Which is worse? - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

SeattleUte · 09-04-2007, 02:40 AM

Sen. Craig or Michael Vick?

YOhio · 09-04-2007, 02:54 AM

Senator Craig is a sad byproduct of a representative government. He's held political office since he was 29 years old and has never held a real job. Although he was tasked with creating law, he hadn't a clue how to confront the justice system. A small-time airport police officer manipulated a U.S. Senator into pleading guilty to a bogus charge.

Michael Vick is a sad byproduct of professional athletics. Thrown into the limelight at an early age, he was ill prepared to handle the attention and money thrown at him. His friends were all bad influences and he was insulated from consequences by his team and handlers. When his choices were finally to poor to defend, he was hung out to dry.

They're both pathetic in their own unique way. The people who have enabled them share in the blame.

DirtyHippieUTE · 09-04-2007, 02:57 AM

Sen. Craig... If it's true (I think it is)...

He had a nasty habit of taking a very intolerant stance on gay issues. Michale Vick never wrote laws that hurt dog owners.

non sequitur · 09-04-2007, 03:48 AM

If Larry Craig had propositioned a woman, would anybody care?

YOhio · 09-04-2007, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by non sequitur

If Larry Craig had propositioned a woman, would anybody care?

It would be really odd that he was hanging out in the ladies restroom.

SeattleUte · 09-04-2007, 04:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by non sequitur

If Larry Craig had propositioned a woman, would anybody care?

I hate social convervatism. Particularly on social issues, I'm libertarian. I don't care that he propositoined a man. What's evil about Craig is he was exremely anti-gay rights as a law maker even while his extreme homosexual repression led him to engage in anonymous bathroom sex. He's also a liar, whereas Vick has come clean. Craig has hurt people, whereas Vick hurt dogs. But Vick killed and tortured dogs. Which is worse? I don't know. Clearly they're both reprehensible. They're both evil and deserved to be completely destroyed.

On a related note, local laws that prohibit lewd public behavior exist for good reason. I don't think enforcing them should be cops' highest priority, but nor should they exist only in word. These people need to be made to get hotel rooms.

View Poll Results: Which is worse?
Sen. Craig	5	31.25%
Michael Vick	11	68.75%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

09-04-2007, 02:40 AM	#1
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	Which is worse? Sen. Craig or Michael Vick? __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

09-04-2007, 02:57 AM	#3
DirtyHippieUTE Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Moscow, ID Posts: 1,151	Sen. Craig... If it's true (I think it is)... He had a nasty habit of taking a very intolerant stance on gay issues. Michale Vick never wrote laws that hurt dog owners. __________________ I reject your reality and substitute my own...

09-04-2007, 03:48 AM	#4
non sequitur Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,964	If Larry Craig had propositioned a woman, would anybody care? __________________ ...You've been under attack for days, there's a soldier down, he's wounded, gangrene's setting in, 'Who's used all the penicillin?' 'Oh, Mark Paxson sir, he's got knob rot off of some tart.'" - Gareth Keenan

09-04-2007, 02:54 AM	#2
YOhio AKA SeattleNewt Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 7,055	Senator Craig is a sad byproduct of a representative government. He's held political office since he was 29 years old and has never held a real job. Although he was tasked with creating law, he hadn't a clue how to confront the justice system. A small-time airport police officer manipulated a U.S. Senator into pleading guilty to a bogus charge. Michael Vick is a sad byproduct of professional athletics. Thrown into the limelight at an early age, he was ill prepared to handle the attention and money thrown at him. His friends were all bad influences and he was insulated from consequences by his team and handlers. When his choices were finally to poor to defend, he was hung out to dry. They're both pathetic in their own unique way. The people who have enabled them share in the blame.