When describing a particularly asinine quote, Wehner asks…
Has anything sillier than this… been written recently by a serious columnist?
Assuming that’s not rhetorical, I will take up that challenge. I give you Derrick Jackson’s Michael Vick inspired diatribe. Well, the diatribe might have been occasioned by Vick, but the target is greyhound racing. For him, dogfighting and dog racing are indistinguishable. This is a quintessential example of the liberal reflex of inappropriate moral equivalence (which, explains Goodwin’s Law, but I digress). One can have a cruelty free dog racing environment. I would like to see such an environment created. Former racing dogs are good pets (I often see them and they are sweet tempered). Fighting pit bulls is by its definition cruel and much of the audience proves that the Puritans had a point. Fianlly, the careers of those canines (who can never become pets because of their ingraained aggresion) is almost invariably an unnatural death.
But to the liberal mind the evil businessman must be as bad as the ‘gansta’ hoodlum if their worlds are even slightly parallel. Otherwise how can the liberal’s animating animus be justified? And increasingly, the liberals are all about their anger.
Update: Sensitive souls should not read this WaPo exposé of the hideous dogfighting subculture.
While I normally disapprove of editorial comments in the article, staff writer Paul Duggan can tap me for a round for this paragraph.
"Dog men," they call themselves, the untold numbers of breeders and fighters. With their pastime illegal everywhere in the country, they stay in touch through secret networks and underground magazines. They say they love to compete. They tell themselves the pit bulls love it, too.