Time to reprint the statement from one who took the dogs in and followed Vick's "redemption":

[woo me with science]

Francis Battista, co-founder of Best Friends Animal Society, who took in and cared for the dogs Vick tortured, had this to say about Vick's "redemption" in November 2010:

http://blogs.bestfriends.org/index.php/2010/11/18/michael-vick-the-value-proposition/

Michael Vick & the Value Proposition
November 18, 2010 - By Francis Battista

LA Times sports reporter Bill Plaschke wrote a compelling piece for yesterday’s paper on the resurgence of Michael Vick as an NFL quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles. Plaschke interviewed the caregiver of Mel, a pit bull and former resident of Best Friends Animal Society—and one of Vick’s former canine victims. Powerful stuff. Plaschke’s article boils down to is this question:

“Essentially, an ex-convict is dominating America’s most popular sport while victims of his previous crime continue to live with the brutality of that crime, and has that ever happened before?

Do you cheer the player and boo the man? Can you cheer the comeback while loathing the actions that necessitated the comeback? And how can you do any of this while not knowing if Vick has truly discovered morality or simply rediscovered the pocket?”

From what we at Best Friends know of the way Michael Vick has related to the animals he abused, the answer is clearly that he has “simply rediscovered the pocket.” Best Friends took 22 of Vick’s 48 seized dogs and the only contact we’ve received from Vick or his representatives was by way of some overtures from his agent, one of his attorneys and a PR firm specializing in reputation rehabilitation. They were interested in some public glad handing that would put Vick in a favorable light with the NFL, which at the time was still considering whether or not to reinstate him. We declined.

Best Friends has never heard from Michael Vick or any of his representatives inquiring after the health or well being of any of the 22 dogs that we received from his fighting ring.

According to the law, Michael Vick has paid his debt to society. Many would argue though that being free to get on with his life is one thing. Being welcomed into the highly privileged ranks of the NFL is quite another and warrants a much higher threshold of qualification. Plaschke again:

“…a large percentage of the population will still think Michael Vick is a sociopath. Many people will never get over Vick’s own admissions of unthinkable cruelty to his pit bulls — the strangling, the drowning, the electrocutions, the removal of all the teeth of female dogs who would fight back during mating.”

Obviously not a sufficiently large enough percentage of the population feels that way to deter the NFL from allowing someone on the field who many do believe is a sociopath ex-convict as long as he can fill the seats. They wouldn’t do it if they didn’t know they could get away with it.

Despite the fact that America is routinely described as a nation of animal lovers, concern for the lives and well being of those animals doesn’t yet compete with the desire to be entertained. That’s a problem.

It’s a problem because the same imbalance of public opinion that tolerates Michael Vick as a celebrated athlete also tolerates puppy mills, pet stores and shelter killings…each a cause of suffering many magnitudes the scale of Michael Vicks crimes and in some cases the same order of depravity.

Ending the societal abuse of homeless pets that results in the death of 4 – 5 million animals annually in our shelter system will require more than the heroic efforts of rescuers, it will require recruiting a larger percentage of this nation of animal lovers to a value proposition that places the lives and well being of our animal companions above personal entertainment, the allure of designer breeds and pets as fashion statements. The Michael Vick story is, for me at least, a marker along the way pointing us to the tasks ahead on the road to No More Homeless Pets.

Francis Battista

Co-Founder, Best Friends Animal Society

[CountAllVotes]

1. Vick is a sociopath

and he should be in jail.

Of course no one ever contacted the places that took the dogs in to see how they are. They could care less which is obvious already.

FUCK YOU MICHAEL VICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BrklynLiberal]

6. +1000

[emilyg]

21. Yes+++++++++++++++++++++++++

[roguevalley]

41. google it. they are doing awesomely well.

[shireen]

150. you should re-google it.

It's true that some have been adopted, a few have even become therapy dogs.

Not all had happy endings, they continue to live with the trauma.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129989424
Forty-seven dogs were given to sanctuaries to be rehabilitated. (One dog had to be euthanized for behavior and another because of injuries.) Some of the dogs remain at those sanctuaries today while others have been successfully adopted.

#####

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/20/earlyshow/contributors/debbyeturner/main6884094.shtml
Reynolds' organization, Bad Rap, received 10 of Michael Vick's dogs. But for many of them, everyday life remains a struggle. A dog named Frodo still fights his fears.

#####

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/nov/16/sports/la-sp-plaschke-20101117
On this night, like many other nights, Mel was waiting for his owners to take him outside, but he couldn't alert them with a bark. He doesn't bark. He won't bark. The bark has been beaten out of him.

While Michael Vick was running for glory, Mel was cowering toward a wall.

Every time the 4-year-old dog meets a stranger, he goes into convulsions. He staggers back into a wall for protection. He lowers his face and tries to hide. New faces are not new friends, but old terrors.

#####

That's from just a few minutes of goog'ing.

[AndrewP]

170. Not all of them, Mr. Press Secretary

[Raine]

87. ABSOLUTELY agree

with everything you said.

[KeepItReal]

101. Michael Vick went to prison

He was sentenced to jail and served his time losing his NFL contract and job in the process.

If you think he deserved a longer sentence say that.

[trud]

127. "If you think he deserved a longer sentence say that."

Life in prison, that would do it. And every cent he has given to animal welfare groups.

[KeepItReal]

131. Get your legislators to change the laws and sentencing

Unless he offends again, you're not going to get your wish on Mr. Vick's punishment.

[Myrina]

129. I think he deserves to be tortured the way he did those dogs.

Then let's see what a macho super athlete he is. Punkass chump needs to burn in hell.

[cottonseed]

137. What Vick did to those dogs were sick. But it is NEVER acceptable to suggest someone be tortured.

Maybe that's just me.

[femrap]

141. I'm with you.....

I hadn't heard that the teeth of the female dogs were removed so they wouldn't bite while breeding. For the love of Mother Nature, how the fuck do these boyz come up with ideas like this? How sadistic can they become?

May there be one big fat injury awaiting Vick on the football field.

[martymar64]

175. +1000

[quickesst]

144. Then call GWB or Cheney.....

....they might have some tips for you on how to get this done. It's obvious that you agree that "torture" is just and deserved in some cases. Thanks.
quickesst

[npk]

149. So you condone torture

That is kinda the same attitude many right wingers have about water boarding terrorists or those found to have strong ties to terrorism. Your saying it's OK to torture Michael Vick because he tortured animals. Right wingers and even some liberals would say it's OK to torture terrorists, because they have tortured innocent people or our soldiers. Vick may be a disgusting person, but so are those who support terrorist organizations. Laws must apply equally.

[skyounkin]

138. This scumbag getting a second chance

means someoen most likely didn't get a first chance.

Fuck him.

[earth mom]

171. Sociopaths are NEVER redeemed or cured. Vick will find other beings to torture-just ask *.

:puke:

[martymar64]

176. Next it will be a woman or a child that he tortures or kills

[hlthe2b]

2. Yes... The people who rescued his maimed & dying dogs...

THEY should be the ones lauded. Not the moral degenerate, Vick. Those that want to lionize him really need to do some soul searching, IMO>

[AndyTiedye]

10. If They Want to Lionize Vick That's Fine

They should use real lions.

