Cheney shoots someone

[BRussell]

Originally posted by Mac on a Mac
Cheney breaks his silence! (to Fox News)

'I'm the Guy Who Pulled the Trigger'

No better way to clear the air than to publicly admit it. Takes the wind out of the opponent’s sails like nothing else.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184957,00.html

Yeah and his statement here just serves as a contrast to their initial line that it was the guy's own fault. I'm sure Rove did a focus group before deciding to change message.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by BRussell
Yeah and his statement here just serves as a contrast to their initial line that it was the guy's own fault.

Curious...Where did they (Bush, W.H., Rove, Cheney, other) say that? Got a link?

[Mac on a Mac]

Originally posted by BRussell
I'm sure Rove did a focus group before deciding to change message.

Ah, yeah. I'd say Rove took a few days to sort it out and decided that the "I take all responsibility" card would best serve the regime.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Curious...Where did they (Bush, W.H., Rove, Cheney, other) say that? Got a link?

I don't know about those individuals, but the person who Cheney asked to make the initial statement - Katharine Armstrong is her name - clearly placed the blame on Whittington. She said he came up unannounced and didn't tell anyone he was there, etc.

A link

According to Katharine Armstrong, the daughter of Anne Armstrong who was with the hunting party at the time of the incident, Whittington broke away from a line of three hunters, including Cheney, and failed to announce that he was returning to the group. Hearing a covey of birds, Cheney shot at one, not realizing that it was Whittington who had startled the quail and that he was in the line of fire.

"This all happened pretty quickly," Armstrong said in a telephone interview from her ranch. Whittington, she said, "did not announce -- which would be protocol -- 'Hey, it's me, I'm coming up.'

"He didn't do what he was supposed to do," she said, referring to Whittington. "So when a bird flushed and the vice president swung in to shoot it, Harry was where the bird was."

[Northgate]

Originally posted by SDW2001
You have absolutely got to be shitting me. The media is going fucking bonkers over a hunting accident. Have you heard the montage of questions some of the more conservative news outlets have put together? It's like the twilight zone in White House press room. One reporter asked if Cheney was going to resign. Resign?

Meawhile, Al Gore (the very same!) goes to Saudi Arabia and speaks at a conference (for a fee!) sponsored in part by our friends The Bin Laden Family and proceeds to bash the US and it's indiscriminately "rounding up Arabs".

I guess your right, Northgate. It IS different. Al Gore gets a free ride on a speech on foreign soil that's practically treason. Cheney causes a hunting accident and suddenly it's time to impeach him.

Let me share with everyone why I have not really posted on this topic: Disbelief. That's it...right there. Total disbelief. You know what went through my head when I first saw the story? Try "Oh, that's too bad. I hope the guy is OK."

My second thought was "I wonder if anyone will try to politicize this?."

The third thought, I shit you not, was: "Hahaha. No. Not even this Democratic party would do that! They'll realize it was a hunting accident and move on. They'll figure that it would be beyond the pale and not beneficial politically."

I really thought that. Honest to God himself. So there you have it, jimmac et al. You're always saying that I'm consistently wrong. I guess you finally have a really good example now!

Honestly, if this does not prove how rabidly partisan the mainstream media is, I don't know what does. He didn't issue a press release? Who the hell cares? We found out within 24 hours. That is not good enough? Suddenly it's a goddamn conspiracy?

And the Democratic Party: Where do I begin? Harry Reid and Hillary Clinton start talking about how this is representative of the secerecy of this administration? I literally laughed out loud when I heard that on my way home today. I really did. This is a party that is beyond desperate.

This was a hunting accident.

This was a hunting accident.

This was a hunting accident.




Say that over a few times and return to planet earth.

Absolutely pathetic! Pathetic!

Treason? Well at least I'm now sure you've reupped your membership in Cult of Bush.

So, exactly which "Democrats" have "politicized" this? Members of congress? Members of the Senate? Whom exactly?

