Donovan McNabb blogs about Jim Johnson and Mike Vick

by JasonB on May 20, 2009 10:55 AM EDT in News Comment 59 comments

Over on his Yardbarker blog, Donovan McNabb wanted to share some thought on two people he considers friends. Eagles defensive coordinator Jim Johnson and QB Mike Vick.

My thoughts and prayers go out to Jim Johnson as he battles through another round of chemotherapy to deal with cancer. Jim is one of the toughest men I’ve come across and although he has a tough battle ahead, no one is going to fight harder.

I am happy that Michael Vick has served his time and will now be afforded the opportunity to move on with his life. I’m sure he will continue to be remorseful and will learn from his experiences. Hopefully he will have the opportunity to continue his dream of playing professional football.

0 recs | Comment 59 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Nice

Donovan is class personified.

Also, it amazes me the amount of people who believe Vick should be expelled permanently from the NFL for what he did. He could save 1,000 dogs in the future and some people couldn’t forgive him for what he did. IMHO, he did his time and deserves the opportunity to move on with his life. If Goodell wants to suspend him some number of games for lying to him and the Falcons, so be it. But he deserves another shot in the NFL, granted a team is willing to give him the opportunity.

by ajay on May 20, 2009 11:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I’m relatively certain most convicted felons have a hard time finding a job. Why is he different? The guy wasn’t even a great QB. He could win games, which i guess is what everyone wants, but what makes him deserve another shot? Before dog fighting, the guy was a giant legal pain in the ass and a black eye to the NFL. after the dog fighting, he deserves a ~~second~~ third? fourth? fifth? chance.

the guy is scum. hopefully he changed, but i doubt that. he had a golden opportunity to live a life of leisure, protect himself from a criminal world, but instead he used the money he received from an NFL team to fund abysmal treatment of dogs. if the eagles sign him, I’d be livid…I just don’t cheer for scum bags.

by eagleyosh on May 20, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

While it’s true that convicted felons find it hard to get a job, they’re not generally banned from entire industries (save for some jobs that require specialized licenses or security clearances). Even in those cases (like, say, become a lawyer) if you show yourself to be rehabilitated they’ll let you back eventually.

by wildcatlh on May 20, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Love DMac

Astra Inclanant, Non Necessitant

by EagleGreeninMD on May 20, 2009 11:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

very well said...

i really do love donovan’s personality. he gets a lot of flak by certain media outlets whenever he stutters a sentence, but it’s usually undeserved. he’s a cool guy and i think most of us can agree with these statements.

by awd777 on May 20, 2009 11:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

He gets crucified for fighting dogs

but if he had his mistress abort a child, nothing would have ever been said.

Some things in this country are so out of proportion

E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!!!!!

by 700 Level on May 20, 2009 12:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

fighting dogs is illegal

choosing to have an abortion is not. unless you’re going to make this a political thing, i think you have to understand the difference.

now if he “had his mistress abort a child” then maybe that would be more of a story, because he was “forcing her” to have an abortion, as opposed to coming to that decision as a couple. but i think you’re just making an anti-abortion post…

http://poorsportsblog.blogspot.com/

by PoorSports on May 20, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i understand that dude

i was basically just taking a shot at the fact that animals are winding up with more rights that humans in this country…

I am by no means making light of dog fighting either

E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!!!!!

by 700 Level on May 20, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah thats true

there was a case recently that a cop shot a man right in the head in Oakland and I have not heard a word about it. But Vick kills dogs and its the worst thing ever. Granted it is still horrible but I mean between this and PETA its like humans should be living out side.

here is a video of the Oakland shooting it is a little graphic so me careful if you watch it.

Let's get it.

by homestar2281 on May 20, 2009 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that is just insane, how often do we see abuse of power. Wow I’m shocked.

"The 0-2 pitch, swing and a miss! STRUCK HIM OUT! The Philadelphia Phillies are 2008 World Champions of baseball! And let the city celebrate! " - Harry Kalas 1936-2009

by Whodie126 on May 20, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

holy shit

WTF was that? Comparing the Vick incident to that is a bit of a stretch. Im not saying Vick needs continued punishment, I just think he had his shot and blew it, repeatedly. That being said, holy shit, that video is f’ed up! I mean I havent read anything else on it yet, but I cant see what explanation he could possibly have for shooting a man point blank in the head while he was subdued by like 4 officers.

Either way, if we must compare this to Michael Vick, I’ll say the same thing. When this cop is done his jail time, I don’t think he should be allowed to have his old job back either.

