As those that thoroughly understand all there is to know about old media are slowly but surely getting weeded out of larger organizations so that fresh blood can be brought in, I’m pretty sure the NFL league office is still using Windows ME and hasn’t heard of twitter.
So, for the time being, Reggie Bush should fly under the radar until his tweet gets talked about on ESPN later on today when they have NOTHING else to talk about or some archaic newspaper in New Orleans stumbles upon his twitter page in a week or two.
But, here’s Reggie expressing “concern” of being fined by the league because of a tweet…
All because of this tweet (which doesn’t make sense)…
“I believe we live in a world full of double standards! Why is it wrong to fight dogs but legal to hunt birds, deer, moose, fish, etc?”
I love Reggie Bush. I love that he’s been wearing apartheid diamonds the size of my knuckle since he was playing college football – unpaid? I love his swagga. In fact, he’s strangely one of my favorite pro athletes.
But, all of that said, he definitely didn’t do well on the analogy portion of his SAT. And, it’s a shame his education at USC didn’t pass along any knowledge.
For Reggie’s tweet to make sense, we would have to exclude anything about humans hunting. Moreover, there would have to be a case when some other NFL player – or person – was caught bankrolling bloody gambling fights between birds, deer, moose, and/or fish. Can you imagine – one bird fighting another bird? Snoozefest. Well, maybe a cock fight in Mexico wouldn’t be too boring. But, you get my point.
P.S. Yes, there’s a ton to fit in the 140 characters that twitter allows and people commonly get misunderstood. But, I think in this case, Reggie simply fcked up the analogy. If you go to his twitter page, he won’t really accept responsibility for making a bad analogy – yet.
Paging the league office…
The other thing that Bush doesn’t discuss is that dogs are regularly beaten and tortured when they are raised for fighting. That doesn’t really happen in hunting or fishing.
Hahaha – good point. If only twitter was 160 characters. Or, 175. Ok, fck it – go all out. 900 characters.
Wow, how annoying would anything more than 160 characters be?
Though his analysis was a little off the point is why is it okay to kill or torture any animal? Is it because a dog is domesticated? And birds and deer aren’t? No one should be in the business of harming any animals.
Wonderful post great job And I really loved this one And I can tell youve put a lot of time and love into it Check my site out about at
People always gotta take celebrities comments in a negative way..I think what he meant to say was stand up for all animals.. If people are jumping up about dogs soo much then do something about all the other animals that are getting killed “for fun” COMMON SENSE!
Yeah – I don’t think that was his intent but could be wrong.
Honestly, I don’t understand the value of twitter. I read one market research report that says nearly half of all tweets was “pointless babble.” Only 9% had “pass-along value.” Maybe only 4% was “news.”
Okay, I’m a senior citizen, but I get Instant Messaging. I get MySpace, FaceBook and Friendster. Heck, I even get an unexpected rap song, should the beat and melody are just right. But this SMS for the net seems a bit too thinly clever — a bit excessive fad and flash in the pan, for my tastes.
Perhaps there’s a Zen side to this. Any one care to Enlighten me?
I agree CandyGirl, I think the message got twisted. The point he’s making is why is it o.k. to kill any animal. Why is it O.k. to kill the messenger? After all he too is one of God’s animals