Oh, I'm sorry, Clinton and Reid were talking about the way the administration "handled" the situation. Apparently you can't discern between criticising the White House's press operation versus the actual accident. Unlike you, I can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Jay Leno? John Stewart? David Letterman? Oh, "those" Democrats. Got it.

And this is coming from the same crowd that chooses their presidents on whether or not they wear earth toned suits and go wind surfing while on vacation.

[groverat]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Al Gore gets a free ride on a speech on foreign soil that's practically treason.

[Anders]

Oooookay. Everybody who doesn´t think this was a misfortune, hope the guy is going to be all right, are having a quiet laugh at Jon Stewarts hopeless impression of Cheney AND MOVES ON please continue the discussion and know we feel less likely of you. Look I even made a nice poll about it.

[groverat]

I voted for the second option.

I think Cheney was really trying to kill Jews.

[Anders]

Originally posted by groverat
I voted for the second option.

I think Cheney was really trying to kill Jews.

Voting for option two makes your vote instantly invalid.

Even the vote system here feels that way apparently

[sammi jo]

Why the crazy obsession with a simple accident, for fvcks sake? Why is everyone going to town on this trivia? Its Monica-freaking-Lewinsky-ism all over again. It*was*an*accident*repeat*after*me*. An A-C-C-I-D-E-N-T. They happen all the time. This storm in a teacup is symptomatic of the inexplicable topsy-turvy priority pecking order we have here in modern America, where we get our collective panties in a twist over insignificant crap, while the real nasty stuff is left unsaid, unreported, uncommented upon and sidelined.

How long is it going to take to get mature enough as a nation to be able to face up to, and deal with our own demons?

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by sammi jo
Why the crazy obsession with a simple accident, for fvcks sake? Why is everyone going to town on this trivia? Its Monica-freaking-Lewinsky-ism all over again. It*was*an*accident*repeat*after*me*. An A-C-C-I-D-E-N-T. They happen all the time. This storm in a teacup is symptomatic of the inexplicable topsy-turvy priority pecking order we have here in modern America, where we get our collective panties in a twist over insignificant crap, while the real nasty stuff is left unsaid, unreported, uncommented upon and sidelined.

Well, partly, because the press doesn't appear to have any "volume" except LOUD. Everything is a crisis. Everything is a BIG deal. Haven't watched any cable news, wouldn't be surprised if they had a complete animated 3D logo and announcement "stinger" created too.

I find the press' early behavior in this whole thing a bit sad. It certainly seems as if their primary concern was that they were not the first ones notified (and immediately).

[Gene Clean]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Well, partly, because the press doesn't appear to have any "volume" except LOUD.

Yeah damn it, since when is shooting a man in the face anything but ordinary and dull? Here, report on the Olympics. That's LOUD!

Leave the VP and his face-victims alone. Geeeez. Shoot a man in the face and get the headline. Only in America™.

[Outsider]

Originally posted by pfflam
With armor piercing, fully automatics?

Do they hunt deer in Texas with grenades? Cause that would be OK.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
Yeah damn it, since when is shooting a man in the face anything but ordinary and dull? Here, report on the Olympics. That's LOUD!

Leave the VP and his face-victims alone. Geeeez. Shoot a man in the face and get the headline. Only in America™.

That's not what I'm saying. The point is that everything is a major event in the media. Let's do an experiment and find out how many other hunting accidents have happened, all across the country over the entire hunting season...then let's find out how many have been reported (other than a small blurb in a local newspaper). Shall we? Yeah, yeah...I know...but it is the VPOTUS! It's the VPOTUS! It's the VPOTUS!

[dmz]

The Plot Thickens!!

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by dmz
The Plot Thickens!!

One does wonder if the reporter asking the question: "Would this be much more serious if the man had died?"...

a) Was genuinely wondering what the W.H. thought , or

b) Not sure and need someone to tell him/her.

