The NAACP has come forward to say Michael Vic should not be dropped by sponsors nor punished further by the NFL.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/08/22/vick/index.html
After the normal showing of support for any black person in trouble, they went on to say he is being "persecuted" and then the spokesmen said that he doesn't understand why deer hunting is legal but forcing dogs to fight each other to the death for wagering purposes is not. Of course lip service was paid to "need to follow the laws" and so on...
- - -
My question: What, in the hell, does this have to do with the NAACP? Is Vic being "persecuted" because he is black? Is dog fighting a "colored person" hobby or something?
I thought the NAACP was supposed to work for the advancement of colored people. Not the redemption of members of their culture that contribute to a "thug" reputation. How is advocating for dog fighting and gambling advancing anything?
More respect lost to what used to be an essential and principle driven organization.
Just wait for PETA to weigh in. Nothing would satisfy me more than to see the NAACP and PETA in a total b!tch-slap smackdown.
Just wait, $harpton hasn't weighed in yet.
If it had been Bret Farve, I guarantee you NAACP would have demonized him.
What a colossally dumb move by the NAACP.
Hint to the group: Vick is being "persecuted" because he's GUILTY.
The NAACP, defender of dog-killers.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
What a colossally dumb move by the NAACP.
Hint to the group: Vick is being "persecuted" because he's GUILTY.
The NAACP, defender of dog-killers.
Really doesn't do much to advance the image of colored people now does it?
ACLU defends NAMBLA, why not?
The dog cruelty ain't what is going to bring Michael Vick down.
It's the fact that they were involved in illegal gambling that will be the excuse to never let him play in the NFL again.
I like this quote from Stephon Marbury
"We don't say anything about people shooting deers and shooting other animals, you know what I mean?" Marbury said.
"From what I hear, dogfighting is a sport. It's just behind closed doors."
quote:
Originally posted by NellieBly
"From what I hear, dogfighting is a sport. It's just behind closed doors."
Some hyperbole here but...
Oh yeah, just like rape!
If something takes place behind closed doors its no longer a crime? Worst. Logic. Ever.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
The NAACP has come forward to say Michael Vic should not be dropped by sponsors nor punished further by the NFL.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/08/22/vick/index.html
After the normal showing of support for any black person in trouble, they went on to say he is being "persecuted" and then the spokesmen said that he doesn't understand why deer hunting is legal but forcing dogs to fight each other to the death for wagering purposes is not. Of course lip service was paid to "need to follow the laws" and so on...
- - -
My question: What, in the hell, does this have to do with the NAACP? Is Vic being "persecuted" because he is black? Is dog fighting a "colored person" hobby or something?
I thought the NAACP was supposed to work for the advancement of colored people. Not the redemption of members of their culture that contribute to a "thug" reputation. How is advocating for dog fighting and gambling advancing anything?
More respect lost to what used to be an essential and principle driven organization.
Used to be the NAACP was a constructive force, but with this news, it seems they have sunk fairly close to Al Sharpton's depths....
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
The NAACP has come forward to say Michael Vic should not be dropped by sponsors nor punished further by the NFL.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/08/22/vick/index.html
After the normal showing of support for any black person in trouble, they went on to say he is being "persecuted" and then the spokesmen said that he doesn't understand why deer hunting is legal but forcing dogs to fight each other to the death for wagering purposes is not. Of course lip service was paid to "need to follow the laws" and so on...
- - -
My question: What, in the hell, does this have to do with the NAACP? Is Vic being "persecuted" because he is black? Is dog fighting a "colored person" hobby or something?
I thought the NAACP was supposed to work for the advancement of colored people. Not the redemption of members of their culture that contribute to a "thug" reputation. How is advocating for dog fighting and gambling advancing anything?
More respect lost to what used to be an essential and principle driven organization.
Used to be the NAACP was a constructive force, but with this news, it seems they have sunk fairly close to Al Sharpton's depths....
MJ, will you please quit mis-spelling Rev. $harpton's last name? It's an $ not an S for God's sake!
I liked this quote from a Fox News website:
An NAACP leader said Michael Vick should be allowed to return to the NFL, preferably the Atlanta Falcons, after serving his sentence for his role in a dogfighting operation.
"As a society, we should aid in his rehabilitation and welcome a new Michael Vick back into the community without a permanent loss of his career in football," said R.L. White, president of the group's Atlanta chapter. "We further ask the NFL, Falcons, and the sponsors not to permanently ban Mr. Vick from his ability to bring hours of enjoyment to fans all over this country."
White said he does not support dogfighting and that he considers it as bad as hunting.
"His crime is, it was a dog," White said.
That dude just doesn't get it.
quote:
Originally posted by Wilbur
I liked this quote from a Fox News website:
An NAACP leader said Michael Vick should be allowed to return to the NFL, preferably the Atlanta Falcons, after serving his sentence for his role in a dogfighting operation.
"As a society, we should aid in his rehabilitation and welcome a new Michael Vick back into the community without a permanent loss of his career in football," said R.L. White, president of the group's Atlanta chapter. "We further ask the NFL, Falcons, and the sponsors not to permanently ban Mr. Vick from his ability to bring hours of enjoyment to fans all over this country."
White said he does not support dogfighting and that he considers it as bad as hunting.
"His crime is, it was a dog," White said.
That dude just doesn't get it.
As soon as R.L. White goes to bat for Pete Rose to be inducted into the baseball HoF, I'll give him his props.
What would Imus do......That's W.W.I.D. for those of you that don't know......
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
The NAACP has come forward to say Michael Vic should not be dropped by sponsors nor punished further by the NFL.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/08/22/vick/index.html
After the normal showing of support for any black person in trouble, they went on to say he is being "persecuted" and then the spokesmen said that he doesn't understand why deer hunting is legal but forcing dogs to fight each other to the death for wagering purposes is not. Of course lip service was paid to "need to follow the laws" and so on...
- - -
My question: What, in the hell, does this have to do with the NAACP? Is Vic being "persecuted" because he is black? Is dog fighting a "colored person" hobby or something?
I thought the NAACP was supposed to work for the advancement of colored people. Not the redemption of members of their culture that contribute to a "thug" reputation. How is advocating for dog fighting and gambling advancing anything?
More respect lost to what used to be an essential and principle driven organization.
Huh? That isn't what I saw this morning on ABC,(could have been NBC). Your dreams came true Conan and the NAACP leader was sitting across from the PETA spokesman. He made no excuses for Vick and said he was responsible for his own actions. When asked directly if they thought it was racism, he gave a typically political answer but the gist of it was...no. He did feel the public was being too harsh in its treatment of Vick. I then tuned out to go to work but the PETA lady didn't seem aggressive at all.
Was this the same interview you refer to? Did it explode after that?
That was just pure wet dream fantasy on my part. [;)] Can't believe it actually happened.
"The dog cruelty ain't what is going to bring Michael Vick down." < RecycleM.
^
True.... what will bring Mister Vick down is the 350 pound biker that killed his old lady but "always took real good care of his dog"...
My only comment... Malcolm would not be amused.
I bet he's first pick when they play pick-up football in the prison yard.
This doesn't bode too well for the organization either:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294589,00.html
The NAACP isn't even mentioned in the story, Wilbur.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
The NAACP isn't even mentioned in the story, Wilbur.
You are absolutely correct and I'm 100% wrong. I could have sworn I read that in a different link through Drudge.
Then lets say it doesn't bode too well for the cause.
quote:
Originally posted by Wilbur
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
The NAACP isn't even mentioned in the story, Wilbur.
You are absolutely correct and I'm 100% wrong. I could have sworn I read that in a different link through Drudge.
Wow, Drudge, there's a good source!
You do realize that Drudge has done some really good investigative reporting in the past. Especially under the current administration he is more likely to get tips than anyone else. Not to mention the whole Clinton thing, the Dan Rather thing, and the fact that he often breaks stories before the major outlets. You clearly do not like his politics, but that doesn't mean he fails to get the scoop.
However, more importantly, is the fact that most often Drudge is often not the source. He merely links to the source. His sources are usually major newspapers, wires, or other media outlets. So more often than not, questioning Drudge's source is just questioning the AP wire - which is everyones source.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
You do realize that Drudge has done some really good investigative reporting in the past. Especially under the current administration he is more likely to get tips than anyone else. Not to mention the whole Clinton thing, the Dan Rather thing, and the fact that he often breaks stories before the major outlets. You clearly do not like his politics, but that doesn't mean he fails to get the scoop.
However, more importantly, is the fact that most often Drudge is often not the source. He merely links to the source. His sources are usually major newspapers, wires, or other media outlets. So more often than not, questioning Drudge's source is just questioning the AP wire - which is everyones source.
For me, Drudge is merely an internet tabloid-quality partisan hack with delusions of journalism. If I wanted that, i'd go for someone a litlle more resspectable in the genre, such as Steve Dunleavy....
How can he be a hack? Doesn't he usually (99%) of the time just link to stories others have written? I really don't see Drudge actually writing stories on his own very often, but when he does they often turn out to be true (I.E. Monica).
So his links to the Washington Post, NY Times, CNN, AP wire, Reuters, Breitbart?
Currently there is not one piece of original journalism on his site. So disqualifying him as a source disqualifies all the sources above that are currently linked. That's what I was trying to point out. Most often, DRUDGE is not the actual source.
Can't argue that he is not a partisan hack though...
I won't yet call him a Propogandist, but I won't call him a legitimate Pundit either.