"I want to maintain my flexibility."
-Andy Reid

by BroadStBullies on May 20, 2009 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Save the baby humans!

by Andrew B on May 20, 2009 10:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i see your point here, but

comparing abortions to dog fighting is quite a stretch. If you’re going to compare human rights to dog rights, you’ve got to put the in the same situation — and I happen to think that if Mike Vick wasn’t caught fighting dogs but fighting BABIES, it would garner FAR higher media attention than what he did get.

with that said, animal rights activists do tend to get a little ridiculous at times…

by frameoncue on May 20, 2009 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Legal vs. Moral

Just because something is legal or illegal does not mean it is right or wrong.

Plenty of evils are tolerated, and plenty of harmless activities are crimes.

by Andrew B on May 20, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

“Vick did wrong, he paid for it, I hope he learned from it and I hope he hasn’t completely wrecked his life.” This sounds like a non-controversial, completely reasonable position. He’s going to get crucified.

by Tracer Bullet on May 20, 2009 1:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Opportunity

Vick has a wonderful opportunity here. It’s likely that he will do the public a great service by speaking out against dog fighting. which is great!
But in a perfect world i would have him speak out about the lack of rehabilitation in our jail systems. I am in social services. Trust me, insightful people learn from incarceration. But people from low-income hoods may not have had the benefit of acquiring that insight in their lives just yet.
I once asked an uneducated, African-American ~~WOMAN~~, who was recently released from jail, “What have you learned?”
Answer: “I can make a dagger out of toothbrush.” Sad.
No one is helped by that.

by BuddhaBall on May 20, 2009 3:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Oops!

I didn’t mean to cross out the word “WOMAN”. I meant to underline it! Ha Ha! My bad.

by BuddhaBall on May 20, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol i just figured you were implying that she could beat you up

E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!!!!!

by 700 Level on May 20, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i hate to be off topic...

but what other methods would you propose?

E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!!!!!

by 700 Level on May 20, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Long Discussion

My friend, this topic is worthy of long discussion (just like anything worthwhile).

But for the sake of answering your question I’ll say literacy programs.

by BuddhaBall on May 26, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dogfighting

Why is speaking out against dog fighting “great” and a “public service”, but its perfectly okay hunt, trap, raise animals for meat, fur and leather, experiment on them with drugs and cosmetics and chemicals, race them, cage them, etc., etc.?

At least be consistent. If you are going to condemn dog fighting, join PETA, don’t be a hypocrite.

Personally, I see no reason that dog (and cock, and bull) fighting should be illegal while hunting is not. Many of the same people who are so outraged at Vick and dogfighting probably see nothing wrong with bull fighting as practiced in Spain, France, and Mexico.

As for me, I’ll stick to my belief that meat is murder … tasty, tasty murder. And that if Vick wants to run dog fights, more power to him. At least he isn’t out being involved shooting and stabbing people like Pacman Jones and Ray Lewis.

by Andrew B on May 20, 2009 10:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

acceptable hunting

because of extensive hunting earlier in the century, there are currently acceptable hunting practices. For example, deer hunting is necessary in certain areas, as the top predator in that ecosystem, the wolf or coyote, was successfully hunted to ecological extinction, meaning it fails to keep deer populations in check, who now are eating all of the plants in certain areas to extinction. Hunting in this way is acceptable. In other areas, hunting of coyotes has been deemed acceptable because they are invasive (aka, shouldnt be there) and are taking up the spot of the natural predator. Therefore, in order to reinstate the natural predator to its spot in an ecosystem, the species taking its niche must be removed.

by eagleyosh on May 20, 2009 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Top Predator

Human Beings have been the top predator in the American ecosystem for at least 15,000 years.

That misses the point though. If its okay to blow Bambi’s brains out, or force feed calves before slaughtering them for veal, why can’t you have dog fights?

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

deer fighting=necessary…otherwise ecosystem is all screwed up, because nothing else will keep their population size in check.

I know your response will be that dog populations are out of control, why can’t we fight them. Well, we do, in a humane way. Euthanize them. It’s different from what michael vick did…

According to the statement, Vick also was involved with the others in killing six to eight dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions in April. The dogs were executed by drowning or hanging.

When an elderly person’s systems fail, how would you feel if the way about putting them out of their misery was to drown them? I’m not some crazy PETA person. I am, however, disgusted by any person who can hang a dog or drown a dog. it’s cruel, whether it’s being done to a human or a dog.

by eagleyosh on May 21, 2009 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I meant to say “why can’t we fight them if their populations are out of control? Well, we do control their populations, but in a humane way”

by eagleyosh on May 21, 2009 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

An immortal soul

Humans have an immortal soul, while animals simply have an animalistic soul that gives the otherwise inanimate matter of their body the ability to have movement.

