumping at the chance to speak out against it.[/quote] What do you think the outrage would be like if he had beaten a homeless prostitute to death for kicks? Even just once. Yet engaging in felony activity for the past 5 years while brutaly killing hundreds of animals is somehow illiciting an outageous reaction? What out of proportion action are you talking about here? The loss of multi-million dollar sponsorhips while he maintains his status of employee of the NFL, which also pays him millions? Or perhaps are you referring to the "public outrage"? --- "Oh noes!! People are saying nasty things about me on talk radio.... boo hoo hoo. Guess I'll just have to fly the fuck outta here on my private jet to my other more remote mansion to get away from it all" Poor Michele Vick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodey319 Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 ok, one problem i have with this stuff in the last few posts is that this has nothing to do with how atlanta used to be or how it is now. Michael Vick plays for a football team in atlanta and that is about all atlanta has to do with this case. The stuff didnt happen near atlanta and he isnt being tried in atlanta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JungleCat Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Someone sent this to me so I figured I'd add it to this since it fits well. [attachment=398:ATT316301.jpg] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONYX Posted August 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Lucid' post='523519' date='Aug 8 2007, 10:10 AM']Could someone please explain why Don Imus getting fired for his comments is any different than sponsers pulling out from Vick? Imus was FIRED, Vick is still an employee of the NFL and is still making millions. Please explain how sponsers pulling endorsements is somehow an violation of due process. This is what I really don't get. Vick doesn't have the inalienable RIGHT to be a spokesman for Nike. He doesn't even have the right to work for the NFL, but he still does. How exactly is Vick being lynched? And how exactly has his right to due process in ANY WAY been violated? This whole thing is starting to make me very sick. Please sneaky, explain how these feelings are "justified", since I am as open minded as they come when it comes to these things and I really don't see it.[/quote] [color="#FF0000"][b]I completely understand where you are coming from but the only difference I can see between the Imus incident and the Vick case, is Imus made a mild racial insult to an entire female basketball team while Vick is accused of abusing some animals. I assume the logic behind this thinking, is that on the grand schcme of things, the violations or disrespect of humans is far more important than the violation or disrespect to animals. Now as far as all the sponsorships are concerned, I agree with you, I dont see how anyone can argue that but at the same time I can see how some people feel that the NFL is being too severe with him.[/b][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONYX Posted August 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Montecore' post='523522' date='Aug 8 2007, 10:15 AM']Another thing that makes this case stand out is the unusual nature of the crime. People are accused of domestic violence, rape, drunk driving all the time ...even an occasional case of vehicular manslaughter is not all too uncommon. But how many times lately have you heard about dog fighting? Not too many. Sadly, we've become desensitized to seemingly everyday crimes against humans. Only the unusual ones get play anymore. [b]sneaky, I totally agree with you, the outrage about Vick’s alleged actions is completely out of proportion when compared to what others have done. But because it’s a rather novel crime, people are jumping at the chance to speak out against it.[/b][/quote] [color="#FF0000"][b]I think media propaganda has a lot to do with it. There are plenty of players in the NFL that are assholes just like Vick. Some more, some less but the media decides which one should become the main villian by making it the top story and the nation whips out the torches and pitch fork. Perfect example, a few weeks ago, Brian Urlacher sent a text message to his son's mom in the midst of their custody battle and accused her of raising his young son to be a "faggot". If the media wanted to make him public enemy # 1 they could have but they chose Vick. The question then becomes why Vick? Would it be easier to villanize him? I certainly think so.[/b][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschooler Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='sneaky' post='523583' date='Aug 8 2007, 10:55 AM'][color="#FF0000"][b] the only difference I can see between the Imus incident and the Vick case, is Imus made a mild racial insult to an entire female basketball team while Vick is accused of abusing some animals. I assume the logic behind this thinking, is that on the grand schcme of things, the violations or disrespect of humans is far more important than the violation or disrespect to animals. [/b][/color][/quote] [quote name='sneaky' post='523596' date='Aug 8 2007, 11:27 AM'][color="#FF0000"][b] Perfect example, a few weeks ago, Brian Urlacher sent a text message to his son's mom in the midst of their custody battle and accused her of raising his young son to be a "faggot". If the media wanted to make him public enemy # 1 they could have but they chose Vick. The question then becomes why Vick? Would it be easier to villanize him? I certainly think so.