[giant]

It's really too bad you totally predictable wingers are just running on autopilot because you end up being just as dumb as the liberals on this. However, I guess the bush/cheney fan club deserves some credit for finally having one of their periodic "even a stopped clock is right twice a day" moments.

[midwinter]

Originally posted by giant
It's really too bad you totally predictable wingers are just running on autopilot because you end up being just as dumb as the liberals on this. However, I guess the bush/cheney fan club deserves some credit for finally having one of their periodic "even a stopped clock is right twice a day" moments.

\

Nah. If they were on autopilot, they'd have interrogated what exactly we mean by "shoot" or "face" or "Vice President" and wound up making it so confusing that everyone would just throw their hands up in the air and say "IT'S ALL SO CONFUSIN'!!!"

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
So, speaking to people of different nationalities is treason, but shooting people in the face is OK.

As long as it's not "foreign soil". He could have killed the poor guy and chop his body and eat his liver, but at least he didn't talk to dem ragheads...

Did you even see what Gore said? He can speak to anyone he wants...that's not the point. Northgate was addressing a double standard. I'm saying there is absolutely a double standard, just in Gore's favor.

Fran441 writes:

There are still many unanswered questions about this though SDW.

Why was the Sheriff not allowed to talk to VP Cheney immediately after the accident?
Why did the VP not talk to any law enforcement about the accident for 14 hours?
Why did the VP not openly talk about the accident immediately after the fact?
Why did the VP's office let the owner of the ranch release the story? What was the reason for holding back the story?

Why would law enforcement be involved at all? There was no reason to think anyone broke the law.

SDW, the Press goes bonkers over most accidents. Remember when President Bush fell off his bike? That was a simple accident but it was all over the news. Why? Because he's the leader of the free world. Is it any surprise that the man who is next in the line of succession is getting a lot of press after he shot a man?

Not the same situation. That had to do with the personal well being of the President. That's a totally different issue. Cheney wasn't the one shot.

As I said before, it's the not crime (or lack thereof), but the cover up. Have politicians not learned that they need to be up front about these kinds of issues? Like it or not, the Vice President is a public servant, he chose to run for political office and press coverage is inevitable, if not required at this point.

Was this an accident? Local law enforcement seems to think so after talking to the VP over 14 hours after the accident. The DA, however, has stated there would be a Grand Jury investigation if Mr. Whittington was to die of these injuries. We can only hope he can overcome the heart issues he is facing, but you don't have 'minor' heart attacks when you're 78, and most surgeries at that age, especially involving major organs, are risky at best.

To take a page out of your book, ask yourself these questions:

Since this is an accident, why won't the Vice President answer any questions?
Since this is an accident, why won't the Vice President answer any questions?
Since this is an accident, why won't the Vice President answer any questions?

Any sort of formal investigation is totally unwarranted. There was not even suspicion that this was foul play or anything of that nature. Obviously there is going to be questioning if the guy dies. I don't see how that's news.

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by pfflam
When you were listening to Rush tell you how hysterical the Dems and the evil Meida-Liberal-Elite were getting?

Hey, maybe you'd like to get the quote right next time.

SDW wrote:

I literally laughed out loud when I heard that on my way home today. I really did.

And FYI...I pretty much came to my own conclusion when I saw that David Gregory told McClellan "not to be a jerk." Asking the guy to resign...calling the press secretary a jerk, issuing press statements saying that this "coverup" is indicative of the secrecy of the administration....sounds pretty hysterical to me.

addabox:

SDW: you get to bitch about the "liberal media" when the mainstream press picks up some utterly scurrilous story from an extreme left wing smear piece to the effect that Cheney was actually trying to kill the guy to keep him quite because he "knew too much" about any of a half dozen scandals swirling around the White House, and keeps that spin on the front burner for months, ala the Vince Foster "story"

Until then, STFU.

Why don;t you pare that down to "there is no liberal media", let me laugh at you, and call it a day.