Humans and beavers build dams, humans and sheep cut grass, humans and wolves act in coordinated groups and hunt, humans and chimps make and use tools, humans and squirrels gather nuts and store them up for later, but only humans compose symphonies, build cathedrals, write poetry, philosophize, sculpt like Michaelangelo, or paint like Raphael or Van Gogh.

Composed (as opposed to natural) beauty and the creation of imposed order from the world’s chaos, which is seeking after God, is absent from the animal world.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Whoops

Replied to the wrong post.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

humane way?

You can’t be truly “humane” to an animal, because animals are not people.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Uhhh...?

Uhhh…If something in my entry made it sound like I am in support of (deep breath) hunting, trapping, leather, bull fighting, cock fighting, drugs, cosmetics, chemicals, eating meat, or Ray Lewis and Packman stabbing people at a club…

..let me apologize. I must have given the wrong impression. Ha ha!

I guess you’d expect nothing more from a “hypocrite” though. Eh Andrew?

by BuddhaBall on May 26, 2009 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rehabilitation is a joke.

The result of crime should be corporal punishment or monetary restitution. The Quaker theory that people need to sit and ponder their sins has been very definitively proven to not work in terms of making better people.

The prison system is a great waste of money and resources. It treats human beings, made in the image and likeness of God, as dangerous animals who must be kept caged. Moreover, the prisons themselves are breeding grounds of filth and corruption, being infested with drugs, homosexual rape, and guard brutality. How is that congruous to human dignity? How is it possible for a person treated like an animal to not become like one, and forget that they have a soul?

Its long since time to bring back floggings, the stockades, outlawing, more frequent executions, etc., with the punishment fitting the crime.

Its a joke that a person caught in flagrante delicto must have a court trial (is their guilt not obvious if caught in the act?) and cannot have summary justice meted out to them immediately upon capture. The only time that happens is when someone in a protected class like the police or politicians and judges is killed, and the killer is apprehended and generally shot during capture.

Rehabilitation cannot happen in prison, because what prisons really do is harden criminals into resentment at being caught.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with most of what you said, but humans are a type of animal…just a different species. We fall under the kingdom animalia.

by eagleyosh on May 21, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

An immortal soul

Humans have an immortal soul, while animals simply have an animalistic soul that gives the otherwise inanimate matter of their body the ability to have movement.

Composed (as opposed to natural) beauty and the creation of imposed order from the world’s chaos, which is seeking after God, is absent from the animal world.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree or disagree?

The title of your entry seemed to (sarcastically) disagree with my point. But then the actual content of your entry seemed to agree.

by BuddhaBall on May 26, 2009 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Question

Just a question and not a complaint, but do you guys/girls feel that these are in fact McNabb’s words or just a product of his PR rep?

Also, anyone think it’s a bit in bad taste to mention Vick in the same blog as JJ’s battle with cancer? I’m a fan of McNabb so I’m not hating, maybe just nitpicking.

by IWantToFlyLikeAnEagle on May 20, 2009 6:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

yeah

I think Donovan took 2 mins out of his day to wright two small paragraphs

Let's get it.

by homestar2281 on May 20, 2009 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I say ban him from the sport

Hopefully he will have the opportunity to continue his dream of playing professional football.

He had his dream come true, obviously killing dogs was more important than “his dream of playing professional football”

How many times does someone deserve to have their dreams come true?

"I want to maintain my flexibility."
-Andy Reid

by BroadStBullies on May 20, 2009 7:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

apparently that's contingent on

their 40 times

by eagleyosh on May 20, 2009 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i dont get it

"I want to maintain my flexibility."
-Andy Reid

by BroadStBullies on May 20, 2009 9:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

if they can run fast, they get more chances to have their dreams come true

by eagleyosh on May 20, 2009 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can a veterinarian who euthanizes dogs be an NFL football player?

Are some ways of killing dogs okay, but others are not? Why?

by Andrew B on May 20, 2009 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

if you can’t reason why euthanasia of dogs is acceptable but what michael vick did isn’t, then you probably just don’t want to understand.

by eagleyosh on May 20, 2009 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is it okay for the SPCA to euthanize healthy stray dogs and cats?

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

well

it’s between that and them all starving to death in the wild. which is less painful for them?

by eagleyosh on May 21, 2009 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They wouldn't starve to death ...