[hlthe2b]

13. that would be fitting...

:evilgrin:

[MsPithy]

121. Haa!

Thanks for that!

[Capitalocracy]

151. After they pull all his teeth out.

Wouldn't want him fighting back.

[whathehell]

34. Precisely....n/t

[dkf]

3. I think it is better he stays away.

I'd be happier if he isn't around doggies. No?

[woo me with science]

30. ...

"Best Friends has never heard from Michael Vick or any of his representatives inquiring after the health or well being of any of the 22 dogs that we received from his fighting ring."

There are many ways he could have expressed regret or ongoing concern without handling the dogs. He reached out only when he wanted something.

[dkf]

50. He did agree to put $1 million on an account to take care of the dogs.

[KoKo]

54. Dogs live shorter life than humans...so what good its this? what about the tortured dead dogs?

Nothing in the way of money will help them in the lives they lived under torture and the cruelest of conditions.

If Vick had done this to women or men or combinations of both...would he be where he is today?

But, because he did this to "ANIMALS" he was let off easy. And, that millions of lives depend on seeing the "DOG TORTURER VICK MAKES IT BACK FOR THE TEAM AND AMERICA!" will be the HEADLINE NEWS on all CABLEs and MAG/RAGS and Promoters and Sensational Pudits and the rest on Cable and other Media will see this as a news story like "missing, possibly murdered White Women and Tortured Children."

It's GREAT FOR BIDNESS ....Isn't It? And the SPORTS WORLD WILL LICK IT UP and the TALK RADIO AND CABLES WILL HAM IT UP...OPINION POLLS ...CONSTANT NEWS!

More MEDIA MANIPULATION for us. Meanwhile...We have TWO WARS and folks are DYING...and our ECONOMY is not what we need for JOB GROWTH...and we sit and wait to be entertained by "Michael VICK...the DOG TORTURER" and we will move on. Because Michael Vick really matters more than you or I or any of the rest of us. He's about "BIDNESS IN AMERICA!" and "BIDNESS" is what makes AMERICA GREATEST COUNTRY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH!

Aren't WE PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN? REDEMPTION FOR VICK and OTHERS who have DONE CRIMES against "AMERICAN LAWS" is what MAKES US GREAT..! It's GREAT because the RICH and POWERFUL AND THOSE WHO SERVE THEM...Always WIN! It's what makes us GREAT!

Who could argue against that? I hope to be GREAT and Above the Law, Myself, one DAY! I'm working hard to make sure I do this...achieve this status in our society. I deserve it...Don't you and the rest of us? :shrug:

[trud]

128. "If Vick had done this to women or men or combinations of both...would he be where he is today?"

What about Mike Tyson, whose brutality to women is legendary? I was about ready to throw up when I saw Jesse Jackson even being in the same room with him.

[Chorophyll]

132. People who would treat dogs like that

are probably not too lovely around humans, either. Scary p.o.s.

[hlthe2b]

4. I see the un-rec crew is already hitting this thread.

May all true dog-loving DUers reverse the trend.

[AndyTiedye]

7. It's at +5 Now

Could have gotten some unrecs for being in the wrong forum.

[hlthe2b]

9. Yes.. perhaps...

though related threads last night and today have been pretty fractious.

[KansDem]

8. I have cats, but rec-ed just the same!

Someday I might have a dog...who knows?

[hlthe2b]

11. I should have said animal-lovers...

Kitties count! ;)

[unapatriciated]

83. done 45

[AndyTiedye]

5. I Gave this a Rec

but the mods really should move it to the regular GD forum.
It doesn't have a lot to do with the Presidency.

[whathehell]

14. Except that Obama

just "congratulated" the NFL for taking Vick back in..:eyes:

[rhett o rick]

12. America is a nation of football lovers over animal lovers. nm

[whathehell]

16. I think the men in this country may love football more than animals..

If you look at the animal rescues, they're almost COMPLETELY dominated by women...In fact, it was a woman who started

the ASPCA.

[AndyTiedye]

48. Says More About the NFL Owners Than Anything Else

The NFL did not put this up for a vote among the American people, American men, or even their season ticketholders AFAIK.

All the polls I have seen say that pretty much everybody thinks Vick is scum.

The people who own the NFL don't care what we think.

[whathehell]

53. You might be right...

but "the fans" still come out for Vick, right?...It would seem to reflect on them as well.

[AndyTiedye]

82. Well, Now We At Least Have It Down to "The Fans" (Those Who Actually Show Up at the Game)

which is not quite so broad a brush as "American men".

Even among "the fans", many would be season ticket holders,
who must have purchased their tickets long in advance.
Would they have even known Vick was coming back?

[whathehell]

89. Sorry if you don't like it

but sometimes the "broad brush" sweeps pretty well.

[Llewlladdwr]

172. Not really.

I'm an American man and don't folow sports at all.

[KoKo]

55. K&R

[Recursion]

15. OK, what job should he take? (nt)

[rhett o rick]

18. I find your defense of Vick, very strange. What is your motive? nm

[Recursion]

22. Sorry, you seem to be replying to the wrong post

You're mentioning a "defense" of Vick, so clearly you weren't talking about my post.

[rhett o rick]

71. I stand by my statement. Your defense of Vick is very strange. nm

[whathehell]

19. How 'bout he get the choices most of us get?

which right now means "not many".

I'm sure he could still live better than most on his savings.

[CountAllVotes]

20. try a prison guard

he'd fit right in.

[frylock]

39. vick should take any job offered to him..

obama should think before he opens his fucking grocery hole and makes an incredibly idiotic statement such as he did in regard to vick.

[AndyTiedye]

47. I Think He Should Still be Making License Plates for the State

But even the most blatant cruelty to animals rarely gets the punishment it deserves.

Nonetheless Vick's name will live on in infamy for his misdeeds
long after his achievements on the football field are forgotten.

[Raine]

61. Bait

see how that piece of shit likes it.

[Myrina]

130. +100

n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

17. This does not prove that Vick has not rehabilitated himself

I believe that he's very sorry for what he's done.

He's a role model to people locked up in jail. People who committed crimes know there's hope and a second chance is possible.

I'm happy for Michael Vick.

[emilyg]

23. Nor does it prove that he has rehabilated. In any

case I don't care. He's an ugly person.

[Cali_Democrat]

25. Correct

I believe that Michael Vick's rehabilitation or lack thereof is a matter of opinion.

[whathehell]

26. or fact, depending on whether one knows him or not....n/t

[TBF]

96. And the "opinions" that we should look for are those that actually dealt with the victims

of Vick's multiple crimes.

I really don't even have a problem with Vick playing football again, giving him a chance to earn a living. I do have a problem with those who idolize him though and brush off his past criminal acts. Yes, we should let the man go on with leading his life - but hold him up as some paragon of virtue? No.

[whathehell]

24. What, in his case, would "rehabillitated" mean?

that he doesn't torture animals anymore?

Or that he doesn't want to?

I know you can't "force" what for most is a simple feeling of empathy...but he's still a sadistic scumbag in my book.

