I also find it annoying that people refer to Vick's actions as a "mistake."

I agree. Picking up the wrong keys, turning left instead of right is a mistake. I, too, am sick of people calling malicious acts "mistakes."

Your examples are more in the line of "accidents", but the analogy is still good. What Vick did was neither a mistake nor an accident. If the victims were human, it would be called "premeditated."

What O'Donnel doesn't say is that states have animal cruelty laws which  govern the way an animal is euthanized.  Yes, Mr. O'Donnel, you are correct:  it's called a veterinarian!  No, we cannot poison, shoot, strangle, drown, electrocute, bludgeon to death, run over the animal with your car, etc., when it's time to put it down. (an inconvenient truth) And, no, the laws for slaughtering animal for food are different from the above, so his silly analogy about fishing doesn't apply. So spare us from the "meat is murder" routine please.

 Dog fighting for fun and profit is not a sport and as some of Vick's empty-headed defenders suggest ; dog fighting is ILLEGAL and it carries a hefty penalty, one in which Vick will embrace very soon.

We lovc our pets in America; that's why we have laws to protect them from Cro-mags like Vick who make "mistakes" over how to dispose of the ones he no longer wants because of their embarrassing performance!

And, Mr. O'Donnel (are you related to Rosie?) I don't give a rat's butt about your argument that "other countries" eat dogs and that we shouldn't be so sensitive about killing our pets.  Would you want to live in one of those countries which eat dogs, Mr O? 

I certainly would not.

Elitist Lawrence O'Donnell wouldn't let thug basketball player Stephon Marbury within a thousand feet of him.  (unless he knew someone else in the Hollywood crowd was watching)

Well, at least it's not too hard to imagine that a fish would be O'Donnell's best friend...

msh,

Dog....fish.  Perhaps O'Donnell was taken in my the Sharpton thing....Brent Farve & dolphins w/spears on their heads.  :) 

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

I consider the things many of these people say to be outright lunacy. But, whether it's a dog or a fish, if you stop for a second and really take a good, long think about it, at least to me fishing becomes less and less excusable.

Yes, dogfighting is a vicious, cruel sport. People pit animals against each other in violent, bloody combat for the pleasure of a few grunting morons tossing cash around.

But does the banality and cruelty of one thing lessen the pain and misery being caused by a different act? Does the evil nature of something somehow lessen the evil nature of an entirely seperate thing?

Imagine what a fish goes through from the moment the "sportsman" dangles the hook in the water. The fish is thinking to himself (or herself), "hey, food"- but instead of getting a nice, tasty meal, a barbed, jagged hook plunges through their face! And then the fisherman begins to rapidly yank the line in with all his human might, dragging the poor thing by the impalement to a boat, where as the fish gasps for a breath he or she is whopped over the head until presumably dead- or left to suffocate in the boat.

I always thought I'd be the last person to defend a liberal on this site, but fishing carries a barbarism and brutality -and pain inflicted on the animal- that goes beyond the pale.

Did you say dogfish? Or Dog Fish?

___________________________________ 

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber

"I’m sorry, but at the moment I cannot bring myself to be concerned with
the killing a few dogs when, over the last thirty years, 40 million
babies have been killed in the name of convenience."

Wow, how sad for you that you are only capable of caring about one issue at a time. What a waste having a human brain is when you think like an amoeba.

Assuming you are a Christian, and dogs being one of God's creatures, how do you thing God feels about your flippant attitude towards the unnecessary torture and slaughter of one of his creatures?

the screams of all those plants,  oh the humanity

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”   -Chief Justice John Roberts

Larry is best known for his spectacular on-air meltdown on MSNBC in the fall of 2004, when he was on with Swift Boat head guy John O'Neill. Sad to say the video seems to have disappeared from the web, but you can read about it here:

http://michellemalkin.com/2004/10/22/lawrence-odonnell-and-liberals-unhinged/

fitzfong,

It seems to me that one of the fundamental beliefs of liberalism is that no one person or group is any better than any other. Taken to the extreme, that applies to all living organisms.

