After years of a political landscape that considered it open season on Democrats, apparently things have taken a lethal and possibly fatal turn.
As the White House attempts to claim that they intentionally waited for a public citizen to report the story to the press–as convincing an argument as Pee Wee Herman announcing that he “meant to” take a header over his bike handlebars–Harry Whittington is (let’s face it) fighting for his life as pellets are apparently making a bee-line for his ticker.
Here’s what I don’t get:
Today’s newspaper ran a picture of Cheney from an earlier quail hunting incident. As one would expect, the rifle was tilted at what appeared to be an angle of about, oh, fifty degrees or so, as Cheney prepared to blow helpless birds out of the sky with his WMD–weapon of mass defowling.
Now the reports claim that Whittington wandered “into the line of fire.” Which I would believe if Cheney were trying to kill, say, Bambi’s mother. But he was trying to kill birds that were–unless I missed something–in flight.
I fully admit I’ve never hunted, but how the hëll does one step “into the line of fire” of a gun elevated at fifty degrees toward the sky? I don’t know how close Whittington was standing, but if he was at point blank range he’d probably be dead, and if he was any distance, he’d have to be ten feet tall. I just don’t get it.
It should be interesting if, in addition to stonewalling Congress whenever investigations are launched, the White House attempts to stonewall the Texas sheriff.
PAD
• 
If this were not the VP would anyone care? Of course not, so why does this accident take on such immense importance?
But it is the VP and that makes it news, so your entire point is moot.
What seems to be forgotten over the past five years is that the politicians in Washington work for us. They are are responsible to US. Not the other way around. His handling of it is also indicative of his judgment and his penchent for keeping everything a secret from the public.
Openness in government is supposed to be one of the cornerstones of democracy. But I guess that idea has been forgotten, too.
>If you accidentally shot your friend while hunting would you expect to be crucified by the press and have your job threatened? I doubt it.
While, the lack of a legal hunting license would cause a regular joe who just shot a hunting buddy some serious headaches. In this instance, it has barely been mentioned and has been all but forgotten. Let’s remember, this is the guy who has screamed about ending the lawlessness in the Middle East and supposedly takes a firm stance on the law in this country. It appears that is only the case when his own inconvenience isn’t an issue.
[B]But it is the VP and that makes it news, so your entire point is moot.[/B]
Yeah news, but not a full blown scandal with unfounded talk of attempted murder and reckless drunken abandon.
[B]What seems to be forgotten over the past five years is that the politicians in Washington work for us. They are are responsible to US. Not the other way around.[/B]
I find this statement to be irrelevant to the topic at hand, but if it has been forgotten it has been for a lot longer than 5 years.
[B]His handling of it is also indicative of his judgment and his penchent for keeping everything a secret from the public.[/B]
Your eagerness to lay blame based on conjecture and your obvious bias would severely undermine your argument if you were making one.
[B]Openness in government is supposed to be one of the cornerstones of democracy. But I guess that idea has been forgotten, too.[/B]
I imagine you are waiting for full disclosure on how Cheney wipes his ___ and if that doesn’t meet with your approval you can hate him even more. What does quail hunting have to do with government? Politicians are people not god-like perfect beings.
While, the lack of a legal hunting license would cause a regular joe who just shot a hunting buddy some serious headaches. In this instance, it has barely been mentioned and has been all but forgotten. Let’s remember, this is the guy who has screamed about ending the lawlessness in the Middle East and supposedly takes a firm stance on the law in this country. It appears that is only the case when his own inconvenience isn’t an issue.
I guess I understand that you have to draw the line somewhere, but do you really equate the lawlessness in the Middle East to a $7 hunting license?
Yeah news, but not a full blown scandal with unfounded talk of attempted murder and reckless drunken abandon.
And where did someone here accuse the VP of attempted murder?
I find this statement to be irrelevant to the topic at hand, but if it has been forgotten it has been for a lot longer than 5 years.
So was you initial “If this were not the VP would anyone care?” statement. What’s your point?
Your eagerness to lay blame based on conjecture and your obvious bias would severely undermine your argument if you were making one.
Mr. Kettle, meet Mr. Pot.
What does quail hunting have to do with government?
Nothing, but then nobody said it did. The VP shooting a guy, however, does relate to government.
I could say more, but in just two posts on this forum, you’ve already exposed yourself as an absolute freaking moron, so why bother?
“I imagine you are waiting for full disclosure on how Cheney wipes his ___ and if that doesn’t meet with your approval you can hate him even more.”
I just figured the Secret Service did it for him…
“Politicians are people not god-like perfect beings.”
Yeah, that’s kind of the point. “People” involved in this sort of thing would be grilled by the police (quite possibly down at the police station), have their blood alcohol level being checked, and might well be facing criminal prosecution and civil action. Politicians might well be facing, at the very least, a press conference where a battery of reporters asks them tough questions.