Northgate:

Absolutely pathetic! Pathetic!

Treason? Well at least I'm now sure you've reupped your membership in Cult of Bush.

So, exactly which "Democrats" have "politicized" this? Members of congress? Members of the Senate? Whom exactly?

Oh, I'm sorry, Clinton and Reid were talking about the way the administration "handled" the situation. Apparently you can't discern between criticising the White House's press operation versus the actual accident. Unlike you, I can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Jay Leno? John Stewart? David Letterman? Oh, "those" Democrats. Got it.

And this is coming from the same crowd that chooses their presidents on whether or not they wear earth toned suits and go wind surfing while on vacation.

Nice argument. Al Gore makes demonstrably false statements that deride the US and inflame muslims, while on the soil of an Arab state. I said that was "practically treason." Maybe you'd like to, I don't know, actually offer a coherent argument as to why it's not? Notice I did not say it "was" treason. But it's close. We're at war with muslim extremists and he's talking about how we "round up Arabs." I suppose you see nothing at all wrong with that.

In addition, Reid and Clinton have abolutely politicized this. Come on. Their response was NOT limited to how the situation was handled. If it was, they would have said that they would have liked to see it handled differently. No, the message of the day was that this incident was indicative of "the secrecy of this administration". Please.

[dmz]

Wait a minute!

Not even the VP can raise the bag limit on lawyers?!

There's a term limits joke in there somewhere.

[Gene Clean]

Did you even see what Gore said? He can speak to anyone he wants...that's not the point.

Well what is the point? That by saying something you become a traitor of the country? Do you know what you're even implying here? Do you know what the punishment for treason is?

Do you think that every dissident, non-conformist, opposition leader, politician or not, is committing treason by not agreeing with the official position of the United States Government?

Because that's all he did. He said something that the United States government doesn't agree with. But I guess that, by your metric, even the guys that leaked the Abu Ghraib prison pictures and videos are traitors because they did something that the US Government didn't want them to do, and on foreign soil as well, where ragheads live.

Northgate was addressing a double standard. I'm saying there is absolutely a double standard, just in Gore's favor.

BS. Shooting someone in the face and making a statement for or against X are not even the same ballpark. They're not even the same sport, as Jules would say.

Knowing that, your claim of double standards rings hollow. Especially as we are not even talking about two similar things, ler alone same things, as would the definition of 'double standard' require. As much as you'd like to equate shooting someone in the face with a speech by a guy on Foreign Soil™, I gotta break it to you: you're full of crap.

[Gene Clean]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
That's not what I'm saying. The point is that everything is a major event in the media.

Good morning.

Let's do an experiment and find out how many other hunting accidents have happened, all across the country over the entire hunting season...then let's find out how many have been reported (other than a small blurb in a local newspaper). Shall we?

Sure. Here's one. And another one. One more. Enough? Or want more?

Yeah, yeah...I know...but it is the VPOTUS! It's the VPOTUS! It's the VPOTUS! [/B]

Yeah I guess the VP shooting someone in the face ain't news anymore.

Chanel X - Next up: Cheney eats man's brains out!

You: Oh, that's so ordinary... damn that liberal media! Don't they have nothing better to report on!

[pfflam]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Unbelievable.

Even in jest this seems unbelievably crass.

Yes perhaps . . . t'is true, but notice how multi-layered-!

[pfflam]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
Yeah damn it, since when is shooting a man in the face anything but ordinary and dull? Here, report on the Olympics. That's LOUD!

Leave the VP and his face-victims alone. Geeeez. Shoot a man in the face and get the headline. Only in America™.

[pfflam]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Hey, maybe you'd like to get the quote right next time.

No, I got thequote . . . the point is that you were listening to talk-radio when you heard it, typical right-wing media talk radio and they couched every clip in the guise of 'hysterical media reaction' just so you could all have a laugh at those pathetic Liberals together . . . I guarantee it!

