What Michelle Beadle Can't Say . . .

The views stated within this post aren't endorsed by Michelle Beadle, ESPN, ABC, Disney or any of their affiliates . . . so we don't need anyone trying to get anyone fired or suspended!!

I'm a dedicated fan to the show SportsNation and admire how Beadle and Colin Cowherd stray away from the usual "have to say just the right thing" comments sport media has taken of late, and express their actual opinions in a controlled manner unlike Skip Bayless and Jim Rome. And for people to be attacking Beadle, and calling her a racist because of her personal view of Michael Vick and his well known "previous" lifestyle, is asinine.  She hasn't taking anything away from his production and has said numerous times that his play is unarguably making a difference, but she can not give him any praise as a person, because as a person he sucks.  What he did and was involved in, is beyond forgiveness. And Beadle acknowledges this on air, but due to the sensitivity of our country she's hampered by what she may actually want to say and may not have enough air time to get her whole point across.  It truly has nothing to do with being an animal lover, it has to do with thinking your life is more important then a dog, cat, or any other animal - this isn't just a Vick issue but human issue.  Vick and whom ever else was involved should still be in jail and should have been trailed as if they murdered humans.  Why is that just because dogs were the victims here and their lives lost that the crime is seen as less of an offense - life was lost nonetheless was it not?!  Within the animal kingdom, there isn't murder, there's only protection of young, food, territory and pack dominance...but they don't kill just to kill, or to rid their self of another creature.  We as humans do that, yet we're supposed to be the higher intelligence, civilized, know all be all powers that be on this planet and somehow we can't figure out that killing each other is just the opposite of all of those things; the animals figured it out.  If it's not out right self defense, then what's the need of a human taking a life, of man or animal.  There's several cultures that encourage the abuse or usage of animals within numerous things such as dog fighting, there's also cock fighting, the running of the bulls, rodeos, horse racing (a horse being wiped is abuse), bullfighting, etc..there's an abundance of activities we put animals through that I'm sure if it were up to them, they'd choose not to do.  And those asinine people trying to label Beadle as a racist, should also notice that the subculture of dog fighting isn't just prominent within the Black community because is rampant within the Hispanic and Southern White cultures as well, it's just well known that Blacks are more likely to use pit bulls or bull dogs in dog fights.  Many also contend Vick wasn't responsible.  It was his property, his money, his friends and family, and if he didn't know then it was his responsibility to know what was going on under his umbrella of his circle around him.  Just as someone who dies from a gun shot via a drive-by or crossfire, car crash caused by a drunk driver or someone talking on the phone or texting while driving . . . those innocent people can't be brought back to life, and neither can those dogs.  And this isn't just towards Vick, but anyone who partakes in the unnecessary devastation of life, especially life that doesn't have a voice...but is that the reason why people feel it's not a big deal or shouldn't be on the same level as murdering a human, because they don't communicate with writing and linguistic language as we do.  And if that is your reason, then you're a moron who needs to be moved to the Phantom Zone.  Along with Vick who thinks he deserves the privilege of love from a dog ever again...if you want love, get a Chia Pet.

And just for the record, we're NOT a country of forgiveness and second chance. We're a country of, if you can make me money now then I'll help blur your past, ignore and pretend your wrong doings didn't happen, country. If his stats or play weren't what they are right now, do you actually think the NFL and car dealerships would be embracing him?!?


Dear Roger Goodell, you have more problems with concussions and a possible work stoppage with the NFL.


...I'd like to have Vick at a table in a discussion with Beadle, Cesar Millan, and myself.  Three people who'll actually deal with him in a conversation, not sideline reporters who only have 45 seconds after a game or a school room full of kids who are just happy they're in the same room with a NFL player.

Who Gets To Decide... Their Life?

Took a few weeks off, had to adjust to the disappointment of the Phillies losing the NLCS to the Giants, which will be discussed in a upcoming blog post, but onto the matter at hand.....

Watched, "You Don't Know Jack", yesterday, I highly recommend it, it's a good film. That's not surprising because it stars Al Pacino, John Goodman, Susan Sarandon and Danny Huston; it's a glimpse at the life & work of Jack Kevorkian. Personally, I've never seen what he does or advocates as a crime, wrong, unnecessary action or power trip. And this became world news in the 90's when I was only 9-17 years of age, and all I thought was he's a man trying to help not destroy. If anything, he was trying to destroy days of living not being able to live.

He was helping those who were suffering end their suffering, whom are others to determine they're not to decide their own fate. Doctors and families decide the same exact thing, when removing someone from a feeding tube or oxygen machine and technically with the death penalty (which I'm so for and we need to use more). And those people are usually not privy to what's going on, well except the bastard in the chair or gas chamber...at least his patients had the wherewithal to acknowledge they wanted to release their families from the burden of various duties and finances. Now obviously, not ever Dick, Tom & Jane should be allowed to decide to end their life by medical assistance, but if they're suffering from an incurable diease that ravages the body and brain; and they're able to without a doubt declare this is what they want to be done then it should be done. Should be done without prejudice or threat of imprisonment to the individual(s) who are willing to assist them. No nothing like a noose or blunt object should be used, it should be carried out painless way, if there truly is such a thing. Your body may not feel anything, but your mind will and isn't that the real justice he's providing, mental relief as well. We witness paralyzed individuals live life to the fullest all the time but they may have the mental strength to carry on even though they can't walk away, but they feel no pain but most likely mental angst. As where someone who has ALS, Parkinson's or even advanced stages of HIV/AIDS or a form of cancer, they feel the life force slip away each and everyday. Now some things may happen due to certain life decisions like unprotected sex, but in the end, it's still their decision.

Yet, people want to put a moral stamp or religious stance against it when it has nothing to do with either! No one wants to die, but who wants to live years of agony and suffering of not only their self but to witness it basically kill their families from the outside in. And I'm not making this a soapbox situation to argue against moral strict or religious people, I totally understand where they're coming from. But they should try to see where those who's decision it is in the first place, try to see where they're coming from. And wouldn't the only opinions that really matter be those, of those who he assisted and their families who were among those deciding too, and many of the people who contacted him were the wife, husband, brother, sister or child of the person in pain - they wanted their relative to have the release just as much as the pained one. Really, in the end, once again it comes down to money. Health providers, health carriers, hospitals and doctors are in it for the money. Relieving you of your pain doesn't pay like keeping you around. Now obviously not the whole industry feels this way or works this way, but there's no money in death only for the funeral director and he only gets paid once. And from what's been made public, I don't believe he ever charged a dime to assist anyone.

Now this is simplistic, but it could help and is a start:
Individual must be diagnosed and receive 2nd/3rd opinions on their "incurable" disease. There should be a disease scale of determination, so no one who's having joint problems, possibility of blindness or deafness be allowed to jump in the grave - not saying those people wouldn't be in some forms of pain but it should be something that will not only change your life and mental stability, the lives of others as well but also be something that would cripple your finances, demand you almost never be alone, and probably prevent you from leading some sort of life of enjoyment. They must also go through a minimal psychological review to determine if they're just a manic depressive or sane and comprehensive of their actions/decision. And if their spouse or life partner aren't available, then their children, sibling or medical facility should be apart of the decision or interviewed on their psychological frame of mind and the everyday life of the person being assisted. And of course, a legal document should be in place.

. . . . . . this world has far too many other issues at hand, to bicker over someone trying to leave it without agonizing pain and in some last form of peace.