[/b][/color][/quote] To insinuate that the Media "chose" and is "villanizing" Vick is asinine. I can`t believe you think calling people derogatory names once or even twice, is on the same level as abusing, torturing and killing Dogs for entertainment and profit for years and years. Calling people names isn`t against the law. Calling someone a "nappy headed hoe" or a "faggot" doesn`t get you indicted by a Federal Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmening Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='sneaky' post='523596' date='Aug 8 2007, 11:27 AM'][color="#FF0000"][b]I think media propaganda has a lot to do with it. There are plenty of players in the NFL that are assholes just like Vick. Some more, some less but the media decides which one should become the main villian by making it the top story and the nation whips out the torches and pitch fork. Perfect example, a few weeks ago, Brian Urlacher sent a text message to his son's mom in the midst of their custody battle and accused her of raising his young son to be a "faggot". If the media wanted to make him public enemy # 1 they could have but they chose Vick. The question then becomes why Vick? Would it be easier to villanize him? I certainly think so.[/b][/color][/quote] I think you're comparing apples to cumquats here. Text message vs. felony? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steggyD Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Harmening' post='523612' date='Aug 8 2007, 12:55 PM']I think you're comparing apples to cumquats here. Text message vs. felony?[/quote] Someone's reaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONYX Posted August 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='oldschooler' post='523608' date='Aug 8 2007, 12:50 PM']To insinuate that the Media "chose" and is "villanizing" Vick is asinine. I can`t believe you think calling people derogatory names once or even twice, is on the same level as abusing, torturing and killing Dogs for entertainment and profit for years and years.[/quote] [color="#FF0000"][b]In the example I used, Urlacher was implying his 3 year old son was a "faggot". This is where our point of views differ because I believe the emotional and mental abuse of a human child is far greater of a crime than the physical abuse of a canines. It's not that I dont sympathize or feel badly for the dogs........[/b][/color] [quote]Calling people names isn`t against the law. Calling someone a "nappy headed hoe" or a "faggot" doesn`t get you indicted by a Federal Court.[/quote] [color="#FF0000"][b]Ask yourself this, "If the media hadn't made the Vick case such a huge story, would the Feds really have pursued it?" Maybe, but I doubt it. If the Feds really wanted to, they could come after all kinds of people. They could indict everyone who has downloaded a song or movie illegally off the internet if they really wanted to. Dont you think the Feds watch tv too? Dont you think the federal prosecutors have egos too? This is the perfect case for them. Massive coverage, damning evidence....why wouldn't they prosecute? But just because the Feds are prosecuting Vick, doesnt mean that his actions are more severe than others who have not been federally indicted. Misogyny, racism, homocide by way of DUI and child abuse are and will always be more severe than animal abuse to me but In guess I am in the vast minority when it comes to that.[/b][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONYX Posted August 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Harmening' post='523612' date='Aug 8 2007, 12:55 PM']I think you're comparing apples to cumquats here. Text message vs. felony?[/quote] [color="#FF0000"][b]Is Vick the only athlete latley accused of a felony?[/b][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='sneaky' post='523641' date='Aug 8 2007, 01:44 PM'][color="#FF0000"][b]In the example I used, Urlacher was implying his 3 year old son was a "faggot". This is where our point of views differ because I believe the emotional and mental abuse of a human child is far greater of a crime than the physical abuse of a canines. It's not that I dont sympathize or feel badly for the dogs........[/b][/color] [color="#FF0000"][b]Ask yourself this, "If the media hadn't made the Vick case such a huge story, would the Feds really have pursued it?" Maybe, but I doubt it. If the Feds really wanted to, they could come after all kinds of people. They could indict everyone who has downloaded a song or movie illegally off the internet if they really wanted to. Dont you think the Feds watch tv too? Dont you think the federal prosecutors have egos too? This is the perfect case for them. Massive coverage, damning evidence....why wouldn't they prosecute? But just because the Feds are prosecuting Vick, doesnt mean that his actions are more severe than others who have not been federally indicted. Misogyny, racism, homocide by way of DUI and child abuse are and will always be more severe than animal abuse to me but In guess I am in the vast minority when it comes to that.