Outrage?

"Whenever there are great virtues, it's a sure sign somethings wrong"-Bertolt Brecht

Got a kick out of the Mothers Day happenings with the alleged plot to exclude Filly Rachel Alexandra from the Preakness. Seems many in the press and in blogger land are outraged, in horror, think this is despicable, etc, etc.

Maybe it is the state of the times we live in, but it did not move me much. As long as everyone plays by the rules they are given, I don't get too upset about these things. I'd rather see Rachel Alexandra skip the Preakness and run in the Belmont Stakes, but if Jackson wants her in the Preakness, that's fine too, load him all in the gate and let 'em go.

Speaking of a Filly running against the boys, what happened to all that outrage last year when Eight Belles had to be put down after her game 2nd in the Derby? Should not these same people be screaming at the top of some hill in Baltimore as to this horrible mistreatment of Rachel Alexandra by forcing her to run in the Preakness? What happened to William Rhoden, the NY Times Columnist, who last year led the crusade against the sport with multiple columns about the ills of the sport, including running a filly against the boys?

He did write an article about horse slaughter and the global meat market on May 1st, but since the Rachel Alexandra announcement that she will run in the Preakness, he has written 3 columns which included not a word or opinion on the situation. The 3 columns were one on NBA MVP Lebron James and 2 columns on NY Yankee Alex Rodriquez. (Apparently no one ever writes about A-Rod so Rhoden treated us to back to back columns on him, with the 2nd one stating that "for all his character flaws, the one thing he consistently does well is play baseball". Really, never knew that.)

Will be interesting to see if Rhoden parachutes in with a column before the running of the Preakness, or perhaps he will wait in the bushes to see if some misfortune happens and than his outrage will return, in the form of a NY Times column telling us so.