Ode to Michael Vick and a Savage Breed of Dog; Columnist Unleashes

It's Rah-Rah Season!
Lehigh Valley, PA - Every now and again, a truly sparkling editorial or column comes along with torturous humor.1 The most recent example comes from columnist Paul Carpenter of The Morning Call, who swipes a heavy blow at Michael Vick and his forever association to a breed of dog that has "recently enjoyed a series of triumphs over adversaries" in the region, including the brutal killing of Carmen Ramos -- a "splendid display of teamwork" by five pit bulls.

The frenzy of a new NFL season is upon us; no sense feigning delight.

Carpenter weaves other whoppers into the piece as well, citing specific examples of how humane groups responded to other destructive pit bull maulings in the area. For instance, after three pit bulls "teamed up to blitz" Schenectady resident Shirleen Lucas, the Mohawk Humane Society responded by "announcing it was seeking a $25,000 grant to work on reversing the 'bad rep' of pit bulls." (Stop drinking Pepsi readers and skip the nearest Pittie-Palooza).

Similarly, when a pit bull attacked the carriage horse, Melissa Levy, executive director of the Philadelphia Animal Welfare Society, said the dog is "actually a sweetheart." It must be that the horse was asking for it by cheering for the St. Louis Rams.
In any case, it seems the animal rights crowd holds some animals -- Chihuahuas and horses, for example -- in lower regard than pit bulls, and humans don't count at all, especially not the small children who seem to be a favorite target of the sweethearts.
The rash of recent pit bull attacks coincides with the football frenzy swirling around Vick, who has been elevated to heroic role-model status by Eagles owner Jeff Lurie. The only thing that matters to Lurie and Eagles fans is whether Vick can help bring victory over the Rams on Sunday. (Paul Carpenter, The Morning Call)

All through the column, Carpenter keeps the NFL theme alive and his disdain for Michael Vick -- aka the classy "Ron Mexico." Who knows, the 2011-2012 season may be the one where Vick finally gets a new dog? Meanwhile, all the "rehab" work on his famed Vicktory dogs has achieved dismal results. We reported last November that after 35 months of rehabilitation, only three of the 22 dogs received by Best Friends had been adopted into family homes.

Kudos and a rah-rah to Paul Carpenter!

1Other biting pieces have been penned by Kerry Dougherty, Andrew Holota, Michael Felger, Lauren Ritchie and the Lynn Journal Staff.

9 thoughts on “Ode to Michael Vick and a Savage Breed of Dog; Columnist Unleashes”

i absolutely adore paul carpenter. he has no qualms about taking on the nutters and their crazy propaganda.

here's my favorite.

I've never had such a good read…i want a pit nutter to tell him he needs to educate himself and know the facts….he was so right-on – what a delight to read a real journalist for a change!!!

Great article, but I wish the term "animal rights" was not being used to describe the pit bull advocates. I don't want the organizations devoted to helping factory farm animals, save wildlife habitat, etc. to be undermined by these people who don't care about anything but pit bulls.

Great journalism!

You bring up a good point nlbchi, but it is a tough call on his part. Should he have said animal welfare groups? Perhaps he should have said humane groups? Most people do not understand the difference between animal welfare and animal rights groups. The ones that do likely think the latter are more radical. But let's not leave out no-kill groups, because they at times claim to be both. Essentially, some animal rights groups oppose pit bull laws (including mandatory spay/neuter laws); most animal welfare and humane groups oppose them (at least publicly) and ALL no-kill groups oppose them. Blogger Mark Robison is a fine example of a so-called animal rights activist bent on protecting the reputation of pit bulls at the cost of tarnishing fellow animal lovers!

I agree, Nlbchi. It bothers me that the pro-fighting dog lobby is being identified as animal rights folks–but it bothers me even more that some of my colleagues in the animal rights movement have bought in to the arguments proferred by pit bull advocates and breeders.

Seeking the perpetuation of aggressive animals primarily bred to attack and maul other animals (including human animals!) is certainly not an animal rights position.

Pit bull pushers are completely ownership rights activists in line with all breeders.

They freely use and muddle animal rights and animal welfare arguments even though those arguments are sometimes contradictory, but it is just bullshit to cloud their drive to advocate for complete freedom to own pit bulls no matter what.

It is disgusting that most (but not all) animal rights and animal welfare groups don't see this and don't object.

The absolute abomination is that they also use HUMAN RIGHTS arguments and are getting away with that as well.

These pit bull pushers are NOTHING BUT ANIMAL OWNERSHIP RIGHTS ACTIVISTS.

This must be recognized and made clear at each opportunity.

That said, KUDOS AND RAH-RAH TO PAUL CARPENTER!!!!!