[/b][/color][/quote] The Feds were involved long before the media knew anything about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmening Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='sneaky' post='523643' date='Aug 8 2007, 12:46 PM'][color="#FF0000"][b]Is Vick the only athlete latley accused of a felony?[/b][/color][/quote] Only athlete? Or only high profile, face-of-a-franchise athlete? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steggyD Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 sneaky, the investigation goes back years, way before there was any media hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MULLY Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 I think because sneaky is black a lot of people here are subconciously seeing this as a "playing the black card" thing. Personally, I agree with sneaky 100%. Is Vick's crime deplorbale? Yes. Should he be tried in a court of law? Yes. If found guilty should he be punished accordingly? Yes. I don't think sneaky would argue any of those points. What he's trying to say is that Vick is "accused" of being involved with this dog fighting and sponsors dropped him like a hot potato. Even if he's not convicted those sponsors are not coming back. Kobe was accused of raping a woman and Nike and his other sponsors didn't bat an eye about it. Yes, dog fighting is disgusting but is it on the same level as raping another human being? The other point he's trying to make here is that the media jumped all over Vick like he anal raped the Virgin Mary and dumped a load on her face.............and wiped his dick on her curtains. <hehe!!> Sure, what he was involved in is cruel to animals but there is cruelty to humans going on every minute of the day and we whisk that under the rug. We have become a numb society when it comes to crimes against each other. Hear of a murder or a rape or children starving to death and we're like "Aww, that's sad.......where's dinner?" Hear about dogs being made to fight and then killed if they don't do well and people throw up their arms like it's the worst crime anyone could ever even think of commiting. Society as a whole is fucked up. Doesn't really apply here but this kind of seems to fit. ""I love Los Angeles because it's a very liberal town, but it is extremely hypocritical in what it chooses to be liberal about. Like, you can be driving through West Hollywood and see a guy in lipstick wearing a fur coat and high heels, jacking off into a mailbox. People yelling at him: 'Hey! Is that real fur?!' MULLY FREE MICHAEL VICK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhoDeyThink Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='WhoDeyUK' post='520737' date='Aug 2 2007, 10:15 PM']I don't think even sneaky doubts his guilt. It's just the contrast between the way he's being treated as opposed to Kobe and Little.[/quote] Well when they found 3 diffent men's gizz in her panties..........thats is hardly a guilty conviction. She didn't go through with the trail because she is a lair and was never raped. As far as the upper deck card being pulled....well he wont play this year so there shouldn't be any card anyway. Just like that 07 O'dell card that doesn't exsist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Fulcher_33' post='523703' date='Aug 8 2007, 04:50 PM']I think because Onyx is black a lot of people here are subconciously seeing this as a "playing the black card" thing. Personally, I agree with Onyx 100%. Is Vick's crime deplorbale? Yes. Should he be tried in a court of law? Yes. If found guilty should he be punished accordingly? Yes. I don't think Onyx would argue any of those points. What he's trying to say is that Vick is "accused" of being involved with this dog fighting and sponsors dropped him like a hot potato. Even if he's not convicted those sponsors are not coming back. Kobe was accused of raping a woman and Nike and his other sponsors didn't bat an eye about it. Yes, dog fighting is disgusting but is it on the same level as raping another human being? The other point he's trying to make here is that the media jumped all over Vick like he anal raped the Virgin Mary and dumped a load on her face.............and wiped his dick on her curtains. <hehe!!