[Cali_Democrat]

27. Vick's rehabilitation is a matter of opinion.

We can't say for sure if he wants to torture animals again because we can't read his mind.

But I think we cans safely say that he hasn't tortured animals since he's been released from jail.

I believe he's been rehabilitated. Obviously others be won't think so. It's a matter of opinion.

[whathehell]

33. Besides the fact that he was forced to "do time"..What does inform your opinion that he has been

rehabillitated?

In fact, you haven't yet answered my question about what "constitutes rehabilitation"...Just your guess that he has enough enlightened self-interest

not to torture animals anymore?

[Cali_Democrat]

36. Not only the jail time, but listening to Vick's statements

He seems to be sincere when he says that he's sorry for what he did and he won't do it again. Obviously if you believe he's a sadistic scumbag, you aren't going to take him at his word.

JMO :hi:

[whathehell]

37. Obviously

:hi:

[roguevalley]

43. If the entire country hated me vociferously I would say and look

pretty damned contrite too but it wouldn't tell anyone how I felt. He's a scumbag who made his bed and will bear it forever.

[Cali_Democrat]

46. I feel that he's sincere when he says that he's sorry. n/t

[AndyTiedye]

49. Sorry He Got Caught

[Cali_Democrat]

57. He said he's sorry he got caught?

[roguevalley]

69. deliberately obtuse. you know what they meant. or perhaps

I'm wrong. I can be. I don't mind. but I'm not wrong about him. he's sorry he got caught. you don't harm helpless things the way he did and not feel something deep inside for it as a good thing. He got caught. he's not sorry for anything but that. he's as bland in his empathy as any bushie.

[Cali_Democrat]

79. I'm not aware of every word uttered by Vick

I wasn't sure if he said it that or not. If he had, it would have been news to me and I would change my opinion about him.

To say he's only sorry he got caught and not sorry for the deed is not something you can say for sure.

Sorry, but I think I can safely say that you're not a mind reader.

[cherokeeprogressive]

181. What stops you from saying that about ALL convicts? n/t

[astonamous]

80. Animal abusers pose a very real risk to the community.

The seminal study on this issue dates back to work started in 1975 and sustained over more than 20-years (i.e., 1975-1996). In what has proven to be one of the key findings from this long-term study, the Massachusetts SPCA and Northeastern University concluded that those who abuse animals are five times more likely to abuse humans. It is no great leap in logic to draw the conclusion that if an animal abuser is five times more likely to escalate to human victims, then such an offender posses an even greater risk of re-victimizing the same silent population he has already preyed upon. In Mr. Vick’s case, such an obvious conclusion is even more compelling when one considers that Mr. Vick engaged in a sustained six-year criminal enterprise dedicated to profiting from gambling on the outcome of dogfights while using the most cruel and barbaric methods imaginable to manage his “kennel” and maximize his profits. The ongoing nature of his conduct remains serious cause for concern and understandably contributes to the enduring distrust of his repeated public assertions of remorse and reformation. Some additional yet basic risk factors one should consider in assessing Mr. Vick’s case and the continuing threat convicted abusers present to society include:

1.The vulnerability of his victims;
2.The large number of his victims;
3.The number of victimizing incidents;
4.The severity of the injury and methods used to kill;
5.The duration of the abuse;
6.The degree of pre-planning or premeditation;
7.The existence of other criminal conduct at the scene of the animal abuse (e.g., drugs, gun law violations, gambling);
8.The fact that this offender served as an instigator of criminal acts involving multiple other perpetrators; and
9.The offender’s history of positive interactions with the victim animal(s) prior to the abuse.

In light of these factors, it is difficult to discern how Mr. Vick’s supporters could reasonably believe that he should be allowed to exercise control over another dog. The Animal Legal Defense Fund strongly disagrees with that view and recommends the longest possible ban on ownership be maintained. Whether his supporters are truly concerned about animal welfare or just too invested in Mr. Vick’s “comeback” to give a damn about the fate of the next dog who comes under Mr. Vick’s control—you will have to decide for yourself.



http://ourcompass.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/michael-vick-banned-from-dog-ownership-ask-an-attorney/

[martymar64]

177. Also, any woman that Vicks hits on needs to run and not look back.

She knows what he'll do to her given the chance.

He can't torture dogs anymore so he'll have to move onto torturing hookers.

[jody]

31. Agree "sadistic scumbag" and IMO are all who condone his actions. n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

180. I'm glad I haven't seen any DUers condone his actions. n/t

[sirthomas66]

118. Mine too. I stopped watching football about 12 years ago because of

people like this animal. Makes me so much more glad I did. For me, I agree with what you said. I think Vic is a sadistic scumbag and I do not for one minute believe he has gotten over that which is ingrained in his being. If he lost all his money, it would just be a matter of time before he would pulling out kitty toenails to pass the time. Makes me angry to think about it. What kind of people have we become?...

[superduperfarleft]

112. Just curious, do you also write marriage proposal letters to convicts?

It just seems like a dangerous level of naivete on your end.

[Cali_Democrat]

134. LOL...what?

I'm not sure what you mean....

[AndrewP]

28. but...but...he throws the ball hard! Forgive him!!!

:puke:

The fact that the President gave him the thumbs up today is sad. But it'll probably win him the Pennsylvania primary, so YAY team!

[AndyTiedye]

166. I Hope He Is Truely Rehabilitated, and Stays Away From Dogs

It would be too bad if a doggie put the bite on that throwing arm of his, wouldn't it? :evilgrin:

[Aramchek]

29. Obama supports Dog Fights!! Obama supports Dog Fights!!!!

right?

[woo me with science]

40. Very few are singled out to receive words of support from the President.

Of all the people he could have chosen to make this particular point, he picked the person who did this:





I find that incomprehensible.

[whathehell]

44. You are correct....Maybe we should send the prez those pictures. n/t

[whathehell]

42. No...but that will be part of the repukes campaign theme in '12...Dumb Move on Obama's part. n/t

[Aramchek]

64. are you kidding? Repukes like hurting animals. Just look at Palin.

[whathehell]

66. Repukes are often quite comfortable with Hypocrisy. n/t

[TBF]

32. Michael Mountain, one of the other co-founders of Best Friends, was president of the organization

when they took in Vick's dogs. He now runs a humanitarian site called Zoe. His take agrees with Battista's -

Michael Vick’s True Message to Young People

“I got away with it and you can, too”

By Michael Mountain

Last night, Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) went on CNN to defend his association with Michael Vick and his support of Vick having a dog at home soon.

I have a lot of respect for Pacelle’s work for animals of all kinds. But on the issue of Michael Vick, he and the HSUS have been wrong from the start.

It began as soon as Vick was arrested. The HSUS argued to the authorities that the dogs who had been rescued from his Bad Newz Kennels should all be killed. (PETA wanted them all dead, too.) A number of other organizations including Best Friends (of which I was still president at that time) and the ASPCA filed a brief with the court that led to the judge rejecting the advice of the HSUS. Instead, 47 of the 48 rescued dogs were sent to rescue groups and sanctuaries (22 of them came to Best Friends) for a chance at a new life.

