The First Casualty...Is Truth
Senator Larry Craig.
All three are making headlines for what they did, and bigger issues with the truth.
Didn't we learn anything from Watergate? Or Monicagate?
Vick's foray into the seamy world of dogfighting is bad enough, but I think the bigger obstacle to his possible NFL return is the fact that he lied to his Atlanta Falcons bosses and, more importantly, to his pro football overlord, Commissioner Roger Goddell. I wasn't there, but I'm guessing Goddell begged Vick to come clean when they met as the storm clouds were just starting to swirl. Vick, though, is a child of athletic privilege, unaccustomed to personal responsibility or consequences. He no doubt felt that this, too, would pass. And, it might've, had his co-defendants not flipped. I also find it interesting that ESPN pundits are so intrigued with the fact that Tiger Woods is weighing in on the Vick situation (Tiger's take? Vick could've cut his losses by coming clean early on. Pretty radical, huh?) Some of them seem truly flummoxed by the fact Woods is commenting, pointing out that he's usually the last one to go moth-and-flame when things go controversial. My conclusion: Tiger can't win. If he's quiet, he gets ripped for holding his tongue. When he talks, the same sages wonder why he's talking.
Briggs is the Chicago Bears linebacker who probably blew his shot at NFL Man Of The Year consideration by piling up his Lamborghini along a stretch of I-94 early the other morning. That's not necessarily a crime, of and by itself. Leaving the smoldering heap and calling police to report said ride as stolen is another matter. Is there any doubt what happened? Why would a rider leave his wounded mount in the middle of the night? I'm guessing that wasn't Mountain Dew on his breath as he beat feet.
Then there's the good Senator, who has us all rethinking our bathroom stall posture...does he really think anyone's buying his argument that he pled guilty just to make the allegation go away? Would YOU do that if YOU truly believed you were innocent? Blaming the local paper for his woes? Typical, and wrong: he's old enough to know the adage about avoiding fights with people who buy ink by the barrel.
That brings up another issue: a colleague of mine wondered why it is that, when a conservative Republican gets in trouble, the mainstream media make sure to point out that, indeed, the accused is a "conservative Republican". I admittedly don't keep score on such things and don't use labels like "conservative" or "liberal" in my copy. And, if the "conservative" or "liberal" in question doesn't run from those titles when times are good, why is it suddenly a crime for the media to point them out when the politician in question is doing a perp walk? Craig isn't a story because he's a conservative Republican: it's because he's an alleged hypocrite. And that's a story no matter what the leanings of the actor in question.
Someone wiser than me once said that the truth hurts. It does. Lying, though, creates scars. And, it keeps the headlines coming.