> Sure, what he was involved in is cruel to animals but there is cruelty to humans going on every minute of the day and we whisk that under the rug. We have become a numb society when it comes to crimes against each other. Hear of a murder or a rape or children starving to death and we're like "Aww, that's sad.......where's dinner?" Hear about dogs being made to fight and then killed if they don't do well and people throw up their arms like it's the worst crime anyone could ever even think of commiting. Society as a whole is fucked up. Doesn't really apply here but this kind of seems to fit. ""I love Los Angeles because it's a very liberal town, but it is extremely hypocritical in what it chooses to be liberal about. Like, you can be driving through West Hollywood and see a guy in lipstick wearing a fur coat and high heels, jacking off into a mailbox. People yelling at him: 'Hey! Is that real fur?!' MULLY FREE MICHAEL VICK[/quote] co-sign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Fulcher_33' post='523703' date='Aug 8 2007, 02:50 PM']I think because Onyx is black a lot of people here are subconciously seeing this as a "playing the black card" thing. Personally, I agree with Onyx 100%. Is Vick's crime deplorbale? Yes. Should he be tried in a court of law? Yes. If found guilty should he be punished accordingly? Yes. I don't think Onyx would argue any of those points. What he's trying to say is that Vick is "accused" of being involved with this dog fighting and sponsors dropped him like a hot potato. Even if he's not convicted those sponsors are not coming back. Kobe was accused of raping a woman and Nike and his other sponsors didn't bat an eye about it. Yes, dog fighting is disgusting but is it on the same level as raping another human being? The other point he's trying to make here is that the media jumped all over Vick like he anal raped the Virgin Mary and dumped a load on her face.............and wiped his dick on her curtains. <hehe!!> Sure, what he was involved in is cruel to animals but there is cruelty to humans going on every minute of the day and we whisk that under the rug. We have become a numb society when it comes to crimes against each other. Hear of a murder or a rape or children starving to death and we're like "Aww, that's sad.......where's dinner?" Hear about dogs being made to fight and then killed if they don't do well and people throw up their arms like it's the worst crime anyone could ever even think of commiting. Society as a whole is fucked up. Doesn't really apply here but this kind of seems to fit. ""I love Los Angeles because it's a very liberal town, but it is extremely hypocritical in what it chooses to be liberal about. Like, you can be driving through West Hollywood and see a guy in lipstick wearing a fur coat and high heels, jacking off into a mailbox. People yelling at him: 'Hey! Is that real fur?!' MULLY FREE MICHAEL VICK[/quote] Most of the people I know say things like "IF vick is convicted of these things, he should go to prison", or "What Vick ALLEGEDLY did was pretty bad, but he deserves his day in court." I agree with those statements. IF, IF, IF. BUT, there is nothing wrong with the sponsors pulling out from under Vick...theirs is an image-oriented business, and Vick isn't representative of that in THEIR opinion, and it is THEIR right under the contract they signed with Vick that they can choose to terminate their relationship with Vick for ANY reason. There is also nothing wrong with the media running this story...ALL the media outlets are saying the same thing "Alleged" or "If convickted"....that's their job, that's what they do. As far as your statement goes about people "sweeping crimes against humanity under the rug because we are a numbed society", I don't buy that either. Myself, my family nor anyone I know believes as you apparently do. And, LOL at your Los Angeles reference....and the curtains! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MULLY Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='WhoDeyThink' post='523705' date='Aug 9 2007, 05:52 AM']Well when they found 3 diffent men's gizz in her panties..........thats is hardly a guilty conviction. She didn't go through with the trail because she is a lair and was never raped.[/quote] It was a while before they found the 3 different strains of jizz in her panties. Until that time it was pretty much signed, sealed, and delivered that Kobe was a rapist. Why didn't Nike drop him when he was fist accused like they're doing with Vick? That's the entire point of this thread. Michael Vick has been accused, not convicted, [b]accused[/b] of a crime. A crime that shouldn't rank up there with raping another human being, but he's being treated like he's the second coming of Hitler and that farm in Virginia is a reincarnation of Auschwitz. Sad state of affairs we have here. Don't get me wrong. I love animals and if he's found guilty then I'd like to be the one to kick him in his nuts for it. But this whole Nike thing is a fucking joke and a half. It's not balanced. Be accused of killing some dogs and your sponsorship is out the door. Be accused of raping someone or vehicular manslaughter from DUI and it's "Let's see how this plays out first." Do you not see the hypocrisy of that? Face it, this isn't Nike's high moral standards in play here. It all comes down to the tree hugging PETA people picketing outside the home office. They have enough money and a big enough voice for them (NIKE) to take a hit in the pocketbook. That's all it is. They're just trying to save face. Fucking company pays kids cents a day to slave over making their shoes yet Michael Vick is the anti-Christ for being involved with dog fighting. Fucking shit happens every day all around the world yet they choose to crucify Michael Vick for it because he's a face that everyone knows. MULLY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Fulcher_33' post='523720' date='Aug 