We've been hearing a lot about celebrity justice this past year, probably because so many celebrities are appearing before a bench these days. While there are opinions flying around like gulls over a garbage scow, one thing everyone seems to agree on is the fact that it just isn't fair. Not fair at all.

What's interesting, however, is the difference in opinion about exactly what isn't fair about it. Even more interesting is the fact that the difference isn't related to who is speaking as much as it's related to whom they're speaking ABOUT.

After the O.J. trial, it was on everyone's lips - you don't go to jail if you're rich and famous. It was the same after the Michael Jackson trial. Ditto Robert Blake.

And when Paris Hilton was released early in the same fashion in which many non-celebs in the same situation were released, the public outcry was quite palpable. The explanation that the situation was not unusual or particular to celebrities fell upon a deaf nation. Everyone expected her to serve her full term, and by God, they'd bitch and whine until she did. And the same goes for that Lindsey Lohan scofflaw, as well. Nichole Ritchie, no different. 

I have no problem with that. Send 'em up the river. I'm just wondering why it should be different for Michael Vick.

Everywhere I go, I hear that he's only being prosecuted - some say "persecuted" - because he's rich and famous. I've been hearing it from the beginning. Never mind that his actions were against the law, not to mention any imaginable concept of decent human behavior. Never mind that he CONFESSED. They're only going after him because he's a famous football player.

Why the difference? Am I supposed to think that District Attorneys and Judges are big Paris Hilton fans, but don't care so much for sports figures like Vick and Kobe Bryant? None of them watch football or basketball, but would hate to see the next Lindsey Lohan film released late?

Or could it be that people have a vastly different standard for the celebrities that they like? Could it be that Americans don't care as much about the objectivities of the law as much as they like to pretend? Of course it could, and it's far from impressive.

Even more infuriating are the people who say "Well, [another sports figure] did [insert crime here] and only got [light sentence] so why should we go after Vick?

Well, by that logic, why go after anybody? If someone can show that one person got away with breaking a law, shouldn't everyone? After all, if one person got a light sentence, then there is no justice, and why should we pretend? It would be unfair to hold one person accountable for his actions if anyone else has gotten off prior to this, isn't it? That's how the argument seems to go.

And we ALL know that only one party's politicians are ever arrested. If it was the OTHER party, no one would say anything. Remember that guy from the other party who did such and such back in 1976 and got away with it? Obviously, every single person in the world who is mad at our guy knows about the other guy and approves. Hypocrites.

Meanwhile, I tend to think that the mistakes of the past may be beyond fixing, but their repetition can be easily avoided. In other words, if the law isn't being prosecuted properly in regard to celebs, there can be a point where that changes. Just because so-and-so got off five years ago in one state, it does not follow that someone else should get off for a crime committed in another. It is perfectly valid to say "Enough is enough. From now on, we do it right." We don't have to wait until it's someone unpopular confessing to a crime. We can choose to do things right any time we want. If we want, that is. We have to actually care about the law being obeyed by both those we like and those we don't.

But the lamest, worst of the lot is right here. This is pathetic excuse-making at it's worst.

First off, I have to ask why anyone watches The View. If any women reading this do watch the view, I sure hope you've never put men down for watching sports, Baywatch or the Three Stooges, because the fact that The View survives is ample proof that men aren't alone in watching utterly stupid, mindless television. However, I digress.

On her first show, and no doubt wanting to prove that she can be as controversial as Rosie O'Donnell, Whoopie Goldberg tells us that the conviction is unfair because Vick was doing something that comes from his southern U.S. culture.

Well, what else did I see in the news today that reflects southern U.S. culture? How about the racist slogans and swastikas that were burned into the lawns at a golf course in S. Carolina? How about nooses hanging from trees, and justice only for white people? What would Whoopie have to say about these "southern cultural traditions"?

I mean, sure, racism is wrong, and most of us know it is. Just like we know that training dogs to tear each other to ribbons and killing them tortuously if they fail is wrong. But we can make excuses for culture, right? How many people living in the area that Vick grew up in feel that wearing a white hood and putting a black neck in one of those nooses is a valid cultural statement?

Culture can be an interesting thing, but many people feel that it should be immutable, which I disagree with. I applauded when the state of New Mexico finally outlawed cockfighting, despite the fact that it is part of "Mexican culture." We're close enough to Mexico for those sad sucks to take a road trip for their blood sport. Cultures have been evolving since the first culture began. They do that because mores and standards change over time. If you tell me that you must be allowed to do something for no other reason than the fact that your granfather did it, I simply will not consider your argument valid enough to consider as such. It's really that simple. Show me how your tradition makes sense in our culture today, or how no one is harmed by it. Don't just tell me, "That's our culture", because when it comes to stuff like racism, animal torture, female genital mutilation, or forcing teenage girls to be their cousin's third wife, among other things, I simply don't respect or care about it. This is our culture, and it changes all the time. Jim Crow was part of our culture, and isn't anymore. Keeping women out of academia and the workplace was part of our culture, and isn't anymore. Voting rights for men only, etc., yada yada yada.

So please, Whoopie, spare me the bullshit about culture. Unless you're willing to stand up in defense of cross - burnings, segregation, and racially tainted justice as results of "southern culture", you really should shut the fuck up and let those elected to apply the law do so. We'll save the outrage for when someone is convicted on shoddy evidence without a confession. At least, I will. And I don't think I'l be standing up for someone rich and famous when that happens.