Cheney on the other hand talks to the law on his own schedule (giving his body plenty of time to metabolize whatever booze might have been in his system) and gets hand-held by a single journalist who already has stated that he thinks the entire matter have been blown out of proportion.
If the argument is that Cheney “is people,” not unlike Soylent Green, then he should be treated AS people, and not like someone in his own special class.
PAD
First, an answer to Mark above–the man who doesn’t want to be accused of taking part in a drive-by quailing!
And second, it’s not the shooting in itself that’s the big deal, here. It’s the fact that Ðìçk’s people waited so long to break the story. You know, because it’s SOOOO interesting. Now, before half the people here cheer for me while the other half want my head, lemme explain. No, no, there’s too much. Lemme sum up. First, does shooting this guy affect Cheney’s job performance in anything other than a few hospital visits and maybe talking to some authorities? Second, people hunting ANYTHING occasionally get shot. My ex-girlfriend’s father once shot himself in the foot while hunting deer. I guess he wanted to, you know, get off the front line of the Deer War but didn’t wanna look like a coward. Moron, yes, coward, no. Third, WHY is this a huge-o story? Because right now, with 24-hour news channels, they need SOMETHING to fill the air. Hunt for Bin Laden? Yeah, nothing happening there. Medical research? Nada, at least nada interisante. But Cheney shoots a guy? BIG NEWS, baby!
Now, the fact that I think this executive branch is really subscribing to the whole “Don’t ask, don’t tell” plan is beside the point. The less people know, the happier they are. Information bad!!
“I just figured the Secret Service did it for him…”
I really like that one. 🙂
“Yeah, that’s kind of the point. “People” involved in this sort of thing would be grilled by the police (quite possibly down at the police station), have their blood alcohol level being checked, and might well be facing criminal prosecution and civil action. Politicians might well be facing, at the very least, a press conference where a battery of reporters asks them tough questions.
Cheney on the other hand talks to the law on his own schedule (giving his body plenty of time to metabolize whatever booze might have been in his system) and gets hand-held by a single journalist who already has stated that he thinks the entire matter have been blown out of proportion.
If the argument is that Cheney “is people,” not unlike Soylent Green, then he should be treated AS people, and not like someone in his own special class.”
Your right. It works both ways. They can’t act like gods and we can’t treat them like gods. I guess reality falls somewhere in the middle and the debate comes in as opinions differ on where that balance should be.
Why must we assume that ordinary people would have been handled so much more stringently? Where is the crime here that warrants the expectation of such an extreme response? And I am not looking for a missing hunting license. I used to fish without a license in the lake near my house when I was a kid. Should I lose my job?
I might have missed some info. Are there indications that Cheney was drunk? Or are we able to assume he was because he allegedly prevented a test from being done?
And Den, sorry that we disagree. I honestly feel the same way as you. Your a moron. 🙂
“While, the lack of a legal hunting license”
He had a legal hunting license. He just didn’t have a $7 sticket, which is a new thing they are doing. It’s sort of like having a fishing license, and fishing in the same lake for years, and then suddenly they want you to get a “catfish” sticker, which costs $7, in addition to your license. It’s a fairly new regulation that most hunters down there weren’t familiar with, so they are giving all the hunters warning on this. It’s not a criminal affair, as much as people want it to be.
“Yeah, that’s kind of the point. “People” involved in this sort of thing would be grilled by the police (quite possibly down at the police station), have their blood alcohol level being checked, and might well be facing criminal prosecution and civil action. Politicians might well be facing, at the very least, a press conference where a battery of reporters asks them tough questions.”
Bûllšhìŧ, bûllšhìŧ, bûllšhìŧ. Sorry. Got to call bûllšhìŧ. Lifelong hunter here. Resident Oklahoman. Been peppered once myself. My father got shot in the leg with a rifle. My uncle was shot by another hunter while hunting deer. He was also shot once by a bow while hunting deer.
In none of these cases were the shooters ever grilled by the police. Why? Because in areas where hunting is common, hunting accidents are also common.
I’m so amazed at either the naivety of people, or the strong desire to make something out of nothing. If two friends where playing basketball, and one friend got elbowed in the face, and his nose broken, the police wouldn’t investigate it as assault. But if I punched someone in the face and broke their nose, it would be assault, and I would go to jail.
“Why must we assume that ordinary people would have been handled so much more stringently?”
I think it a VERY safe assumption that such extended delays and obstruction would have been red flags to the police and resulted in far greater scrutiny and even repercussions.
“Where is the crime here that warrants the expectation of such an extreme response?”
Assault with a deadly weapon? Reckless endangerment? Firing a gun while under the influence? Obstruction of justice?
“And I am not looking for a missing hunting license. I used to fish without a license in the lake near my house when I was a kid. Should I lose my job?”