8 2007, 05:18 PM']It was a while before they found the 3 different strains of jizz in her panties. Until that time it was pretty much signed, sealed, and delivered that Kobe was a rapist. Why didn't Nike drop him when he was fist accused like they're doing with Vick? That's the entire point of this thread. Michael Vick has been accused, not convicted, [b]accused[/b] of a crime. A crime that shouldn't rank up there with raping another human being, but he's being treated like he's the second coming of Hitler and that farm in Virginia is a reincarnation of Auschwitz. Sad state of affairs we have here. Don't get me wrong. I love animals and if he's found guilty then I'd like to be the one to kick him in his nuts for it. But this whole Nike thing is a fucking joke and a half. It's not balanced. Be accused of killing some dogs and your sponsorship is out the door. Be accused of raping someone or vehicular manslaughter from DUI and it's "Let's see how this plays out first." Do you not see the hypocrisy of that? Face it, this isn't Nike's high moral standards in play here. It all comes down to the tree hugging PETA people picketing outside the home office. They have enough money and a big enough voice for them (NIKE) to take a hit in the pocketbook. That's all it is. They're just trying to save face. Fucking company pays kids cents a day to slave over making their shoes yet Michael Vick is the anti-Christ for being involved with dog fighting. Fucking shit happens every day all around the world yet they choose to crucify Michael Vick for it because he's a face that everyone knows. MULLY[/quote] If WOW had picketed, i'm sure he would have been dropped. But despite the non-stop 24 hour media coverage people did not get as outrage, especially when it started getting leaked out the chick was a giant liar. Plus we view dogs differently in this society. Almost the same way we view our children. Nike isnt stupid, they are going to do whatever makes them the most money possible. Apparently they think that michael vick could cost them more money than he will make them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steggyD Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 They don't compare, the Kobe deal versus Vick. It is a federal case, get it, big time, federal fuckin' government. No corporation wants to continue sponsoring someone with the federal government on their ass. It's that simple. Get over it. Next debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschooler Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 [quote name='Fulcher_33' post='523703' date='Aug 8 2007, 03:50 PM']I think because sneaky is black a lot of people here are subconciously seeing this as a "playing the black card" thing. Personally, I agree with sneaky 100%. Is Vick's crime deplorbale? Yes. Should he be tried in a court of law? Yes. If found guilty should he be punished accordingly? Yes. I don't think sneaky would argue any of those points. What he's trying to say is that Vick is "accused" of being involved with this dog fighting and sponsors dropped him like a hot potato. Even if he's not convicted those sponsors are not coming back. Kobe was accused of raping a woman and Nike and his other sponsors didn't bat an eye about it. Yes, dog fighting is disgusting but is it on the same level as raping another human being? The other point he's trying to make here is that the media jumped all over Vick like he anal raped the Virgin Mary and dumped a load on her face.............and wiped his dick on her curtains. <hehe!!> Sure, what he was involved in is cruel to animals but there is cruelty to humans going on every minute of the day and we whisk that under the rug. We have become a numb society when it comes to crimes against each other. Hear of a murder or a rape or children starving to death and we're like "Aww, that's sad.......where's dinner?" Hear about dogs being made to fight and then killed if they don't do well and people throw up their arms like it's the worst crime anyone could ever even think of commiting. Society as a whole is fucked up. Doesn't really apply here but this kind of seems to fit. ""I love Los Angeles because it's a very liberal town, but it is extremely hypocritical in what it chooses to be liberal about. Like, you can be driving through West Hollywood and see a guy in lipstick wearing a fur coat and high heels, jacking off into a mailbox. People yelling at him: 'Hey! Is that real fur?!' MULLY FREE MICHAEL VICK[/quote] Kobe Bryant had one person accuse him of a one time event. Michael Vick is accused of operating an organized crime ring, that breed, fought, gambled, tortured and killed dogs. The case against Vick was years in the making. There is a lot of damaging evidence against him. The media only jumped on Vick after the Feds started making their case public, and started releasing more and more details. If Vick was accused of commiting the same crimes against Humans, that he is accused of commiting against animals, he wouldn`t be seeing the light of day right now. He`d be in jail awaiting trail. Not in his mansion awaiting trail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.