Friday, August 24, 2007

Good Puppies

...If only Vick was actually in it...








Update: Add Jamie Foxx to the list of black celebrities coming out to defend Michael Vick (hereafter "the piece of excrement").
“It’s a cultural thing, I think,” Jamie said.
Horseshit.
“Most brothers didn’t know that, you know. I used to see dogs fighting in the neighborhood all the time. I didn’t know that was Fed time.
Right, 'cause what matters is not whether something is cruel and inhuman... or even illegal... but if it might end you up in Federal prison. Gotcha.
So, Mike probably just didn’t read his handbook on what not to do as a black star.”
Plays the race card -- Check. 'cause if Brett Favre did this, no one would care. Right.
“I know that cruelty to animals is bad, but ..."
That one stands on its own.
"... sometimes people shoot people and kill people and don’t get time,” Jamie continued.
Yeah, if they do it *accidentally*, and if there's no negligence involved, that might sometimes be the result. 'course, there is no such thing as accidental torture, or accidental execution. But, hey, they're only dogs, right?
“I think in this situation, he really didn’t know the extent of it, so I always give him the benefit of the doubt.”
And finally, we come to the rationalization. What's unspoken, IMO, in all this is the whole "he's a big hero to me *so* he couldn't possibly have done these things" fallacy. Um--Yeah. He could, and he did--In fact, he's fucking admitted it.

Prison's too good for him.

Labels: , ,

2 Comments:

Blogger SeangSTM said...

Priceless.

I heard a 'journalist' at the NYTimes was wondering why no one is up in arms about hunting animals, while they get their knickers in a twist about 'dog fighting.'

They do realize he had a rape chamber...where the overly aggressive dogs would be allowed to repeatedly fuck the other ones until they were exhausted? ANd dogs would be tortured if they became unfit for fighting.

I see the comparison. Totally.

8/24/07, 11:18 AM  
Blogger Scott said...

I'd love a link to that NYTimes piece, 'cause I haven't seen it, but the NAACP came out with a statement like that, which was quickly repeated by the likes of Stefan Marbury.

And I can see why people would be confused. After all, hunting is where men stalk, kill, and subsequently eat, wild animals. The killing is a means to an end. It's about procuring food.

Whereas Vick tortured domesticated companion animals to death in various depraved ways just to watch them die. And then he set the worst of the worst on each other to fight to the death. And he did it all for profit.

Again, I can see why people would confuse the two.

Which is not to defend hunting. I do not hunt, and I never would. (I am an avid carnivore, however.)

8/24/07, 11:40 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home