Personally I don’t give a dámņ about that. From what I’ve read, the “license” in question is the fairly recent development of hunters requiring a $7 stamp to hunt quail, something that many people besides Cheney didn’t know was a requirement. A minor infraction at best and not worth the ink the story was printed with.
“I might have missed some info. Are there indications that Cheney was drunk? Or are we able to assume he was because he allegedly prevented a test from being done?”
I assume nothing. I’m saying that delaying the police for as long as possible is an indicator that something is being covered up, and that if you or I tried it, it wouldn’t be tolerated. I’m saying Cheney gets a free pass because of who he is, and that’s what I object to.
PAD
“Bûllšhìŧ, bûllšhìŧ, bûllšhìŧ. Sorry. Got to call bûllšhìŧ. Lifelong hunter here. Resident Oklahoman. Been peppered once myself. My father got shot in the leg with a rifle. My uncle was shot by another hunter while hunting deer. He was also shot once by a bow while hunting deer.
In none of these cases were the shooters ever grilled by the police. Why? Because in areas where hunting is common, hunting accidents are also common.”
Then Oklahoma is a bûllšhìŧ state and the cops are bûllšhìŧ cops. Slapdash chickenshit lack of police procedure in one place doesn’t justify it elsewhere, although it is comforting to know that if I’m really pìššëd øff with someone, I can just go hunting with them in Oklahoma, shoot the crap out of them, claim, “Accident, my bad sorry,” and walk away from it with no investigation.
And furthermore, from my understanding, the police WERE trying to investigate and WERE stonewalled by the Secret Service. So your entire point is pointless.
PAD
“Then Oklahoma is a bûllšhìŧ state and the cops are bûllšhìŧ cops. Slapdash chickenshit lack of police procedure in one place doesn’t justify it elsewhere, although it is comforting to know that if I’m really pìššëd øff with someone, I can just go hunting with them in Oklahoma, shoot the crap out of them, claim, “Accident, my bad sorry,” and walk away from it with no investigation. “
If the person you shot says the same thing, then yes, this would be the case anywhere in the country, unless the cops were total morons. And there is a big difference between an investigation, and a grilling. A police report is filed in every case. But unless they have legit reason to believe intent, they don’t grill anyone. Gosh, a big liberal like you sure wants a police state, where people are presumed guilty? Or is this just anti-Cheney slipping in.
And furthermore, from my understanding, the police WERE trying to investigate and WERE stonewalled by the Secret Service. So your entire point is pointless.
Is there any link to this? If true, then yeah, no argument, Cheney deserves some harsh questions. I didn’t like it when Clinton assumed he was abopve the law and lied in court and I won’t like it any more if Cheney is allowed to blow off legitimate questions from police officers. But I haven’t read anything like that from actual policemen so if there are quotes out there I’d like to see them.
“Is there any link to this? If true, then yeah, no argument, Cheney deserves some harsh questions. “
There’s as much evidence of this, as there was that he was drunk. None. Just implication and innuendo. Course, since when do facts matter. The police investigate, gave and report, and were satisfied. But evidently, the report wasn’t filed though PAD, so it’s not official yet.
“If the person you shot says the same thing, then yes, this would be the case anywhere in the country, unless the cops were total morons.”
And if the person in question is dead or in a coma? Or if he is unaware of the enmity the shooter bears for him.
“And there is a big difference between an investigation, and a grilling.”
Yes, the difference would be the same as between “potato” and “po-TAH-to.”
“A police report is filed in every case. But unless they have legit reason to believe intent, they don’t grill anyone.”
Then that’s chickenshit. It’s prejudging a case and is just begging for abuses of the law.
“Gosh, a big liberal like you sure wants a police state, where people are presumed guilty? Or is this just anti-Cheney slipping in.”
No, it’s the anti-gun wielding, anti-hunting, anti-police obstructionist slipping in, as opposed to the pro-Cheney, pro-Bush, spin-the-GOP-position-no-matter-what, knee-jerk Conservative-lockstep-party-line,gun-loving, liberal-hating hypocritical, suck-our-Ðìçk-Cheney, would-be-demanding-impeachment-if-it-were-Clinton bûllšhìŧ that so informs the opposing view.
And by the way, people ARE presumed guilty, all the time. If they weren’t, it would be impossible to lock them up while they were awaiting trial, because there would be no constitutional basis to hold an “innocent” man against his will. “Innocent until proven guilty” only refers to the trial procedure and on whom the burden of proof lies.
And the bottom line is that our highest officials should endeavor to be above reproach. They should be the models for cooperation with law enforcement at all levels. THe problem is that the Bush White House has made stonewalling and refusal to cooperate so much a part of their MO that it’s difficult to see this as anything other than more of the same.
PAD
And furthermore, from my understanding, the police WERE trying to investigate and WERE stonewalled by the Secret Service. So your entire point is pointless.