Pacelle acknowledged on CNN that there are people in his own organization who disagree with the HSUS’s association with Vick. He should have listened to them before, and he should listen to them now.
Vick has never admitted the unspeakable acts of torture he personally inflicted on the dogs.

A few days ago, I noted that Vick has never to this day actually admitted in public the unspeakable acts of torture he personally inflicted on the dogs. The judge commented on this when sentencing him to prison...

Much more at link: http://www.zoenature.org/2010/12/michael-vick%E2%80%99s-true-message-to-young-people/

[woo me with science]

35. This should be an OP.

Thank you for posting this.

[TBF]

38. I did post an OP on Michael's earlier article -

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/TBF/28

Will repeat it here since it's really good:

Michael Mountain was president of Best Friends Animal Society when they were given 22 of the dogs who�d been rescued from Vick�s dog-fighting kennels � the ones who were most traumatized and needed the greatest care. As Vick's release date from prison approached, Vick�s PR people called to see if Best Friends would like to invite Vick to the sanctuary as part of his rehabilitation. He turned them down, explaining that it would not be good for the dogs to be visited by their tormentor. He explains that apart from that they also "wanted to see, at very least, some true remorse on his part � not just a public relations campaign."

On his current humanitarian website, ZOE, Michael writes "Rehabilitation starts with acknowledging what you did. So here are some of the questions someone still needs to ask and that Vick needs to answer. To the best of my knowledge, no one has ever asked Vick any of these in a formal, public interview. And if the HSUS is so close to Vick, and they really believe he�s a changed man and that he should have a dog, then they need to start by sitting their prot�g� down in front of a camera and doing the interview that needs to be done, once and for all.

Here are a few of the questions to get started with:

�Michael, describe to us some of the things that took place at your kennels. Let�s start with the dogs who had no teeth when they were rescued. Who pulled them out and why?�

�Many of the dogs were so terrified of people, when they were rescued, that they wouldn�t even walk on a leash for months? What had you done to them to make them so afraid?�

�Tell us exactly what you did with water to the dogs. Did you drown them? Explain how and why.�

�And what were the electric cables for? Did you electrocute them? Again, explain how and why.�

�Please describe what a rape stand is and what you used those for?�

�Tell us, in detail, some of the things you personally did to the dogs yourself. Tell us what, in retrospect, was the worst thing you ever did.�

Only when someone asks questions like these and gets some real answers � or, better yet, Vick steps up himself and tells us the truth without having to be prompted � can any true rehabilitation begin. Until then, we don�t want to hear any more apologetic drivel about how he�s a changed man."

Excerpted today from a much longer post by Michael: http://www.zoenature.org/2010/12/my-questions-for-michael-vick/

[woo me with science]

60. Thank you.

Very interesting to hear from those directly involved.

[whathehell]

45. Vick is a scumbag, imo...No one TORTURES defenseless creatures because of "poor judgement"

they do it because of Poor Levels of Humanity and Empathy....In other words, he's a fucking SADIST and I don't give a CRAP how well the POS plays ball!

[Safetykitten]

70. I said this in another thread. He is actually glamorizing it.

[CakeGrrl]

51. "Time to reprint"...

Why does this need reprinting?

To drum up more "Rot in hell, Vick" posts?

You need more recs?

The man went to jail. But that isn't enough?

Are you going to lobby for the death penalty?

I don't feel like paying for the man to sit in jail for life. He can support himself and does.

What is it that you want now?

[woo me with science]

56. Yes, definitely time to reprint,

as a result of current events clearly described in this and other threads.

Why are you talking about me personally?

[CakeGrrl]

62. Because you created the thread.

What has actually CHANGED?

Vick has served his time. Done.

He's playing for the Eagles.

The dogs have been rescued and are out of his control.

The President offered a thought on events that have PASSED.

What has changed to prompt this...reminder, as if one is needed?

Vick should not be allowed to be a success at his profession? He doesn't deserve to have future success? Is that the gist of this?

How do you propose to mete out that punishment? And what is the threshold for being consigned to it?

[woo me with science]

65. No, I was referring to these questions:

"Why does this need reprinting?

To drum up more "Rot in hell, Vick" posts?

You need more recs?"


I never said anything at all about the death penalty or meting out punishment; you did. I HAVE stated clearly what I consider to be an important point:

Very few people are singled out to receive personal support from the President of the United States. Out of all the people Obama could have chosen to throw his support behind in order to make his point, it is unfathomable to me (and apparently many others here) that he chose the person who did this:

[CakeGrrl]

72. The President supported the ORGANIZATION. Comprende?

Why don't people deal with what was said rather than what they THINK was said?

Show me where the President said he was happy about Vick getting a second chance because the President thinks he's a good guy.

And why Vick? Blame the attention the NFL gets during playoff season. A prominent case in point whether you like it or not. The threads that have popped up about Vick on DU during this season prove he gets attention. So why is it so surprising that the President would choose the Eagles organization to thank for taking the chance to allow a convicted individual to rebuild?

[woo me with science]

81. Here's something I have learned about rhetoric and debate online, Cakegrrl:

In general, the strength of an argument tends to decrease the more you find yourself "translating" other people's posts and putting words in their mouths. For example, you have variously claimed in this discussion that my OP was really about

1. wanting recs
2. drumming up "Rot in hell" Vick posts
3. lobbying for the death penalty
4. wanting everyone to pay for Vick to sit in jail for life
5. claiming that President Obama thinks Vick is a "GOOD" guy
6. wanting to argue that Vick never deserves ANY future success IN LIFE
or
7. wanting to decide how punishment is meted out to Vick

Strikingly, nothing even remotely resembling these statements appears in ANY of my posts.

Cakegrrl, I am quite capable of expressing my argument with my own words. In fact, I have done so repeatedly. I will reiterate my main points here for you one more time, and I may even add a new thought or two along the way:

1. Very few people receive personal words of support from the President of the United States of America.

2. When such support is offered, it can be assumed to be the result of a careful CHOICE.

3. President Obama CHOSE to make a statement of congratulations to the Eagles for rehiring someone who savagely tortured and murdered scores of innocent dogs, for years.

4. President Obama could have chosen anyone to make his point about rehabilitation. Anyone he chose would have instantly become "high profile."

6. There was absolutely no need for him to insert himself into the discussion about Vick or especially to commend the re-hiring of a brutal, serial torturer and murderer of dogs.

7. Many here, including myself, find that deliberate CHOICE about where to lend his support revolting and incomprehensible.

8. Whether or not one personally considers Obama's choice to be revolting and incomprehensible, the choice probably CAN safely be categorized as politically tone deaf and incomprehensible, simply by virtue of how many people WILL consider it incomprehensible and revolting.

[CakeGrrl]

84. In short, your final statement boils down to a matter of opinion.

"Revolting" implies that the President is somehow reaching through the statement to the Eagles to absolve or condone Vick's actions. I disagree that he's doing that.

Some here seem to think that's the case, and that's up to them and you.

If the original post is just the long way around saying "Why the hell did the President DO that?", then fine. But expect some level of disagreement on a forum like this. Posts are MEANT to be interpreted.

