NAACP Steps In Dog Crap

So in this article, leaders of the NAACP decided to get involved in the Michael Vick controversy. Vick is accused of dog-fighting on his property with one co-defendant confessing. However, the NAACP wants to make sure nobody assumes Vick is guilty, merely that he has been charged.

Ok, fine and dandy. Everybody is innocent until proven guilty. Or are they? See, where the heck was the NAACP when the three white college athletes were accused of rape last year? Where was the outrage that they were being judged before their day in court?

See, this is where Vick and the Duke case differ. Vick represents the league as a paid player. The students paid to attend Duke. Now, both Vick and the Duke players had access to league and school policy regarding whether they were kicked off the team or not. In the NFL, there have been way too many players messing with the law. If the league decides to punish Vick, they may do so under the rules agreed to by the players' union, not because he is guilty but because he is harming the league. (Just like the NBA was within its rights to fire the one former player who felt homosexuality was wrong.) The league has an image to maintain. So, the NFL could suspend Vick and of course, Vick could appeal his suspension, and the NFL and union rules would settle the matter.

In the Duke case, the players paid to attend the school and were held to the standard of all students including the right to hold a campus hearing. (I am assuming this, but it is generally a policy at any university so it would be odd if they didn't get that right.) Yet when the Duke players were kicked off the team and the team itself suspended, where was the NAACP begging caution? Oh wait, they were backing the accuser. Needless to say, I don't believe the NAACP has ever been implicated in its support of the lying whore. (And yes, she is a lying whore as proven when her charges fell apart. Look at the definition of each word and you will see it describes her.)

You know the Vick case reminds me of another case from a few years back where the public rushed to judgment and was supported by having one of the accused confess and cooperate with authorities. Can you say Enron and Fastow? Why should a rich black guy be treated differently than a rich white guy? Wouldn't that be racism? Hmmm...yep. So if you felt Ken Lay was guilty before his trial you are completely within the consistency to believe Vick is guilty before his trial.

Ahh, consistency...my favorite.