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by midwinter
\

Nah. If they were on autopilot, they'd have interrogated what exactly we mean by "shoot" or "face" or "Vice President" and wound up making it so confusing that everyone would just throw their hands up in the air and say "IT'S ALL SO CONFUSIN'!!!"

Of course...and they'd also quibble of what the definition of the word "is" is.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
Sure. Here's one. And another one. One more. Enough? Or want more?

Thanks for making my point.

Originally posted by Gene Clean
Yeah I guess the VP shooting someone in the face ain't news anymore.

Gene Clean...expert at missing (or twisting) the point.

[Gene Clean]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Thanks for making my point.

You didn't have a point so I could make one.

Gene Clean...expert at missing (or twisting) the point.[/B]

What, the media too LOUD now too? I guess I shot someone in the face... let me check, it's been 24 hours already, I must've had some kind of hunting accident...

...yep! I missed the point and shot some guy in the face...

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
You didn't have a point so I could make one.

You crack me up.

Umm. No. Not really.

[Gene Clean]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla


You crack me up.

I'm good like that.

Umm. No. Not really.

[/B]

One of your philosophical ponderings again? One minute it's white, the next - black. What up, dawg?

[giant]

Originally posted by midwinter
\

Nah. If they were on autopilot, they'd have interrogated what exactly we mean by "shoot" or "face" or "Vice President" and wound up making it so confusing that everyone would just throw their hands up in the air and say "IT'S ALL SO CONFUSIN'!!!"

Ah, point taken.

[Fran441]

Why would law enforcement be involved at all? There was no reason to think anyone broke the law.

Someone was shot, local law enforcement has an obligation to investigate it, even if it is determined to be an accident later. At the very least, a report would need to be filed concerning why Mr. Whittington was shot, why wouldn't the Vice President have to talk to police?

But the Secret Service refused to let local law enforcement ask the Vice President any questions or speak with him. They even didn't get a chance to see him until the next day. Why did that happen? Brit Hume didn't even bring up this point in his softball questioning.

Now the Vice President has come out and said he had a drink at lunch time. The general consensus from hunters is that you never drink before hunting and others have speculated about the effect the alcohol has in addition to his heart medication.

This was an accident, there's no question of that. The Vice President did not mean to shoot Mr. Whittington. At the very least, the situation was handled *horribly*. The fact that the Sheriff was not allowed to talk to the VP, and the fact that the story was held back leads people to believe that something was being hidden.

The Vice President should have spoken with local law enforcement as soon as they arrived on the scene, he should have had a statement sent out to the media on Saturday night explaining the situation, and there should have been a Press Conference or Public Appearance on Sunday.

If this incident had been handled better by the Vice President and his office over the weekend, the only story you'd be hearing about now would be concerning Mr. Whittington's health.

[Outsider]

This is the same thinking so pervasive on the right that feels that people in the executive branch should be above the law and not subject to the same ethics the rest of us are. Alito was just a confimation of this new mindset. Therefore nothing should be investigated and we aren't allowed to ask questions out loud (and if technology allowed, in our heads) about suspicious activities.

Although this only applies when a Republicant is in the office.

[addabox]

Originally posted by Outsider

,,,,,Although this only applies when a Republicant is in the office.

Well, of course. It goes without saying that Republicans are decent, godfearing, hardworking people who love America, go to NASCAR events and are basically just like you and the wife, albeit with somewhat more access to the secret police.

Therefore, whatever they do must be regarded as intrinsically moral, no matter how it looks, and any effort to question that is an act of appalling, debased cynicism from People Who Have No Sense of Right and Wrong.

Your liberal, on the other hand, is a craven, godless creature, entirely motivated by hatred and rage at the simple goodness he cannot understand. Even when he claims to be "doing good" it is entirely obvious to one and all that he is in fact sowing the seeds of resentment and dissension, the better to cast confusion and doubt on Our Noble Way of Life.