The crux of my counterargument is that some on this forum have a habit of willfully misinterpreting some of the President's actions to fit their preconception of him. You may or may not be in that category.

[woo me with science]

85. Yes, I agree that the crux of your argument is about the posters at DU

and your interpretation of their intent. You started out by taking personal swipes at me. In case you weren't aware, that is against the rules here now.

Your argument was not a "counterargument" in any sense of the word, because you attributed to me throughout this conversation motives and attitudes that I never expressed.

My argument had to do with the President's CHOICE. I outlined my argument clearly, and I explained exactly why I share the opinion of others both here and across the United States that the President's CHOICE was revolting and incomprehensible. I reject your opinion about what my use of the word "revolting" must necessarily "imply." I can think of many possible reasons that this particular action by President Obama could be perceived as revolting, and I have already explained to you straightforwardly why I, personally, chose that word. There is no need to go searching for deeper implications.

Most importantly, I did not have to resort to distorting your arguments in order to defend my own.

[CakeGrrl]

115. The crux is that you didn't like my callout.

I think we're at the bottom line. I don't think that opining that you might have been seeking positive reinforcement through recs rises to the level of personal swipes, however.

I'll just go back once more to your OP where you decided that it was "time" to repost the statement. Something must have made you decide that it was "time". All I wondered was why, when opinions are pretty much set, there was a need to reiterate when your feelings on the topic were obvious. But I'll stop here.

[woo me with science]

174. Of course you will stop here.

No surprise there.

I actually don't mind substantive callouts , even though they are against the rules.

Blind, cookie cutter attacks that pay no regard to what is actually written in the post? You're right. I have very little patience for those.

[pecwae]

95. Thank you.

:thumbsup:

[TBF]

98. Excellent reponse. Some who defend President Obama do so on any given subject and with

ferocity. It is all black/white to them - either you are "with us or against us" - very much the same mindset we saw with the last administration. Some of these folks seem incapable of looking at what Mr. Obama does objectively, and deciding each time whether it was the right call or not. He can do no wrong in their eyes. And, personally, I don't think it's because they are really that simple-minded. Rather, I believe it is all about re-election for them.

[CakeGrrl]

114. You could flip that totally around to apply it to Obama detractors.

with one change: substitute "primarying Obama" for re-election.

The leaps that some are taking to label the President a supporter of dog-fighting based on his comment to the Eagles organization are only manageable if one is committed to maligning the President at every opportunity possible. Those who make that leap would have their heads explode if they ever took a logic class.

[TBF]

116. I didn't say Obama supported dog-fighting. But I also believe there any many folks more deserving

of a call from him than the NFL owner who hired Michael Vick.

[TheEuclideanOne]

117. I think that the fact that we are having this heated discussion is proof all on it's own.

Do some googling, Cakegrrl, and show me one discussion of this topic that is not very long and heated. The fact that we are even having this heated argument shows what a poor decision this was. By associating himself with Michael Vick, it opens up the topic for just to what degree the president condones Vicks behavior, regardless of whether the President's spokesperson has to backpeddle and state that Obama clearly doesn't. In fact, just the fact that the President has to take a stance on whether he condones the torturing of innocent Dogs should show you why this was a bad decision. Heck, how much more does it take?


Whether you agree or disagree on it, I think that the number of people angrily discussing the topic is proof positive that Obama picked a bad person to forgive. If this were any other person, you would not see such long emotional debates, would you?

Here is a bit of trivia question that I bet you can't answer. Who was the last felon that Obama called about to congratulate for giving a 2nd chance? The reason that you can't answer that question is because that person was not Michael Vick. Do you see the difference?

[CakeGrrl]

119. Once again: Obama did not FORGIVE Vick.

The point was to lend support to an organization for giving a chance to a person who served a jail sentence to work again. If the Eagles hadn't been in the spotlight due to the play of Vick elevating their profile, the call likely would not have taken place.

The clarification was necessary because, like here on DU, there is a lot of "guilt by association" going on.

There is nothing wrong with the concept of the President's statement. Obviously people don't like the beneficiary of the Eagles' largesse, but there it is. Like or not, this is a prime example of a formerly incarcerated person excelling at the work they were allowed to resume.

[displacedvermoter]

123. It's not a prime example of any such thing

as it deals with an NFL quarterback and former overall #1 NFL draft pick. A special talent who is probably going to take his NFL far into the playoffs, he was brought to the Eagles to win football games despite how vile a human being he is. Not a whol hell of a lot of human kindness invovled here.

A better prime example would be the car mechanic or plumber's assistant or short order cook who are hired after serving their time, but I don't know that the President is calling employers who hired such folks to commend them for giving these folks a "second chance".

And it is exactly that said vile human is now again a celebrity that I think -- my opinion -- made it cool for the President to mention Michael Vick in his conversation with the Eagles' owner, when he should have stuck to the environmental issues if that was what he was really interested in talking about. The green technolgy stuff sure got overlooked once the Vick talk came out.

[TheEuclideanOne]

135. Google Michael Vick, it might change your opinion

Once you learn a little bit about why he went to jail, you might stop referring to him as he was some random person who was hired by some company after he got out of jail. Otherwise, you will keep describing as some guy who went to prison from some generic crime.

The only thing that I agree with you on is that it was guilt by association. That is not just specific to DU, though, it is human nature to recognize the association that Obama created. That is basically what I think you are at odds with. You can't seem to accept the fact that Vick is not some random anonymous person who just got out of jail. He was the person who committed some extremely vile crimes. Not just once, but for years (this is key). 3 1/2 years ago, the country was shocked just about hearing how disgusting his crimes were. There is no sign that he has done anything near redemption with the exception of what he was forced by law to do. He didn't just go back to work, he went back to a job where he is making millions of dollars for playing a game. Is this what Obama should be recognizing?

I realize that you will ignore this last paragraph, like you ignored the last half of my last reply.... but the point of the call was not really to lend support to the organization for the green stadium they were opening, so I guess you did not read the actual article. In short, the reason for the call was completely ignored by the choice of Obama to congratulate the Eagles for rewarding a dog torturer with millions of dollars.

[Hello_Kitty]

125. Can you please link to a single post where someone made that claim in earnest?

Just one. Otherwise knock it off with the bullshit "OMGZ you guys think Obama supports dog fighting!1!" canard.

It's getting old.

[AndrewP]

173. I think it's 100% about winning elections for the cheer team

[Shining Jack]

142. +1 n/t

[Ghost of Tom Joad]

52. karma

I'm a strong believer, revenge is a dish best served cold. Vick will get his justice one day.

[Raine]

58. He's a Piece of Shit who should be shunned

by any decent society, whatever his fucking "talent" is .

[CakeGrrl]

74. What does "shunning" entail?

Are they tortured?

Prevented from getting food and shelter?

Killed?

Are you advocating shunning for all convicted persons, or only certain ones? Where are you drawing the line?

And if you aren't executing these individuals outright, how are they supposed to exist? Or are they just supposed to die out as survival tools are withheld?

And do you expect them to just sit and take it? Or do you think some of them might go into survival mode to resist?

