Interesting thing going on here. The NFL commissioner should not make decisions about, let’s say, “Michael Vick and people like him,” but Todd is perfectly fine by lumping PETA, who I feel the need to point out is correct in this case, and the groups that protested Tookie Williams’ execution. You know, “groups like them.”

Seriously though, Todd, I think we’re both right here. Your point is fair. He hasn’t been convicted yet. My point that the NFL could easily win a major PR coup by suspending him is also fair. It’s certainly within their rights to do so. As a marginal NFL fan, I’ve always been turned off by Vick anyway. This just makes me less likely to care about the league than I was before, which wasn’t much to begin with. I also associate a lot of Vick’s attitude to that of his family. His brother is a scumbag and whenever I think of Michael, or “Mike” as he insists on being called, or “Ron Mexico” which is my preferred name for him, I think about his brother pulling a gun on some kids at a Taco Bell. Overall, I have low feelings for them in general, so I tend to think he’s guilty because it seems so damn plausible.

Seriously though, I guess we should just toss out the whole trial proccess and innocent until proven guilty, since the feds are always right anyway. In fact, we should just let the commissioner of the NFL decide who’s guilty in every federal case. Things would be much simpler that way.

The difference is, you and your pals who have already convicted Vick would be up in arms if a lower class guy in a poor neighborhood lost his job without a trial, but you will advocate it for Vick. Your justice is dependent on a person position in society.

IF Vick did all these things, it’s brutal and he deserves his punishment. And if you had done your homework, you would know the fed’s conviction rate is 96%, not 99%. That still means 4% of those people, for all intents and purposes, did not commit those crimes. Vick deserves his day in court to prove if he is in that 4% before he gets punished.

IF Vick is guilty, PETA is very right in their position, as I stated in my post. Why is it not possible to you that maybe there are parts to the story here which are not yet revealed, that may prove Vick innocent? Witnesses can be vengeful and can claim to have seen things that they didn’t. Only a trial can tell us who is telling the truth.

By the way, this is a very political issue and that is my motivation. It’s people like PETA and the left that are quick to convict a wealthy person in the court of public opinion then show up to free Tookie Williams (a convicted killer) before his execution. This has everything to do with politics and assuming, based on someone’s income or position, that they must be guilty.

Bringing in the liberal crap is weak. By bringing that into play, you’ve pretty much admitted that politics are your motivation here. What’s the matter, does it not compute that PETA might be on the right side of an issue? Todd, I was trying to discuss it and lay a lot of things on the table. But if you’re just going to run behind what you think my political beliefs are, then forget it.