The liberal press give themselves away when they fail to properly foreground this fundamental narrative.

Sure, they ran hard with every Clinton "scandal" without worrying about that old liberal bugaboo "evidence", but you could tell their heart wasn't really in it, and careful analysis reveals they rarely called for Bill and Hillary to be gunned down like the cur dogs they were, as every right thinking American knew full well was the only appropriate course of action.

And sure, they have largely confined themselves to repeating administration talking points, rarely asking any real questions and credulously forwarding every bit of spin and manipulation proffered by the White House, but that's only to be expected when the White House is occupied by powerful, thoughtful men of gravitas, consumed with protecting America from terrorists and liberals.

But where is the frank acknowledgment that Bush Republicans are effective, forthright, focused, principled, and determined? Where is the vital admission that Democrats, by their very nature, are feckless, disorganized, callow, cynical and disloyal? You can't understand the true nature of events without first openly admitting to this primal dynamic.

OK, Fox News does their bit, not to mention ever larger chunks of CNN and MSNBC, as well as all of AM talk radio, the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Times, every round table discussion show, 90% of the pundit class, any number of editorial decisions at the New York Times and Washington Post, and that carefully orchestrated ecosystem of blogs, rumor sites and RNC front groups, via which any scurrilous story at all can be hand carried up the food chain, through Fox, there to emerge as "legitimate news".

But is that enough? Why didn't, say, CBS, start their prime time newscast with the story about how Al Gore committed treason, and, upon once again setting foot on US soil, would be summarily shot?

We know why: liberal liberal liberal liberal. The huge corporations that own the press take their marching orders from the DNC. It's so obvious.

If you disagree, think about this-- if the press wasn't in the pocket of the most extreme left wing forces abroad in the land today, why won't they tell the real story, and admit that the Democratic party is entirely illegitimate, as any real American can see with their own eyes? Why don't they lead every story with the good news that the Glorious Leader works tirelessly to keep you and yours safe from harm? That Iraq is emerging as a beacon of freedom in a benighted part of the world? That the tax cuts have created unprecedented prosperity while remaining revenue neutral, that a new spirt of professionalism has suffused every level of the federal government, that our friends and allies around the glove stand ready to serve,
and that scrupulous ethics and moral hygiene reign supreme, where once a semen stained dress lay in tatters?

Every one of you knows why, you just don't have the balls to admit it.

One People. One Message. One Leader.

[Chris Cuilla]

adda...think you need to sober up before posting.

Whew! That was a rant to end all rants. Well, sadly probably not in reality.

[BRussell]

You know, we still hear very mainstream and influential conservatives like Limbaugh and Coulter talk about "Fort Marcy Park," where Vince Foster committed suicide. They'd say "just like Fort Marcy Park" when talking about some made-up Clinton scandal, and all the conservatives would nod their heads. They still talk about Chappaquiddick.

Well I think the new rallying cry for all Democrats should be "Remember Armstrong Ranch!" In fact, I think I've got a new sig.

[Outsider]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
adda...think you need to sober up before posting.

Whew! That was a rant to end all rants. Well, sadly probably not in reality.

No I think he was pretty sober. I checked and all the words were spelled correctly, and the grammar was as excellent as ever.

[addabox]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
adda...think you need to sober up before posting.

Whew! That was a rant to end all rants. Well, sadly probably not in reality.

But of course. As a liberal, I am incapable of any line of thought that isn't a "rant", on account of my boundless rage.

I gaze at the world with implacable fury, godless and rudderless and secretly fiercely jealous of the calm equilibrium afforded by simple faith and not being very bright.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by addabox
But of course. As a liberal, I am incapable of any line of thought that isn't a "rant", on account of my boundless rage.

I gaze at the world with implacable fury, godless and rudderless and secretly fiercely jealous of the calm equilibrium afforded by simple faith and not being very bright.

You said that...not me.