Skip to comments.Nike Resigns Michael Vick: Tell Them What You Think Of That
Posted on 09/30/2009 7:21:57 PM PDT by blake6900
Nike has announced they've resigned Michael Vick to an advertising contract. You can tell them what you think of that by clicking here
OK, I would lock a guy up for stealing someone’s dog and I would impose a greater penalty for stealing and harming a dog.
However, your post did not convince me that Vick stole anyone’s dog.
Further,most of the people who want Vick ruined for life or even posted things at the time that he should be killed the way the dogs were, were not basing that on theft of family pets. They heard what was done to the fighting dogs and that was the reaction.
Vick did go to jail and that is more than enough for me in this case. Would I hire him for my company spokesman? Nope. But it sounds like it’s just a deal to wear their stuff.
So, as long as you torture and kill you’re own dogs, it’s not criminal....But, torture and kill your neighbor’s ,..well, that’s a different story.
Beam me up...
His "business associates" did it with his knowledge. He also admitted, in his plea agreement, that together with his co-defendants, he killed approximately 6-8 dogs that did not perform well. Vick admitted to killing the dogs by various methods, including including hanging and drowning".
But it sounds like its just a deal to wear their stuff.
...and by doing so, entice others to purchase their stuff. I simply said, "I won't" and somehow that got turned into an allegation that I wanted Michael Vick killed or other such nonsense.
I don't like Vick for what he did, I won't forget it and I won't move on from it. And I won't support the Eagles for hiring him (but I already hated the Eagles). If he can get a job, good for him. But none of my money will go toward his paycheck much the same as I refused to buy Dixie Chicks products simply because I disliked what they said. I have that right and I'm exercising it.
Studies? Sources, please. So, what you’re saying is that if I get a speeding ticket, then by default I’m capable of taking it to the next step, ie DUI. So, should I be treated as someone who will be a DUI offender instead of a speeding ticket? What’s the next step after that? Vehicular manslaughter? Do you see the fallacy of your argument? By your own standards, once we’ve been served with a speeding ticket we’re capable of ‘taking it to that next step, and judged accordingly’?
Wow. You continue to try to buttress your emotional reaction to the man and what he did by trying to use logic, and that never works well. Again, you equate gangbangers, drug dealers, pedophiliacs, and speeders as the same? Based on your rationale, you have no choice but to lump in the minor crimes with the major. Have you ever had someone who’s had a parking ticket in your house for a beer or an iced tea. It seems hypocrisy is not only my realm, FRiend.
The argument is indeed a straw argument.
That's some serious moral equivalence there, equating the less-than-pampered status of chickens (used for food) with the deliberately cruel torture and murder of dogs (done for entertainment). You remind me of the "War IS Terrorism" crowd.
Unfortunately, I can’t say this news is going to change my spending habits. I would have never spent money on overpriced Nike garbage anyway. Why would you spend money to advertise for Nike, with their signature Swoosh littering every piece of crap they produce? People’s retarded affinity for wearing clothes with corporate logos emblazoned on them has always amazed me.
If anyone really wanted to protest and have their protest “vote” counted all they would have to do is change channels when Michael Vick and his new team take to the air.
The Stations, Broadcasters, Advertisers are well aware of these numbers.
If Michael Vick or his team is/are playing I would rather watch “The 101st run of the Flintstones”
yeah! for morally bankrupt cliches!
” Unfortunately, I cant say this news is going to change my spending habits. I would have never spent money on overpriced Nike garbage anyway. Why would you spend money to advertise for Nike, with their signature Swoosh littering every piece of crap they produce? Peoples retarded affinity for wearing clothes with corporate logos emblazoned on them has always amazed me.”
I agree, Very well put statement.
I can think of a few. Victoria Secret “Pink” , Albacorney&Fink, Reeboock, AeroPastel and Old Navy and that stupid “RED” corporate corrupt slogan crap.
I would rather swallow my own puke than wear their corporate logo crap.
None of that affects Nike's horrible marketing error. That's the only point I'm making. They've joined their brand and their public image with someone who a great many Americans despise.
It really doesn't matter if the honchos at Nike are ok with Michael Vick, or not. They're doing in their brand, and jeopardizing their sales with this move.
He did his time; more than most people do for third degree murder. Let it go.
I really don’t care. Bigger things on my mind.
Good for you. Nothing to see here...keep moving.
Don’t buy anything nike. Is that so difficult? I don’t.
You're missing my point.
I'm not arguing the Michael Vick dog fighting controversy, his imprisonment, related morality, or lack thereof, or anything about the back story.
I'm saying that Nike has made a horrendous marketing mistake by aligning their brand and their image with him.
You can argue that he served his time, so it's time we all let it go, but that won't stop millions of Americans from despising this guy forever.
Because of that fact, Nike's made a marketing blunder of monster proportions, which is going to cost them sales.
Again - this is about market positioning, and proper management of a major company's image. Nothing else.
According to a 1997 study done by the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) and Northeastern University, animal abusers are five times more likely to commit violent crimes against people and four times more likely to commit property crimes than are individuals without a history of animal abuse.
Many studies in psychology, sociology, and criminology during the last 25 years have demonstrated that violent offenders frequently have childhood and adolescent histories of serious and repeated animal cruelty. The FBI has recognized the connection since the 1970s, when its analysis of the lives of serial killers suggested that most had killed or tortured animals as children. Other research has shown consistent patterns of animal cruelty among perpetrators of more common forms of violence, including child abuse, spouse abuse, and elder abuse. In fact, the American Psychiatric Association considers animal cruelty one of the diagnostic criteria of conduct disorder.
Now, I wasn't referring to speeding tickets or parking tickets and you know I wasn't - I said cruelty to animals led to other crimes. Gee I love how you apologists like to twist words though.
Ok. He held dog’s heads under water until they drowned. Others, he hung them from their necks until they were dead. Others, he picked with his hands and slammed them to the ground until they were dead.
We’ll just let it go.
Nike lost me several years back with the black guy as Godlike giving the Nuremberg style podium to a bunch of swooning crackers
I don’t like being pandered to like I am into ghetto worship.
in fact I hate most marketing devised by today’s brainwashed kids for social engineering
Whether or nor “torturing” or killing your own dog is criminal, a human being should not be placed in prison for the way they treat their dog. That is, if you have your priorities straight on the value of human contribution to society versus that of a person’s dog.
If you’ve ever watched one of the “Animal Cops” shows you’ll see plenty of old people in inner cities being handcuffed and hauled to jail because they malnourished a dog. A horrible mistreatment of humans and a horrible waste of police resources.
I wouldn’t harm a dog or cat but I eat plenty of slaughtered pigs, chickens and cows. Get back to me when the farmers are imprisoned.
Now you can be beamed up.