2007-07-20 04:28:54 · 20 answers · asked by Michael Kane 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Vick violated federal laws. Bush violated federal laws.
Vick was a private citizen. Bush swore an oath to uphold the laws.
So, both are criminals. Bush is also an oath-breaker.
2007-07-20 04:33:37 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 5⤋
We Buddhists believe that those who kill, and those who authorize killing to be done, are equally earning bad karma. They will both have to work out this bad karma in this life or in their next life or lives. Even people like Vick and Bush CAN do this---anyone can---but it requires awareness, knowledge of the Dharma, and self-examination, among many other things. I can't see either man going very far along this road, but I hope both do. Unless they start soon, their next lives will be in the lower realms: animals, hell beings, or hungry spirits.
2007-07-21 08:35:53 · answer #2 · answered by pasdeclef 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This says that our priorities are screwed up. they're like hundreds of folk protecting up signs and indicators for defense against canine, and prefer none for the struggle in Iraq. The struggle in Iraq unquestionably impacts people. Mike Vick is in basic terms a tousled guy or woman who spent time with the incorrect human beings, he's not a nasty guy. he's in comparison to Saddam or a terrorist. yet human beings could think of that he's.
2016-10-22 04:04:53 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Michael Vick, that sorry a ss excuse for a human being should be a ss raped in jail then put into a pit of rabid dogs to get torn apart. As for the eating dogs thing and slaughterhouse response they put the animal down as humanly as possible not beat, torture, starve and then make them fight only to kill them because they didn't fight or lost the fight and even the winner of the fight if they are injured they are usually also killed for the hell of it...and the slaughterhouses that do inhumane things to animals are usually forced to make changes or get shut down so you cant compare that to this type of animal abuse.
2007-07-20 04:38:15 · answer #4 · answered by hellzfirex 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Michael Vick is and always has been a thug.
His behavior is repugnant and demonstrates an absolute lack of compassion.
I don't feel the same way about Bush or his actions.
2007-07-20 04:34:02 · answer #5 · answered by tnfarmgirl 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Michael Vick. That little scumbag should be electrocuted and hung himself to see how it feels. George Bush has never had any charges of killing innocent animals pressed against him.
2007-07-20 04:30:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
George Bush.
2007-07-20 04:34:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Vick knows what he did is repugnant and cruel, I doubt Bush does, so, I choose Vick.
2007-07-20 04:31:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Vick, nice question.
2007-07-20 04:32:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
George Bush is responsible for starting a war that killed and displaced countless numbers of innocent people. Not to mention 3500+ soldiers and all the injured.
Mike Vick is responsible for the deaths of a number of pit bulls.
Both terrible, but I give it to Bush, sorry.
2007-07-20 04:33:11 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 4⤊ 6⤋