If BadNewz Kennels could take them in and let them fight.

Honestly, I haven’t seen too many stray animals that starve. There is a lot of food for them out there. They are more pests than in danger of suffering. They are euthanized for being pests.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You are an ASSHOLE

Seriously dude, there is playing devils advocate, and there is just being a downright JITBAG, you are the latter. You are the fucking pest and I wish someone would euthanize you!

"I want to maintain my flexibility."
-Andy Reid

by BroadStBullies on May 23, 2009 8:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really

dude you are a disgrace. this isnt even worth debating, its just shameful to compare killing a dog that you cant fight anymore to a vet putting a sick animal out of its misery.

"I want to maintain my flexibility."
-Andy Reid

by BroadStBullies on May 20, 2009 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why am I a disgrace?

I don’t like dog fighting, and I don’t like dogs as pets. If either one gets you going and provides you entertainment, good for you. its not my thing, but its none of my business either. They are your animals, not mine, and you can do with them as you please as far as I am concerned.

Pet dogs that need euthanized are generally either vicious because of the way the owner raises them, or are dreadfully sick because of being kept artificially alive in pain by veterinary medicine. Dog fighting dogs are also in pain after losing a fight. Either way, the penultimate state is an animal that is suffering and then killed and pet out of its misery.

I fail to see the difference, other than your artificial distinction that keeping animals for your entertainment as pets is GOOD, but keeping animals for your entertainment as fighters is BAD.

Like I said, are you against bullfighting? How about cockfighting? Bear-baiting? How about fox hunting? How about stocking pheasants and deer on a game farm for hunting? How about raising war horses and using them in battle, or driving teams of horses and oxen in the field on 90 degree plus days? How about animal experimentation and vivisection and testing?

Do you have any consistency at all to your position, like the PETA animal-cuddlers, or do you just disapprove uses of animals YOU PERSONALLY don’t like, but whole-heartedly embrace other domination over animals that makes you happy?

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know you are a smart guy and I feel like you might just be playing devils advocate here. There is a clear distinction between necessary euthanasia of an animal and torture.

I had to put my dog down last year because he had a tumor, went blind, and his hips gave out he was 15. I took him to the vet they gave him a shot and he went to sleep. I guess I could have held his head under water or strangled him but I decided not to go that route because I have a soul.

I also happen to be a hunter, but I only kill for food not for sport. The main difference here isn’t that killing of animals its the way in which they were killed. I don’t care animal, or human, or alien, or whatever torture is fucked up.

"The 0-2 pitch, swing and a miss! STRUCK HIM OUT! The Philadelphia Phillies are 2008 World Champions of baseball! And let the city celebrate! " - Harry Kalas 1936-2009

by Whodie126 on May 21, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

nicely put

rec’d

"I want to maintain my flexibility."
-Andy Reid

by BroadStBullies on May 21, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fallen nature is cruel

You can’t “torture” an animal, when in the natural world, animals rip each other limb from limb for dinner or fun, or peck each other’s eyes out to steal their nest, or destory and/or eat each other’s eggs. To “torture” an animal is to give it the expected end a superior animal in the food chain would have given it anyway.

This falls in line with the notion of being INHUMANE to an animal. You cannot, by definition, be inHUMANe to an animal, only a human being. Animals are not people, so they cannot suffer from inhuman treatment.

Killing an animal that has been kept or raised by humans is to simply give it the natural end it would have suffered anyway had there been no humans around.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can’t be inhumane because they’re animals? Oh, please. We’re animals. We’re just too prideful to admit it.

Can’t torture an animal? Per Merriam-Webster.com:
Main Entry:
    1tor·ture Listen to the pronunciation of 1torture
Pronunciation:
    \ˈtȯr-chər\
Function:
    noun

1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony b: something that causes agony or pain
2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure
3: distortion or overrefinement of a meaning or an argument : straining

What does drowning, hanging, being force to fight to the death for pleasure all have in common?

And since when do dogs all die by being ripped limb-to-limb? Or all animals for that matter?

Moo.

by Imp on May 21, 2009 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Humans

People are animals and not humans only in the sense that Venus Flytraps are animals and not plants. In other words, they kind of look and act the same, but really deep down they are quite different.

