Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: dcsportsbog and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Opinions on Michael Vick Vary

There seems to be a surplus of just awesome Michael Vick opinionating in recent days, so I'd like to puncture that bloated pus-filled surplus and post the foul and yellowy drainage here.

Tom Knott in today's Wash Times:

Mexico, in being black, certainly has curried support among a number of civil rights groups, historically wary of the justice system, a plausible viewpoint if ever there was one.

Yet their distrust of the justice system, however understandable, however a politically worthy point, is at odds with the entitlement programs that put more power and money into the hands of an all-knowing, ever-growing bureaucracy that suffocates the liberty and free will of the individual.


Honestly, I've read that about 10 times, and I still don't understand what he's saying. Civil rights groups distrust the justice system, which makes sense, except that their distrust conflicts with the anti-freedom Department of Education, which is teaching our children to fight Mexican dogs? Or something? By the way, I'm in this Kissing Suzy Kolber fantasy football draft tomorrow night, and its rulebook appears to have been written by Tom Knott.

New Yahoo!!!!!!!!!! columnist Michael Silver:

Some would also argue that it is more humane to put a bullet through an unsuspecting deer than to end the life of a canine in any of the hideous ways that the exiled Atlanta Falcons quarterback and his co-defendants are accused - though I'm not necessarily sure the eight-point buck with the 18-inch spread that Manning had mounted on the wall of his Indy home would see it that way.

No? The deer wouldn't rather be shot than be slammed into the ground and electrocuted and/or hanged? Granted, neither is, perhaps, as much fun as an afternoon at Dave & Buster's, and all things being equal, I'm sure both the unsuspecting deer and the nasty canine wouldn't mind not being killed at all and instead living out their days playing fantasy football, but if I'm a deer or a canine, I'll probably take the bullet through the head over the alleged slamming electrocution or even the hanging, thanks very much.

SLAMOnline's Lang Whitaker, in a piece titled "The Duality of Michael Vick" (and I love Lang, for the record, as I do Knott and, presumably, Silver):

This is such a strange case with so many bizarre circumstances. It involves race (because everything in the South involves race), it involves morality, it involves legality, but most of all, it involves duality. Because we are being asked to simultaneously comprehend a series of divergent conditions:

The laws of our country prompt us to assume innocence until someone is proven guilty.

The government has announced that they feel Michael Vick is guilty.

Michael Vick says he is not guilty.

Hold up hold up, you're saying that the authorities are suggesting someone is guilty, but that the accused disagrees???? Bizarre!!!! Strange!!! Dualistic!!!! Someone ask Andray Blatche how he feels about this. Or Pacman.

Florida Today's Pete Kerasotis, in a Florida Today column about one of his Florida Today columns, which, by the way, are described as "cutting edge."

What you'll also find on PETA's Web site is a porn actress modeling a T-shirt that says "Kentucky Fried Cruelty." In fact, the organization has attached itself to more than one porn actress.

PETA and pornographers. That's a nice alliance. You know what police invariably find when they arrest child molesters and rapists? Pornography. And lots of it.

Is it coincidence, or is this past decade's decadent rise in sex-related crimes, which are almost always inflicted on women and children, closely tied with the pandemic proliferation of Internet pornography?

Seriously, the moment when sports columnists are attempting to link animal-rights groups to decadent sex crimes, or civil rights groups to the freedom-hating federal bureaucracy, is the moment when sports columnists should probably attempt to string together some "take it one day at a time" quotes and call it a day.

Or, if they really wanted to help their readers, tell them what two players they should take with the 14th and 15th picks in a blog-sponsored fantasy football keeper league draft. I'm thinking Travis Henry and Michael Vick.

By Dan Steinberg  |  August 14, 2007; 10:22 AM ET
Categories:  NFL  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Todd Pinkston: Alligator Body
Next: Gil Sells House to Nick Young

Comments

Does anyone else find it humorous that Tom Knott referred to Vick as "Ron Mexico" throughout the whole piece?

Posted by: R | August 14, 2007 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, Knott needs to get up to date on his Michael Vick aliases. "Ron Mexico" is old. "Ookie" is what he should have written.

Either way, Stienz that is a tremendous assortment of incredibly asinine writing. What a bunch of clowns.

Maybe this will help your anxiety regarding the career switch from sports writer to bogger?

Posted by: tmc | August 14, 2007 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Stick to sports, morons.

Posted by: DC | August 14, 2007 12:49 PM | Report abuse

The Michael Vick case provides an unusual opportunity to combine poetic justice with the legal version. First: Gratifying as the bolting of a prison cell door might be, no jail time for Mr. Vick. Second: A one-year Vick football ban to eliminate, or at least diminish, the temptation of racist commentary and, on the flip side, the playing of the race card. At that point, allow poetic justice to have a field day: Mr. Vick should be fined, minimally, $10 million, a sum that would hardly bankrupt an established National Football League quarterback near the apex of his earning potential. That amount would help finance no-kill animal shelters in Virginia and maybe elsewhere. Mr. Vick would then be required to take the appropriate business courses during his one-year hiatus so that he could become an administrator in a corporation that will value compassion and mercy over gambling and bloodlust. Upon the conclusion of his football career, Mr. Vick will continue to contribute - both as a financier and an administrator - according to the determinations of the court.
Special treatment because Mr. Vick is a celebrity? Maybe so. But weigh that against the virtues of a freed Michael Vick required to use his wealth to help the breeds he and his associates, in an extremely pre-meditated manner, hurt so badly before executing. If the chances of saving Mr. Vick's soul improve some, wouldn't that be an unexpected and delightful bonus? If a "win-win" situation can exist amid the phrase "the torture of innocents," then perhaps this is as close as we can get to win-win: Mr. Vick serves no time, is spared, for one year, of having to deal with rabid fans, may resume his lucrative career in 2008 and is given the chance to make amends, at least some amends, for the egregious harm he knowingly helped inflict. There might even be a longterm charitable tax write-off involved. If the quarterback and his legal team reject the terms of the poetic plea bargain, who would object to a prison cell, where Mr. Vick could live better than his victims - that is to say untortured except possibly - remote as it might be - by his conscience, for a year or two or five.

Posted by: Len Rosen | August 20, 2007 9:34 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company