And if that's controlled, who's paying for it? I sure don't plan to spend my money on it.

Explain how this works in your vision.

[martymar64]

178. Hows this for shunning?

He deserves to be stared at like a freak everywhere he goes, with dirty looks and whispers of "dog killer" reaching his eyes and ears and the eyes and ears of his family and friends.

If he endorses a produce i.e. Nike, then that company deserves to be the subject of boycotts and negative publicity until they drop him.

If a network hires him as a commentator,then that network and all of its advertisers should be subjected to boycotts and negative publicity until they drop him.

He needs to feel the contempt and hatred burning into him from every eye that gazes upon him wherever he goes, every single day for the rest of his life.

Any time he is on the news for whatever reason, it needs to be mentioned that he was convicted for torturing and killing defenseless animals for fun. His name must be forever associated with cruelty to animals.

He needs to be barred from restaurants, nightclubs, resorts, etc with the phrase "I'm sorry Mr. Vick, we feel your presence here would be bad for business. Please patronize some other establishment."

Any woman that catches his eyes needs to be fully briefed on what he did to those dogs and what he could potentially do to those women or their children.

He needs to know that he is not welcome in civilized society and that he should just go hole up in his mansion and become a recluse, hoping that the world will forget about him and his crimes.

Nobody needs to physically hurt him. He will just bear the mark of Cain of a ruined reputation, just like OJ did after his acquittal.

Now that's what a shunning would look like.

[firedupdem]

77. You should come to Nebraska...

these redneck townies fight dogs all the time. Where is the outrage!!!!!!!!

[LiberalFighter]

59. Vick personally killed at least seven of his fighting dogs by hanging or drowning.

Feds: Vick Personally Killed 7 Dogs By Hanging, Drowning

Falcons' Vick indicted by grand jury in dogfighting probe

Why should killing dogs not be any different than killing a person? If he had killed 8 persons how long would he had served in prison? Or would they have been lenient because he is a sport star?

[Teaser]

68. "Why should killing dogs not be any different than killing a person?"

wait, should we not be able to euthanize suffering dogs then?

trying to understand your argument here. Your question is awkwardly constructed.

[LiberalFighter]

97. I don't think my question is awkwardly constructed.

In a way humans are euthanized although with humans they are given morphine or other pain reducing meds to make it easier to die. And when dogs are euthanized it is by vets not scumbags out to make a buck at any cost.

To compound the situation it is Vick and others like him that trained the dogs to behave the way they did and when they didn't perform to their satisfaction they only considered killing them. And it was in a manner to provide them more enjoyment so they could watch the dogs suffer.

[Kurovski]

63. it's a corporatist's view

that no matter what they do, a money-making sports "franchise" like him will be forgiven anything.

Too much was already invested in him to cut him loose.

[TBF]

99. Bingo. It is amazing how everything comes back to the money -

I wouldn't be surprised if Vick was making a good bit of cash on the side with this little dog-fighting "operation". I haven't seen info on that, but would love to if someone has it available. In capitalism it is always about the money.

[BobbyBoring]

146. YEPPERS!

Foosball and sports in general have gone the way of everything else in this country. Football players used to be a bunch of really tough guys that loved to play the game. Now they're a bunch of over paid cry babies. case in point. The Vikes couldn't play in the snow in their new outdoor stadium.

Stadiums used to be named after great figures in the sport. Now, er have Fed Ex Field, ATT Stadium, etc. It's all corporate now.

The Eagles needed a QB because my team, the Skins got the great McNabb. Poor pick but it's all about the dough. Maybe OJ will get a shot at fame again when he gets out. After this, who can say~

[BlueIris]

67. Thanks for posting this. I hope everyone who is defending Vick,

and yes, I mean everyone, chooses to read it. Horrifying.

[CakeGrrl]

75. I challenge you to provide an example of anyone who has defended Vick.

Because guess what? "Defending" Vick is not the same as thinking he should have the opportunity to support himself after serving a sentence that was handed down for the crimes he committed.

Some people here are all talk, no concept.

I'm curious to know what ELSE people think should be done after someone has done the time for their crime.

Please don't offer anything that the taxpayers have to shell out for, because I'm not down for that.

[TBF]

100. Heh - your president not only supports Mr. Vick, CakeGrrl, he called the fucking

owner of an NFL team to praise him for hiring him.

As I've said elsewhere on one of these threads, I actually have no problem with him playing football again. It's his occupation and it's better than him turning to crime on the street. Although an argument could be made that in many professions (legal, medical) he might lose his license for his horrible crime. But, that aside, while I really don't mind him playing football - I would not hold him up as some paragon of virtue. There are many other people in this country Mr. Obama could take the time to praise. Many who work for non-profits, volunteer their time, serve in our military - millions of examples of people doing good. This was a very big error on the part of Mr. Obama, and quite frankly makes me question his judgment yet again.

[CakeGrrl]

103. He's not "your" President, then. Interesting.

And do show me where Vick was held up as a paragon of virtue. This is the problem with some people here - they're pinning this on the President as if he has effectively waved off the nature of the crime Vick committed.

That's just people reaching to continue their disgust with the President. I guess last week's progress was just too much positivity to take, so this latest call to outrage is just too much to resist.

[TBF]

106. I worked on his campaign -

and yes I have rejected him. He has been horrible for the working class. Their taxes will go up while the very wealthy get continued tax breaks. "Progress"? There has been absolutely no progress on economic issues, DADT was a way of throwing crumbs. Yes, it's a good thing it was repealed, but no it didn't cost him or his rich friends anything.

As I said, of all the people he could have called this is what he chose. A really bad call on his part. .

[onehandle]

73. This whole thing will cost Obama votes. Animal lovers do not forget.

Whoever in the Administration set up this call for the President should be fired.

[CakeGrrl]

76. What did the President do to harm animals?

Anyone who won't vote for the President because of the statement I understand that he made to the Eagles organization - NOT TO MICHAEL VICK - isn't thinking clearly, IMO.

[TBF]

92. Talk about unclear thinking -

there are so many people in this country who Mr. Obama could have called to praise. Owners of non-profits, volunteers who selflessly give their time. But who does Mr. Obama pick? He decides to call the fucking owner of a NFL team and praise him for hiring an ex-con who abused, tortured, and murdered multiple animals.

I have plenty of reasons to not vote for Mr. Obama ever again for any position - mainly centering on his blatant disregard for the working class. This is just icing on the cake. No way, no how. There will be a decent primary challenger to vote for or I'll stay home, since I can't imagine the republicans coming up with a populist candidate.

[hlthe2b]

102. Aww, CakeGrrl with that same straw man posted on every thread

Don't you ever get embarrassed by making such a disingenuous argument, knowing that NO ONE on any Vick thread has ever suggested the President did anything to harm animals any more than he vandalized cars in downtown Atlanta or helped to set up the Holocaust. :eyes:

[CakeGrrl]

111. You apparently don't know what a straw man is. Simple question:

What did the President do in this situation that would cause people not to vote for him?

[Aramchek]

126. so, are the animal lovers going to vote for wolf-shootin', halibut-skullcrushin' Sarah Palin???