As to torture, torture is not only physical anguish but also the combination of mental anguish with it. Its insulting to human victims of torture to compare their suffering to anything an animal undergoes at the hands of humans. An animal does not have a rational soul, so it cannot suffer mental anguish.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

so crucifying a cat isn’t as bad as crucifying a human because it’s a cat? I realize that’s what you believe, and I’m not going to attack. I will, however, say that every organism has a will to survive. If you choke a dog, it knows that’s bad, just as if you choke a human, it knows it’s bad. Torture is torture. Just because animals that aren’t humans can’t comprehend what is happening when they are tortured, to me does not mean that they don’t understand what’s happening. The sensory neurons of a dog act in the same way that the sensory neurons of a human do, to my knowledge.

I feel like we’re looking at it in two ways. So far, I’ve viewed it in the sense that humans are a form of animal, and torturing any animal for the sake of torturing it or financial gain is as terrible as it would be to torture a human. From what I can tell, your belief is that humans were created in the image of God. From what I’ve learned in my religious schooling is that God created all life on earth. It then stands to reason that what he does not want to happen to humans, he would not want to happen to his other creations, i.e. animals. I could be offbase, and if I am, tell me so. I feel discussing God on a football forum could be a touchy subject, so if I said anything wrong/offensive, I apologize, it wasn’t my intent. Just trying to continue the debate.

by eagleyosh on May 21, 2009 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The will to live in an animal is its non-rational soul in action. If anything loses its will to live, it will die, and return to being inanimate matter, like rocks and dirt and water.

“From what I’ve learned in my religious schooling is that God created all life on earth. It then stands to reason that what he does not want to happen to humans, he would not want to happen to his other creations, i.e. animals.”

(1) God doesn’t want us to eat other people.
(2) What God does not want to happen to humans, he would not want to happen to his other creations.
(3) Therefore God does not want us to eat animals.

We could carry that syllogism out in many ways that make the statement seem quite silly. Agree?

The wrongness of dogfighting, as opposed to, say, deer hunting, or beaver trapping, or cattle raising, is really, in the end, just a matter of personal opinion and taste. The Chinese and other foreigners actually raise and eat dogs as food, which is repulsive to must westerners, along with eating cats and horses (but westerners are quite happy to eat Oxen – why are Oxen edible, but horses disgusting, when turned into food?) Is raising, killing, and eating dogs better than what Vick did? Are they wrong to eat dogs? The Hindus think we are wrong to eat cows, and the Muslims and Jews think Christians wrong for eating pork. Is there any obvious way of saying who is right? I don’t see it. Perhaps best then, to stick to St. Augustine’s dictum – when in Rome, do as the Romans do.

You will never offend me discussing God, or politics, or anything else. I’m not touchy.

by Andrew B on May 22, 2009 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bad comparison with Venus Flytrap and humans. The Flytrap, aka D. Muscipula fall under the Kingdom of Plantae (a plant). Humans, aka Homo Sapiens, fall under the Kingdom of Animalia (an animal).
Scientific classification in case you don’t understand.

A “ration soul”? Excuse my French, but fuck that. Step on a cat tail and it’ll scream. Physically hurt any animal, it’ll cry out in pain. No different from any human being. So how it is not mental anguish? Because of some idiotic “soul” idea?

Moo.

by Imp on May 22, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let me know when cats start holding court to mete out punishments to malefactors among the genus felix.

Then we can start comparing pain in an animal to pain in a human.

by Andrew B on May 22, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cats don’t hold courts..ok…
Cats aren’t humans…ok…

Cats have nerves and cry out in pain when hurt. I can’t see what is so different from a cat pain to a human pain.

Moo.

by Imp on May 22, 2009 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ultimately, I agree with 700 Level

Vick’s in trouble for killing 50 dogs, which the SPCA does every day.

But if he had impregnated 50 woman and paid for them to abort the baby, nobody would have blinked an eye at him legally, and he’d still be the QB of the Atlanta Falcons.

Modern humanity’s priorities are SO screwed up.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Its also sad ...

… that we treat our pets better than we treat the mentally deficient homeless people who live in Center City. I couldn’t believe it when I went to my dentist in Chestnut Hill a few years ago, and realized the gourmet bakery below his office was only serving dog treats, and that they cost as much as luxury baked goods for people from some place like Isgro’s or Bredenbeck’s.

Our dogs and cats are lavished with money and attention and shelter and medical care, but hurting people who cannot help themselves are ignored and maltreated and turned out into the cold.

Its like the Dr. Z fundraiser that the football world is all patting themselves on the back for hosting. How wonderful that a bunch of millionaires are throwing a few pennies towards Dr. Z! But really, these same people could give what Dr. Z needs without any of the public show many times over without ever crimping their own over lavish lifestyles. But you’ll never see that happening.

We moderns are just f***ed up.

by Andrew B on May 21, 2009 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs