What's the Real Agenda of Behind Support for Mike Vick and Justification of Dog Fighting?

I'm taking a short break from training for the NASCAR vs. IndyCar rumble with Dave in Indy and doing my first non-NASCAR specific post.

But first, I've got a question for my fellow NASCAR fans....

Imagine for a second that it was your favorite driver whose name was in the dog fighting indictment. Junior, Gordon, Stewart, Kahne, Montoya, Hamlin, Johnson, Burton or whoever. Would you be out there defending him and justifying or minimizing dog fighting?

Just curious.

In spite of the fact that Dave in Indy and I don't see eye to on a number of motorsports topics, we're in 100% in agreement that the entire idea of "innocent until proven guilty" has been trashed in this country and that only being indicted means you are still innocent.

Then the defenders of Vick are going much further than "let him have his day in court."

Sure, they start off with that. Then they start saying the case is weak and the evidence is just based on testimony by snitches who are criminals.

Well, the case against Tim Donaghy for fixing NBA points and spreads is almost certainly based on criminal snitch testimony. How come the same people defending Vick aren't fighting for Donaghy as well?

What the Vick defenders do next, after they attack the case for being weak is really stunning to me.

First, they completely ignore the gambling aspect of the case. Then many of the Vick defenders begin justifying and minimizing the dog fighting.

So I've got to ask the Vick defenders a question. What is your real agenda?

Obviously, you don't care that much when someone like Donaghy is treated like he is "guilty until proven innocent". If you did, you would be out in front fighting for him.

Are you that rabid a fan of the Falcons or Virginia Tech that this is a homer thing? Even an area code 757 thing?

Is this about race loyalty of some kind?

Do you actually participate in dog fighting yourself and just don't have the stones to say it?

At this point, Vick and Donaghy are both innocent. Everyone has been accused of something they didn't do before. Indicted doesn't mean they did it.

Hypothetically, let's say they both did do it (regardless of whether either is ever convicted of anything -- I'm talking about what really happened, not what the courts say). There have been people who have engaged in dog fighting and there have been point shaving scandals before.

In my mind, someone who gets off on dog fighting is a much worse human being than someone who gets caught up in a situation and engages in a crime about money and addiction.

That doesn't mean I'm defending or minimizing fixing games or being involved with organized crime. I'm saying the kind of sociopath who can get off on stealing, torturing and slaughtering house pets is much worse.