Given that, O'Donnell's reasoning makes sense. Since dogs are no better than any other life form (humans included, no doubt), it is hypocritical to get upset about their mistreatment while not getting upset about the act of fishing (for example).

Similarly, it's arrogant for us to place more value in a dog's life than some other animal's (like a cow's, say) given that in some cultures, dogs are treated in ways (eaten) that we would find unacceptable. Again, since according to liberals, no one group of people (or culture) is any better than any other, we have no right to think that our attitudes towards domesticated animals have any real worth.

If Vick were white, he'd be in the pool with the dolphins. 

Please.......stay on point.  :P 

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

If eating babies had a long history, and if some of the "best people" in history had been involved in it and it was considered a sport, that would make it okay? You should have been on this board long enough to know that lefty concepts of multiculturism and moral relativism doesn't fly too well here.

Yes, Pit Bulls were bred to fight. And that is why responsible breeders today have been undoing those years of damage thoughtless humans have created and taking away those over-aggressive tendencies that leave so many Pit Bulls to be euthanized because people are afraid to adopt them. But despite their breeding Pit Bulls *can* be loving animals and be good pets. The power of human love and nuturing trumps nature anyday.

And if anyone is a sissy, it's people like you. Giving in to man's baser instincts is what's weak, having the strength to show control over one's anger and darker nature and showing mercy and compassion and restraint when it's warranted and necessary is just as much as sign of strength as punishing and not showing mercy when it's *not* warranted is.  Ever hear of balance? Hating dogfighting has nothing to do with becoming too soft and everything to do with avoiding becoming too hard. Using your logic, Jesus was a sissy for preaching love, hope and charity then.

The reason our soldiers are stronger then our enemies is because our soldiers fight for freedom, their families (love) and to rid our world of murderous ideologues who fight merely for the brutality and to plunge the world into darkness with hate and murder. The best soldiers are not the most brutal but the most humane as they really have something spiritual to fight for as opposed to say the insurgents of Iraq who fight merely to satiate their own dark lusts for destruction. Right makes might, not the other way around.

Also, desensitizing a innocent animal through violence and isolation and then throwing them into a pit and watching it tear another animal apart is something anyone barbaric and callous to not care about the pain the animals suffer can do. There is no skill or thought required. Dog fighting is no more a "sport" than crapping in a toilet.

If dogfighting apologists are so tough than maybe they should be thrown into an arena and forced to fight each other to the death. See how they like it.

In the 13th and 14th centuries they had lots of neat ways of torturing innocent people to induce them into a confession for a crime they never committed. It usually worked or the accused died in the process "proving" his/her guilt to the non-sissified denizens of this wonderfully enlightened culture. 

This was usually followed by a neat way of executing the "criminal" (if he/she survived the torture) such as ripping off his/her skin before the drawing a quartering their bodies, in full view of the non-sissified public who most likely enjoyed all of it because they had nothing better to do, or other creatively barbaric methods.  

And if you were deemed a heretic, you were given one opportunity to repent. If you still gave the wrong answer, you were burned alive at the stake, again in front of a very appreciative public!  Man, they really knew how to live back then, didn't they?

Sounds like some of the things the Islamic terrorists are still doing today, doesn't it?  Fighting them to wipe out those Barbarians, following your logic, must make us appear like soft pansies and sissies to the rest of the world, right?

BTW, your analogy between dog fighting and soccer is a very weak one.  If a soccer player no longer wants to play soccer he can just quit;  the hapless animals that are ripped to screads don't have the same choice because Morons-with-Money like Vick are holding them captive.

Les Payne, the writer, is what is affectionately known as a "douche bag".

Did anyone notice the hot dogs on the grill in the tiny picture to the write of the article? 

Killing them with kindness isn't working.  Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.