I actually saw an episode of "Animal Cops Huston" last week where the director of the animal shelter explained that all the pit bulls confiscated from a dog fight bust had to be put down because dogs raised for fighting are not a good fit as a family pet and should not be placed for adoption. I checked to see what year that episode was produced and it was 2010. You rarely hear anyone dare to admit that anymore. They should have admitted it with the animals Vick tortured.

I ventured over to game-dog tonight because I had not been in so long. I was struck by a top-level thread, though this particular post was written in 2009.

Nell_Bell
Premium Member
Re: Dangerous dog data base
What I don't get is that if animals are property, how is biting another animal 'dangerous'?
http://www.game-dog.com/showthread.php?t=31840

This is the mentality that many humane, animal welfare and animal rights groups side with in their battle to "protect the pit bull breed." How persons in these groups sleep at night is beyond me.

It's like MADD campaigning for pimps who "promise" to report alcohol smelling Johns engaging in illegal prostitution in cars (with minors to boot!) without a "finders fee" for the information.

A BIZARRE union indeed!

Comments are closed.

Please review our comment policy.

dawn james on September 8, 2011 at 6:21 pm said:
i absolutely adore paul carpenter. he has no qualms about taking on the nutters and their crazy propaganda.
here's my favorite.
Decatur AL livin nt to 4 pits on September 8, 2011 at 10:32 pm said:
I've never had such a good read…i want a pit nutter to tell him he needs to educate himself and know the facts….he was so right-on – what a delight to read a real journalist for a change!!!
nlbchi on September 9, 2011 at 5:20 pm said:
Great article, but I wish the term "animal rights" was not being used to describe the pit bull advocates. I don't want the organizations devoted to helping factory farm animals, save wildlife habitat, etc. to be undermined by these people who don't care about anything but pit bulls.
Jake on September 9, 2011 at 11:51 pm said:
Great journalism!
maultalk on September 10, 2011 at 2:53 am said:
You bring up a good point nlbchi, but it is a tough call on his part. Should he have said animal welfare groups? Perhaps he should have said humane groups? Most people do not understand the difference between animal welfare and animal rights groups. The ones that do likely think the latter are more radical. But let's not leave out no-kill groups, because they at times claim to be both. Essentially, some animal rights groups oppose pit bull laws (including mandatory spay/neuter laws); most animal welfare and humane groups oppose them (at least publicly) and ALL no-kill groups oppose them. Blogger Mark Robison is a fine example of a so-called animal rights activist bent on protecting the reputation of pit bulls at the cost of tarnishing fellow animal lovers!
Packhorse on September 10, 2011 at 3:09 pm said:
I agree, Nlbchi. It bothers me that the pro-fighting dog lobby is being identified as animal rights folks–but it bothers me even more that some of my colleagues in the animal rights movement have bought in to the arguments proferred by pit bull advocates and breeders.
Seeking the perpetuation of aggressive animals primarily bred to attack and maul other animals (including human animals!) is certainly not an animal rights position.
snack sized dog on September 11, 2011 at 4:47 am said:
Pit bull pushers are completely ownership rights activists in line with all breeders.
They freely use and muddle animal rights and animal welfare arguments even though those arguments are sometimes contradictory, but it is just bullshit to cloud their drive to advocate for complete freedom to own pit bulls no matter what.
It is disgusting that most (but not all) animal rights and animal welfare groups don't see this and don't object.
The absolute abomination is that they also use HUMAN RIGHTS arguments and are getting away with that as well.
These pit bull pushers are NOTHING BUT ANIMAL OWNERSHIP RIGHTS ACTIVISTS.
This must be recognized and made clear at each opportunity.
That said, KUDOS AND RAH-RAH TO PAUL CARPENTER!!!!!
OT on September 12, 2011 at 8:35 pm said:
I actually saw an episode of "Animal Cops Huston" last week where the director of the animal shelter explained that all the pit bulls confiscated from a dog fight bust had to be put down because dogs raised for fighting are not a good fit as a family pet and should not be placed for adoption. I checked to see what year that episode was produced and it was 2010. You rarely hear anyone dare to admit that anymore. They should have admitted it with the animals Vick tortured.
maultalk on September 13, 2011 at 8:11 am said:
I ventured over to game-dog tonight because I had not been in so long. I was struck by a top-level thread, though this particular post was written in 2009.
Nell_Bell
Premium Member
Re: Dangerous dog data base
What I don't get is that if animals are property, how is biting another animal 'dangerous'?
http://www.game-dog.com/showthread.php?t=31840
This is the mentality that many humane, animal welfare and animal rights groups side with in their battle to "protect the pit bull breed." How persons in these groups sleep at night is beyond me.
It's like MADD campaigning for pimps who "promise" to report alcohol smelling Johns engaging in illegal prostitution in cars (with minors to boot!) without a "finders fee" for the information.
A BIZARRE union indeed!