Michael Vick is on the cover of Sports Illustrated again

When I was at Atlantic News this week I saw Michael Vick was on the cover of Sports Illustrated - so I had to stop and have a look - and it's funny that the the first line in the article is "Admit it: You can't turn away." You can read the article online because I think that the magazine already is off the newstands - it seems like the magazine changes almost daily - I think it may be a weekly magazine.

The article's title is - "Is It O.k. To Cheer?" - and it's of course all about Michael Vick's journey back to the NFL and specifically the spectacular time he's having this year with the Philadelphia Eagles - and whether or not his comeback is going to stick, and he can truly become the star that he originally seemed destined to be.

In one part it says "The world knows all the bad things Vick has done, yet he's still alive, admired, still able to make a living and play a game he loves. But he tells himself that he's one misstep away from losing it all. Friends say he seems "free" for the first time, unburdened by the distractions of hangers-on and activities he couldn't resist, but there's also a liberation that comes when the worst has come and gone."

I would say that's saying the journalist thinks that Michael Vick is pretty positive that his comeback is going well.

Should a person have to keep atoning for their past mistakes though? Should Michael Vick not be allowed to succeed in the NFL because of the fact that he personally electrocuted and hanged dogs?

I personally think that he has never took responsibility for what he did - he has never acknowledged or gone back to any of the individual "Vick" dogs and looked them in the eyes and said he was "sorry" if you know what I mean.

He's teamed up with Wayne Pacelle and HSUS and gone to schools and said "dog fighting is bad, don't do it" - but he's never gone back to the dogs that he personally tortured and petted them and fed them a dog treat and looked at them and said - "you know what? That is a beautiful dog that deserves to sleep on someone's bed at night and not be chewed to death by another dog".

If he was to do that - in a public way - then I think there are 1,000's of dog owners out there who would immediately forgive him. And I would be one of them.

There's an article in the LA Times about one of the Vick dogs named Mel - who was used as a bait dogs on the Vick compound - he's been adopted out to a home, and he still suffers from serious emotional problems - and if Michael Vick went to visit him and saw the toll that his business did on that one dog - and really took ownership - of even that one dog's problems - if he would even go to that one family's house and look at Mel and say "wow, I can now see that what I was doing really hurt those dogs" - then I think a lot of people would forgive him.

And I have to say - then THOSE people would be able to get on with THEIR lives. It's not just Michael Vick who has to get on with his life - there's 1,000's of dog owners who can't let Michael Vick go - and they're holding back on their own lives too.

Another person who has a bad attitude about this is Chris Rock. He has been very vocal about Michael Vick - and he has turned it into a "race issue" - that Michael Vick is having all these problems because he's "black". He's gone on several talk shows and talked about this - and it has me very concerned, because ultimately I don't think it's a race issue - lots of dog fighters are caught and brought to justice and they are as white as white can be.

There's people down in the United States who consider dog fighting to be part of the black "culture" - and that's why Michael Vick didn't think there was anything wrong with fighting dogs - and that is very sad.

Chris Rock also doesn't think there's anything different between killing dogs in dog fighting and a hunter killing a moose or a deer when they're out hunting.

I have an answer for that though - there is a big difference between a dog fighter allowing a dog to kill another dog over several hours in a fight, or electrocuting a dog - and a hunter shooting a deer - one is called "animal cruelty" - which is a crime, and the other one is done quickly and painlessly - and is the same thing (one would hope) - as is done in an aboittoir where animals are killed for food.

So there is a HUGE difference between dog fighting and hunting, Chris Rock. And someone needs to tell him that. I am sure that he eats meat.

He also has a video about "black culture" where he actually says that "you can rape my dogs - but don't rape my children - I'll kill you if you rape my children".

When he says that he is making light of animal cruelty to such an extent - that I feel sorry for any animal he ever owns. Does he even consider that they're alive?

Prior to seeing the video where he talks about black culture and condoning raping his dog - I had been willing to give Chris Rock the benefit of the doubt - his rant on Jay Leno was almost forgivable because he had been joking that "dogs have never been good to black people" - intimating that white people have always used dogs to control black people - and even when he got off the plane from Jamaica a few days previous and had a little bit of "weed" in his bag - right there beside him was a dog trying to bring him down.

I'd like to submit that anybody carrying a little bit of "weed" from Jamaica would be frisked by a dog in an airport today though, Chris. "Snitch-ass dog"...

His rant was outrageous enough that it was still funny - and when he said that "pit bull isn't even a real dog" - well, that's true - that's what we're always hollering when we talk about pit bulls isn't it?

But the video below is something else entirely. And it's too bad. Animal cruelty isn't about black culture, fame, but it certainly is about how you raise your children - and I wonder what he's teaching his daughters about kindness to animals and treating every species on this earth the same with compassion and love and that we're all equal and deserve the right to love and life and not to be "raped" or electrocuted - and at the very least a quick death - which is actually something we don't even give ourselves - but at least we do give our companion animals when they've had a good long life.