What do you think all kids are just born evil nowadays? Too many black kids maybe? maybe black kids are just demented? [/quote]
Don’t tell me you didn’t make it an issue.
I wasn’t making it an issue until YOU typed this.
My problem with continued defense of their attitudes and behavior of entitlement that they and you try to justify by thier circumstances of how they grew up.
BLACKSMITH
I wasn’t making it a race issue, Airtruth brought it up. “Somehow” Airtruth only was focussing on black culture and black youth.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
Is this about race? Must be, since you think Me and Bill Cosby can relate to each other. What else do we have in common besides being black? Let me guess you would plan an education summit where Jesse Jackson tells a bunch of KKK teens that blacks aren’t stealing their jobs, they’re just a bunch of lazy excuse ladden teens?(That’s real smart)[/quote]
I didn’t know you were black and I don’t care that you are.
And your analogy with the KKK, I agree with you, is not very smart. What is it with you and race?
Clinton was poor and made it to presidency. Reagan was poor and made it to presidency. But this could just go around and around. Not everyone who fights dogs is or was poor and not all of them are or were rich, privileged or underprivileged.
You also made a statement in an earlier post about poor black mothers, so really, yah, you made it the issue.
But what I can see is happening is this whole thing is taking away from the fact that he’s indicted for a crime regardless of circumstances and upbringing.
I don’t care why someone commits a crime. Especially a crime that wasn’t stealing diapers or a loaf of bread for their family.
I will reserve my responses to your championing of the youth culture to another thread.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
BLACKSMITH
Somehow your comments got twisted into ‘people not taking responsibilty for their actions’ and turned into a purely race thing and that was not at all what you were saying. You were just pointing out a contrast in thought between two social groups. Again, good post.
I wasn’t making it a race issue, Airtruth brought it up. “Somehow” Airtruth only was focussing on black culture and black youth.[/quote]
Again, Airtruth was ASKED by Mike Shank to expound on the comments made by Bill Cosby and Oprah. These two addressed their comments to the black community and Airtruth answered Mike’s question by pointing out some of the problems with their comments/reasoning and why some took offense to it and others did not.
Bill and Oprah only addressed their comments to the black community. And a thorough examination of their thoughts has gone on in the community as well.
Mike asked, Air answered, and somehow we got to this point. For me, I will agree to disagree and move on.
Sometimes the discussions on this board get so intense, it reminds me of one of my favorite movie scenes ever. It involves an arguement:
Ron Burgundy: Discovered by the Germans in 1904, they named it San Diago, which of course in German means a whale’s vagina.
Veronica Corningstone: No, there’s no way that’s correct.
Ron Burgundy: I’m sorry, I was trying to impress you. I don’t know what it means. I’ll be honest, I don’t think anyone knows what it means anymore. Scholars maintain that the translation was lost hundreds of years ago.
Veronica Corningstone: Doesn’t it mean Saint Diego?
Ron Burgundy: No. No.
Veronica Corningstone: No, that’s what it means. Really.
Ron Burgundy: Agree to disagree.
[quote]BLACKSMITH wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
BLACKSMITH
Somehow your comments got twisted into ‘people not taking responsibilty for their actions’ and turned into a purely race thing and that was not at all what you were saying. You were just pointing out a contrast in thought between two social groups. Again, good post.
I wasn’t making it a race issue, Airtruth brought it up. “Somehow” Airtruth only was focussing on black culture and black youth.
Again, Airtruth was ASKED by Mike Shank to expound on the comments made by Bill Cosby and Oprah. These two addressed their comments to the black community and Airtruth answered Mike’s question by pointing out some of the problems with their comments/reasoning and why some took offense to it and others did not.
Bill and Oprah only addressed their comments to the black community. And a thorough examination of their thoughts has gone on in the community as well.
Mike asked, Air answered, and somehow we got to this point. For me, I will agree to disagree and move on.
Felicia
[/quote]
Whether or not it was directed at Airthruth or the black community, anyone can respond to any post, or you can PM it.
and in response to your question about “Discovery” in regards to the defense, both sides must offer up all their evidence and share with opposing counsel. There are no surprises, especially if it is an affirmative defense. The defense would want to do all it could to clear their client before it gets to trial.
Steele had said his group was “in support of Michael as a human being. … Right now, he’s feeling discarded, ostracized by people who are rushing to judgment. It’s our responsibility to save him.”
Last week, SCLC President Charles Steele told The Associated Press the group was discussing how the embattled Atlanta Falcons quarterback would be acknowledged at the five-day event.
The SCLC had reached out to Vick through his mother to invite him to the convention. The group was told he cannot travel outside of Virginia, where he has pleaded not guilty to charges of sponsoring a dogfighting operation.
Turns out that Vick’s mom is a member of this church organization.
I didn’t remember that he was restricted from travel out of the state of Virginia.
McNabb also tried to clarify earlier comments he made about Michael Vick’s indictment on dogfighting charges.
“Not everybody read the whole quote,” McNabb said. “The whole quote was basically saying that I was supporting him because he’s a friend of mine. We’ve known each other for a long time, and I just want to see him come out of this thing and be back out on the football field, playing football and doing what he loves.”
McNabb acknowledged the allegations against Vick are terrible but that the Falcons quarterback should not be judged until all the facts are known.
"I also said that just like everyone else, I don’t know exactly what happened. You can only go by what was put on the Internet or by what was said.
“My thing is, just continue to see what happens and what comes out of it before you make judgment.”
