I think Mr. Weissenberger already made the point, but it is a pathetic commentary on the current state of affairs in the media when Vick would be better off had he raped a woman or given a Lawrence Phillips-style beatdown to his significant other rather than mistreating and abusing canines.

The Falcons' braintrust must be thinking, "Fuck, if we only had more of a Pacman Jones debacle here, we could spin this."

drew patrick wrote:I think Mr. Weissenberger already made the point, but it is a pathetic commentary on the current state of affairs in the media when Vick would be better off had he raped a woman or given a Lawrence Phillips-style beatdown to his significant other rather than mistreating and abusing canines.

You and Weissenberger should stop pretending you actually care about these victims of abuse you both mention.

Brinkman wrote:You and Weissenberger should stop pretending you actually care about these victims of abuse you both mention.

The point that "Brinkman" makes is that "drew patrick" and I do not care about the victims of abuse to whom I have referred via the links that I have set forth in this thread. That is, "Brinkman" claims that "drew patrick" and I do not care about the victims of the crimes of assault, battery and murder that certain NFL and ex-NFL players have committed against and upon other human beings.

This is a very serious allegation.

With that behind us, let us imagine that Michael Vick has committed the crime of, say, elephant slaughter.

Sadly, no NFL quarterback of whom I am aware has engaged in this reprehensible activity. This is sadness since it would have provided this forum with an outlet for its collective elephant slaughter-driven rage.

You people are some grade-A smokin' morons.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:"Brinkman" claims that "drew patrick" and I do not care about the victims of the crimes of assault, battery and murder that certain NFL and ex-NFL players have committed against and upon other human beings.

No. I'm sure you care very much about the transgressions of NFL and ex-NFL players. It's the victims, as real, living, non-NFL entities you couldn't give a shit about.

Brinkman wrote:

drew patrick wrote:I think Mr. Weissenberger already made the point, but it is a pathetic commentary on the current state of affairs in the media when Vick would be better off had he raped a woman or given a Lawrence Phillips-style beatdown to his significant other rather than mistreating and abusing canines.

You and Weissenberger should stop pretending you actually care about these victims of abuse you both mention.

When did I "pretend" to "actually care about these victims of abuse"?

My caring, faux-caring, or non-caring about the human victims of violent crimes by NFL and ex-NFL players has nothing to do with how ludicrous the coverage of and attention to the Vick story has become in comparison to these other stories.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:
With that behind us, let us imagine that Michael Vick has committed the crime of, say, elephant slaughter.

But he didn't. He is pleading guilty to something else entirely.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:Sadly, no NFL quarterback of whom I am aware has engaged in this reprehensible activity. This is sadness since it would have provided this forum with an outlet for its collective elephant slaughter-driven rage.

If you would like to discuss that completely unrelated issue, an issue that makes me as sick as the crimes Vick is pleading guilty for, feel free to start a thread about it.

That is only if you are truly interested in hearing about that elephant-slaughter-driven rage that we collectively share.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:You people are some grade-A smokin' morons.

Actually forget everything I said as you have now throughly convinced me with that intellectually superior argument.

drew patrick wrote:I think Mr. Weissenberger already made the point, but it is a pathetic commentary on the current state of affairs in the media when Vick would be better off had he raped a woman or given a Lawrence Phillips-style beatdown to his significant other rather than mistreating and abusing canines.

The Falcons' braintrust must be thinking, "Fuck, if we only had more of a Pacman Jones debacle here, we could spin this."

I don't think he would be "better off" legally - and you can't compare Vick to Pacman and Phillips. The story here is really Michael Vick. Had Michael Vick raped a woman, he would be just as fucked (pardon the pun) - and this would be getting the same amount of publicity (see Kobe Bryant).

barndog wrote:

drew patrick wrote:I think Mr. Weissenberger already made the point, but it is a pathetic commentary on the current state of affairs in the media when Vick would be better off had he raped a woman or given a Lawrence Phillips-style beatdown to his significant other rather than mistreating and abusing canines.

The Falcons' braintrust must be thinking, "Fuck, if we only had more of a Pacman Jones debacle here, we could spin this."

I don't think he would be "better off" legally - and you can't compare Vick to Pacman and Phillips. The story here is really Michael Vick. Had Michael Vick raped a woman, he would be just as fucked (pardon the pun) - and this would be getting the same amount of publicity (see Kobe Bryant).

Whether Vick would be better off legally had he been accused of person-on-person violence is an entirely hypothetical question of evidence (including primarily witness testimony and physical/documentary evidence), but I suspect that he actually would be. That wasn't my point.

Many NFL players have disgustingly beat up (or done worse to) humans (usually women) with nary the discussion or conferral of all-time pariah status that is accompanying Vick's conduct against canines. That is my point.

The only point i ever wanted to make by starting this thread is that Vick is a piece of shit.

That any of the people mentioned by Bradley in his overly-superior screed are just as big or bigger pieces of shit does not detract from Vick's status as a piece of shit.