[glinda]

78. He should never have a pet again. And he should spend big money on

giving to organizations that rescue dogs. That's it in a nutshell.

[OKNancy]

86. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said Obama's call was appropriate

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/27/AR2010122704452.html

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said Obama's call was appropriate, noting that Vick himself has given speeches across the country apologizing for his crimes.

"Obama's a sports guy, Vick's a sports guy, and comebacks and redemption can happen," said Ingrid E. Newkirk, the group's co-founder and president. "We all want a president who can lift us up and move us forwards when ugly things happen, but that cannot let us forget and remain watchful to avoid future abuses."

[Raine]

88. Sometimes I wonder if PETA cares more about

getting themselves and their name more publicity and all the benefits they get from that than they do for animals. :-(

[Vicar In A Tutu]

91. They do.

Though I don't necessarily disagree entirely on this. I mean, Vick's abuse is tiny, insignificant compared to that meted out on a daily basis by the majority of the meat industry.

[TBF]

94. Exactly, I have really changed my mind about them, and will no

longer support their organization.

[TBF]

93. PETA has made wrong calls before - in fact they wanted to kill all the dogs

when Vick's kennel was discovered. They are off my list for donations, along with the Humane Society. That these groups would pander to a celebrity is unconscionable.

[superduperfarleft]

154. And I'll repeat it again: PETA wanted, and still wants, Vick's dogs dead.

I suspect they're just trying to wiggle in to some of that spotlight that HSUS is getting.

[michaz]

90. K&R

[sofa king]

104. Which means Vick is NOT a good football player BECAUSE he tortures animals.

Oh, wait, that's a completely erroneous conclusion that assumes that only one of the two things can be true at the same time.

In that case, I'm going to watch the animal torturer play some awesome football tonight.

So is it wrong for me to admire Mike Vick's football ability in spite of his personal failings? Of course not. Only right-wing authoritarians unforgivingly hate all of a person for a previous transgression that does not apply to what they're doing today.

Yes, I did say that. And I mean it, too. Within fifteen minutes, some of you won't be able to help proving it to me, because just like other right-wing authoritarians, you're extremely hostile to attacks on your world-view. And, you can't bring yourself to read the last paragraph in any post.

[TBF]

109. I don't have a problem with Vick playing football - but I do have a problem with Obama idolizing him

nt

[sofa king]

110. I don't think "idolizing" is the proper word.

"Acknowledging" might be a better one. I can't blame you for feeling that way. Probably the best thing to do, politically, would have been to stay far away from the matter.

But the President also has this amazing and mysterious ability to accept the complexity of humans and understand that there is good and evil in all of us, which until this particular subject came up was something I thought most or all Democrats could easily comprehend.

Now I see that many of them can't, and I am deeply saddened at the thought that, in many ways, our "liberals" are secretly as inflexible and as intolerant and as unwilling to forgive as our opponents, which also means they are just as easy to manipulate as their right-wing authoritarian counterparts on the Republican side.

[TBF]

113. I would think democrats would have the ability to distinguish

amongst types of crimes and realize that there are different degrees. I didn't feel like forgiving Timothy McVey either, though there are many I would give a second chance to. For democrats things are usually not so black and white. But in the case of supporting Obama, it seems that there can be no degrees. You are either for him or against him, much like the Bush administration.

[Bluenorthwest]

148. The President has an amazing ability to claim gay people

should not marry, because we are not 'sanctified by God' and should always be denied the 'sacrament of marriage' enjoyed by his psycho pal Vick, who is sanctified by God, apparently. And singled out by Obama as an example to youth. Acceptance for Vick, intolerance toward others, that is not 'accepting of the complexity' at all, that is playing favorites and being a huge, leaping hypocrite.

[Tx4obama]

136. Obama does not idolize him.

America is a land of laws. Vick was found guilty, served his time, and has a right to live the rest of his life without further persecution. Basically all Obama did was state that he thought folks that have served their punishment should be giving a second chance - that is what we DO here in the United States of America.
-----

NEW YORK CITY -- The Obama administration confirmed on Monday afternoon that the president, in a call with the owner of the Philadelphia Eagles, expressed gratitude for the team's decision to give a second chance to quarterback Michael Vick.

But the nexus of the call, spokesman Bill Burton told The Huffington Post, was on the team's plans to use alternative energy sources at their stadium. And while the president was thankful that Vick was given a career do-over, he still thought that the actions committed by the QB -- the orchestration of an illegal dog-fighting ring, the killing of animals and the deceiving of investigators looking into the matter -- were condemnable.

Here's Burton's statement:

The President did place a call to Mr. Lurie to discuss plans for the use of alternative energy at Lincoln Financial Field, during which they spoke about that and other issues. He of course condemns the crimes that Michael Vick was convicted of but, as he's said previously, he does think that individuals who have paid for their crimes should have an opportunity to contribute to society again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/27/obama-michael-vick_n_801736.html

[TBF]

145. But why Vick -

he took time out of his schedule to make that call. Think of all the other folks in this country he could've called - why make a call about Vick? And the crap about alternative energy is an after-the-fact cover story.

[Tx4obama]

155. Read my comment #136

Obama's main reason for calling the Eagles' owner was NOT about Vick.

[sofa king]

152. Um, just to chide myself here...

It's been the better part of a work day and that means I need to point out that I was dead wrong about my prediction in the last paragraph of my post above.

It shows that however much I like to pretend I'm rational and even-handed, I'm not. Not any more than anyone else. So there's a lesson for myself. And I'm sorry for doubting all of you, too.

[Lorien]

156. You have a deranged idea of what constitutes a "right wing authoritarian"

and yes, you are an individual who is without principles or morals. A bona fide self serving sociopath, just like the one you idolize.

[cottonseed]

105. If Vick's alright with PETA then he's alright with me!

I stand with PETA on this one.

Also, what's wrong with this Best Friends' guy? First he says he turned down initial contact from Vick's people and then complains that they haven't heard from Vick's people? Nonsensical.

[sofa king]

107. Vick is probably also operating on advice of his attorney.

And if I were his attorney I would say, "do not EVER contact ANY animal rights activist for ANY reason, period."

[TBF]

108. PETA's wrong on this issue - they also wanted to kill al lthe dogs found on the Vick property.

Best friends took in those dogs and found homes for some of them (any who do not get homes will live out their lives at the sanctuary).

And this certainly isn't the first time PETA has been wrong about something ...

[northernlights]

140. They didn't allow Vick to actually visit the dogs

That's the only contact they turned down. Because, ya know, it might be a little traumatic and set back their healing if they were forced to deal with their torturer.

And what Vick's people wanted was for Best Friends to "put in a good word" for Vick. They didn't care about the dog's well-being. He never offered to compensate Best Friends for the expense of rehabilitating the dogs.

It was all about poor widdle Vick. That's why they turned them away. To protect the dogs from further trauma.

Those dogs were so terrified, they would crawl around on their bellies shaking. One that Vick used as "training bait" was so terrified that they had to carry him around for months -- he was too afraid to put one foot in front of the other.

Do you seriously think it would in any way, shape or form have been ok for those poor dogs to be forced to face the vile piece of sadistic shit who did that to them?

[AtomicKitten]

120. You don't need to prove Vick's crimes were soul-crushingly horrible.

On that I'm sure we all agree.

However, you are conflating the crime with rehabilitation.

[Elfin Yeti]

122. I saw on TV the other day...

...thay Vick wants to get a dog (he is barred from owning any)! Said it would be "good for his rehabilitation"! I have a few ideas that I think would be good for his rehabilitation too but it doesn't involve a dog!

[alp227]

124. Don't you think that there are MORE important animal issues than Vick?

Vick's already served his time for his crime and has spoken for the Humane Society. Why don't y'all complain about more important issues, like the meat industry (I watched the documentary Food, Inc.), corporate pollution of natural resources, oil drilling, etc.? Not to mention the "puppy mills, pet stores and shelter killings" that the author of this article mentioned. Obama already made that call; all your scolding here won't make a damn difference in this issue or any of the other issues listed above.

And you expect Obama or ANY president or major politician for the matter to call other rehabilitated criminals who are now doing better with their lives?

It's pretty disappointing to learn that Vick has never contacted the org that rescued his dogs though. :-(

(on edit) I read further about the dogfighting case on Wikipedia; some athletes even defended Vick:

Stephon Marbury, a point guard for the Boston Celtics, called dogfighting a sport and compared it to hunting and said that we don't react the same when other animals die.<77> Roy Jones Jr., a prominent boxer, stated, "really two dogs fighting can happen in anyone's backyard or on the street. It happened in my backyard, two of my dogs fought and one died." <78> Clinton Portis, a star running back on the Washington Redskins, stated, "I don't know if he was fighting dogs or not, but it's his property, it's his dog. If that's what he wants to do, do it. I think people should mind their own damn business." <79>

Not to mention that blood sports (involving generally violence against animals) e.g. dog fights, cockfights, etc. happen beyond Vick's world. As another poster mentioned "rednecks" in Nebraska enjoy dogfighting too; where's the outrage about things like that happening in YOUR community?

[TBF]

147. Downplaying the crime - typical. nt

[alp227]

153. i'm not downplaying the crime. i'm just saying: look beyond Vick

for a wider perspective of the issue of animal abuse

[TBF]

159. Of course there are other issues, but the issue today is Obama's call

to the NFL owner. Distractions and straw men do not impress me.

[alp227]

161. so you thought that Obama shouldn't have called the owner?

Back to the original report: "President Obama explained that a level playing field rarely exists for prisoners who have completed their sentences. Vick’s success gives all of them hope." As I've seen in the response 'round here picking Vick, whose path to re-employment is easier than what the average American can do, was a pretty poor example for Obama to address the problem of post-release unemployment and recidivism. Also an unresolved issue: Vick's supposed lack of reconsideration re his dogs as the rescuer contends.

So should Obama have called the Eagles owner at all, not just to thank the owner (maybe as a sports fan, I don't know why he'd call to begin with) but also to address the prison/unemployment issue?

[TBF]

163. I'd love for Mr. Obama to show as much concern for the homeless as he does

for this athlete. Yes, I believe his hero worship is misplaced.

[Tx4obama]

165. Obama called the Eagles owner regarding alternative energy at Lincoln Financial Field

NEW YORK CITY -- The Obama administration confirmed on Monday afternoon that the president, in a call with the owner of the Philadelphia Eagles, expressed gratitude for the team's decision to give a second chance to quarterback Michael Vick.

But the nexus of the call, spokesman Bill Burton told The Huffington Post, was on the team's plans to use alternative energy sources at their stadium. And while the president was thankful that Vick was given a career do-over, he still thought that the actions committed by the QB -- the orchestration of an illegal dog-fighting ring, the killing of animals and the deceiving of investigators looking into the matter -- were condemnable.

Here's Burton's statement:

The President did place a call to Mr. Lurie to discuss plans for the use of alternative energy at Lincoln Financial Field, during which they spoke about that and other issues. He of course condemns the crimes that Michael Vick was convicted of but, as he's said previously, he does think that individuals who have paid for their crimes should have an opportunity to contribute to society again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/27/obama-michael-vick_n_801736.html

-----
p.s. To me, the Vick threads here on DU are a bit ridiculous considering the headlines are not totally accurate, the story has been spun more than a load of towels in a washing machine, and hardly no one at all is talking about what Obama called the Eagles owner for to begin with - ALTERNATIVE ENERGY.

Edited to fix typo.

[TBF]

167. Alternative Energy is the story they came up with as a cover. nt

[midnight]

133. K&R...

[cottonseed]

139. May the flogging never come to an end.

Right?

[Shining Jack]

143. K&R

:puke:

[Tx4obama]

157. ''President Obama, a Christian, not surprisingly believes in redemption.'' -Brian Katulis

Many thoughtful quotes regarding the Obama - Vick issue on the link below:

http://www.politico.com/arena/

[Skittles]

162. yup - he let bush the torturer off so Vick is just small potatoes

[Lorien]

158. These threads help me to add considerably to my "ignored" lists

who knew there were so many sick, sociopathic sport star worshiping wastes of bandwidth here on DU? Threads like these sure shine light on the cockroaches!

[TBF]

160. And it's not even that they agree with what they are spouting off -

they simply will defend Obama at all costs. It doesn't matter what he does, they are on-board. That is nearly as frightening as what Vick did to the dogs. God knows what they would do to dogs or people if Obama instructed them to ...

[Tx4obama]

164. Please explain why folks that serve their time in prison shouldn't get a 2nd chance

once they've been released.

Should people that have been convicted of a crime and served their time, then wear a scarlet letter on their forehead for the rest of their lives?

Should folks that have been released from prison be prohibited from working?

How many years 'after' they have completed their punishment should they be allowed to reenter society without further persecution?

Should we change our legal system?
Instead of judges and juries doling out prison sentences, should sentences be determined by online polls to reflect how the general population feels? :)

I rest my case.

[TBF]

168. I have no problem with Mr. Vick getting his job back. But I hardly think that he is worth a

call from the president. There are so many folks doing good things in this world who have not tortured and murdered dogs for fun - I'd simply appreciate it if Mr. Obama would start with praising those folks. But then, there's nothing to be gained by that politically.

[Tx4obama]

169. As I have said numerous times before...

President Obama did not call the Eagles owner to talk about Vick.
The call was made to talk to the owner about alternative energy at the stadium and Obama asked the owner about helping in getting the other stadiums to follow his lead and implementing alternative energy in their stadiums too.
You are apparently digging your heels in on this issue for some unknown reason.
And President Obama did NOT call Vick - so your second sentence in your comment title is misleading.

President Obama is a Christian and believes in redemption for ALL folks that have served their time in prison and have a 'right' to live the rest of their lives without further persecution.

[martymar64]

179. If he believed in rdemption he should release everybody convicted of marijuana offenses.

But, of course, none of them are likely to be football stars so as far as Obama is concerned, they can all rot in prison. His stated positions on marijuana reinforce this.

I wouldn't be surprised if Obama invited Vick to sit next to Michelle and the girls in the gallery at the next SOTU address. Most of the DUers would love to see this happen.