This link is about McNabb and his comments on Mike Vick. It caused some notice here in the philly area.
I watched this game and will admit that they are right. Harrington didn’t look bad running the offense, even this early on in the preseason.
Does anybody know if or when Vick is comming back. If he can’t leave the state of virginia I can’t imagine that he will ever play this year. Or at least until his trial is over which I can’t imagine is any time soon.
Does anybody have any idea what the facts are in this situation. Outside of the NFL and the falcons position, when can vick actually start comming back?
I don’t think it’s been set in stone yet by team owner Arthur Blank or by Commissioner Roger Goodell. For now, the team is moving on without him, and there hasn’t been talk of him returning to the team at any point in the season (although things can change, obviously).
I don’t think Vick can come back unless he’s told or invited to come back. Other than that, he needs to focus on his case and stay in shape.
I think essentially he is on an indefinite leave of absence from the team.
[quote]MikeShank wrote:
I watched this game and will admit that they are right. Harrington didn’t look bad running the offense, even this early on in the preseason.
Does anybody know if or when Vick is comming back. If he can’t leave the state of virginia I can’t imagine that he will ever play this year. Or at least until his trial is over which I can’t imagine is any time soon.
Does anybody have any idea what the facts are in this situation. Outside of the NFL and the falcons position, when can vick actually start comming back?
“Yesterday, Yahoo Sports “broke” the “news” that Michael Vick will soon be suspended from playing in the NFL for at least a year by der Kommissar Roger Goodell.”
This is great and humorous analysis of the MV episode although less politically correct, second best only to Vick Indicted! thread by MikeShank.
“Umm… is it just me, or is the standard for breaking a news story unfathomably fucking low? Pacman Jones got a year suspension for being involved in stuff that he’ll never get convicted for. Chris Henry got 8 games for some DUIs or something. Michael Vick got a federal indictment for running a dogfighting ring. I’m not a lawyer, but I once had sex with a chick in law school, and she said that animal cruelty for sport and gambling is worse than getting pulled over for DUI. And she had a big rack, so I believe her.”
It does make me wonder though, if the public outrage and scrutiny stems from the negative portrayal of MV by the media. He wasn’t all that well liked to begin with, due to arrogance and previous run-ins with the law. Despicable as the allegations may be, would the public treat him differently if he were a class act like Carl Ripken Jr. or Joe Montana or Hank Aaron?
Vick screwed himself up by not saying anything. Despite his past run ins theres still enough people that would’ve supported him. Us Vick fans however have nothing to fall back on besides he hasn’t been convicted. I assume his lawyers no best, and from looking at Vick I can’t imagine him having the most convincing good guy personality. So the majority of football ticket fan holders probably wouldn’t believe him, but I still wish Vick would have made a better statement against the charges. If he would’ve came out on the radio or something and said, “I can’t believe this stupid shit my family got me into” I would at least have something to run with, I could say see he knew nothing of it.
Instead all I have to fall back on is they are going after him for conspiracy charges which means they don’t have much if any evidence of his participation.
On the other hand, if there was a direct participation of any of the people you named or Vick, I think they would be heavily persecuted by the American society. Animal lovers tend to be extremely passionate, 10 times more than even M.A.D.D. so I would always try my best to stay on their good side.
Without attempting to endorse dog fighting or seeming apathetic towards the plight of those dogs it’s unfortunate that this is even a top story. Frankly, I’m a little more concerned with human rights as opposed to animal rights.
“Yesterday, Yahoo Sports “broke” the “news” that Michael Vick will soon be suspended from playing in the NFL for at least a year by der Kommissar Roger Goodell.”
This is great and humorous analysis of the MV episode although less politically correct, second best only to Vick Indicted! thread by MikeShank.
“Umm… is it just me, or is the standard for breaking a news story unfathomably fucking low? Pacman Jones got a year suspension for being involved in stuff that he’ll never get convicted for. Chris Henry got 8 games for some DUIs or something. Michael Vick got a federal indictment for running a dogfighting ring. I’m not a lawyer, but I once had sex with a chick in law school, and she said that animal cruelty for sport and gambling is worse than getting pulled over for DUI. And she had a big rack, so I believe her.”
It does make me wonder though, if the public outrage and scrutiny stems from the negative portrayal of MV by the media. He wasn’t all that well liked to begin with, due to arrogance and previous run-ins with the law. Despicable as the allegations may be, would the public treat him differently if he were a class act like Carl Ripken Jr. or Joe Montana or Hank Aaron?
Your thoughts, let em be heard.
[/quote]
Here is a link to support that update.
thanks,
Mike
Two NFL sources said that commissioner Roger Goodell likely will announce this week or next the suspension of Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick for the 2007 season.
“That’s the direction it’s going and has been from the time this started,” one of the sources said this week.
[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
Without attempting to endorse dog fighting or seeming apathetic towards the plight of those dogs it’s unfortunate that this is even a top story. Frankly, I’m a little more concerned with human rights as opposed to animal rights.[/quote]
Well, you’re first mistake is to assume that dog rights fall under animal rights. I believe they are two entirely separate things. You have domesticated dog rights. And then you have the other millions of species lumped into animal rights.
Dogs aren’t animals, you see. They above such ignoble classification…and they’re just so friggin cute. How can something that cute not have rights?
Vick is in a tough situation if he is innocent. He can’t just cop a plea because he would still lose any chance of future endoresements. If he goes to court he risks the co-defendents lying to place him anywhere they want to place him.
