If Michael Vick Is In Prison, Why Isn't President Bush?
Comparisons between species are difficult, but I'm going to assume you agree that a human life is much more important than a dog's. After all, we kill dogs everyday in the pound, right? Then there's the question of free will. Michael Vick's dogs had no choice. That compares somewhat to our young people after they enter the military. It's all about following orders, isn't it? So let's see what Michael Vick did, compared to George Bush:
Michael set up a criminal enterprise, an illegal fighting operation. He mistreated dogs, sometimes to death, and he lied about what he was doing. George Bush set up a criminal enterprise called a preemptive strike. Even Neo-Cons like Richard Perle now admit the invasion of Iraq was a violation of international law. In doing this George and his cohorts lied repeatedly to the American People, and they continue to lie about aspects of it. President Bush also mistreated human beings under his control. He lied about torturing them, but his own CIA director admits that wasn't true, although he cites only 3 instances when waterboarding was used. He is no doubt lying about that number. "Taxi to the Dark Side" chronicles our use of torture in Iraq. The title refers to a taxi driver there whose official cause of death was listed as homicide while imprisoned by coalition forces.
Incidentally, I'm not blaming our soldiers for what happened in Iraq - so don't even go there. I believe Iraq was a crime against our men and women in uniform, just as it was a crime against Iraq itself. The Dark Side reference in the title is the place Dick Cheney said we would have to go, and believe me, he took us there.
Michael Vick did his illegal gambling for financial gain. You could argue that President Bush has gambled with the future of America and the world. Worse than what Michael Vick did, President Bush has gambled with our national soul. And just ask Halliburton or EXXON if there's been financial gain involved. President Bush would claim he acted in the interests of national security, and he has a slight point. I guess you could argue that Iraq was more of a threat to our national security than Michael Vick's pit bulls. But not that much more. The national security thing is just more spin.
The end result in Michael Vick's crime was the death of dozens of dogs. In President Bush's case, the latest scientific survey estimates one million dead Iraqis, plus thousands of American soldiers killed or wounded. In this there is absolutely no comparison. President Bush is a million times more of a criminal than Michael Vick is on his worst day.
As with most scoundrels, President Bush hides behind religion and patriotism so he no doubt claims Jesus wanted him to do all this. Well, look at the Bible's opinion of dogs - not very flattering.
Matthew 7:6 "Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces." Or as to who will get into God's kingdom from Revelation 22:15, "For without are dogs and sorcerers and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie."
In short, Michael Vick can make a solid Biblical argument for what he did - many times more solid than President Bush's. President Bush doesn't even make it past, "Thou shalt not kill."
Am I arguing that Michael Vick should be pardoned and let out of prison? No, what he did was sick enough to merit some time. But if Michael Vick ends up serving 18 months, President Bush should serve 18 centuries. And those aren't dog years, either.