Is there any link to this?
After a little digging, I found this chronology on msnbc.com:
6:30 p.m.: Cheney accidentally shoots fellow hunter Harry Whittington while aiming for a bird.
7:50 p.m.: The head of the Secret Service office in McAllen, Texas, calls the Kenedy County sheriff to report the accident. The sheriff asks to speak to Cheney, and they schedule an interview for 9 a.m. At the White House, presidential aide Karl Rove tells Bush that Cheney was the shooter, after talking to ranch owner Katharine Armstrong. Cheney and the rest of the hunting party sit down for dinner at the ranch.
At some point, sheriff’s deputies who heard reports of the ambulance responding to an accident at the ranch stop at the front gate to see if anyone needs help, but are told no one needs assistance. The Secret Service earlier had said the deputies were seeking to interview Cheney, but on Tuesday they said that was not the case.
9 a.m.: Kenedy County sheriff’s deputies interview Cheney.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11386566/
So, if I read this right, the Secret Service called the sheriff’s office an hour and 20 minutes after the shooting and told them that they could interview Cheney the next morning, which right there, is not something I think I could have gotten away with.
There seems to be some dispute over whether the deputies who arrived at the ranch that evening wanted to interview Cheney that night or not.
So, if I read this right, the Secret Service called the sheriff’s office an hour and 20 minutes after the shooting and told them that they could interview Cheney the next morning, which right there, is not something I think I could have gotten away with.
I think, before we jump the gun here (bada bing!), we would have to clarify that “they schedule an interview for 9 a.m.” is the same thing as “told them that they could interview Cheney the next morning”.
Did the Sheriff really want to interview him and they told him no, wait until morning? Yeah, that would be abuse of power.
Peter, you asked “Does NOTHING these people do outrage you?”
Sure. Borders and Budget are big on my list of “Things That Need Fixin’.”
And I’ll be the first to say that I disagreed with just about everything that Bill Clinton did. But not everything. I mean, 8 years, and there were SOME things that the guy did that was fine by me. Granted, I could probably count those instances on one hand…
My question is, Peter, Does NOTHING these people do please you?
RLR
Den, I also wanted to say thanks for the info.
>>While, the lack of a legal hunting license would cause a regular joe who just shot a hunting buddy some serious headaches. In this instance, it has barely been mentioned and has been all but forgotten. Let’s remember, this is the guy who has screamed about ending the lawlessness in the Middle East and supposedly takes a firm stance on the law in this country. It appears that is only the case when his own inconvenience isn’t an issue.
>I guess I understand that you have to draw the line somewhere, but do you really equate the lawlessness in the Middle East to a $7 hunting license?
I was responding to the following statement:
>If you accidentally shot your friend while hunting would you expect to be crucified by the press and have your job threatened? I doubt it.
If the “Cheney shouldn’t be treated any differently than a regular guy” defense is going to be touted out, certainly a very quick reminder that he isn’t and sees this as an entitlement should be pointed out. Treat him like a regular guy. Fine him the huge fine that goes along with hunting without a licence and make it public record.
my bad, I was under the impression that he didn’t have a hunting sticker. Though it is kind of funny that he ir his assistants didn’t ensure that he had all of his ducks (or quails) in a row before going out. It may be a small infraction, but ut is still an infraction.
Bill, the timeline says as much as I’ve been able to uncover: The sheriff asked to speak to Cheney and then an interview was scheduled for the following morning. Whether he wanted speak to him that night or not isn’t clear. The apparent change in the statement about whether the deputies who arrived onsight wanted to speak to him that night, does however, raise some questions that should also be clarified.
As I said before, I don’t really believe that there was a cover up because he was drunk. I still think a decision was made on Saturday that no one was going to give a statement to the press or the local authorities until they had worked out the proper “spin” on the events. And I’m going to continue with that belief unless a witness comes forward to same that Cheney was totally knockin’ ’em back and was completely ripped that night.
And if the you look at their responses so far, it’s followed the administration’s SOP for any crises: First, deflect all blame onto someone else (Have Matalin say that the VP did nothing wrong and it was Whittington’s fault for not announcing his location). Second, minimize the signifigance of the event (He was just “peppered” and now he’s “very stable”. These accidents happen all the time). Third, unleash the punditry and blogosphere to attack anyone questioning the official line as effete liberals. And fourth, issue a belated mea culpa before a sympathetic audience -but only as a last resort.
Peter David: No, it’s the anti-gun wielding, anti-hunting…
Luigi Novi: You’re against hunting? Just out of curiosity, Peter, are you a vegetarian?
Treat him like a regular guy. Fine him the huge fine that goes along with hunting without a licence and make it public record.
As PAD said, this $7 sticker thing is a new development and does not seem to have been treated as a major infraction. I’m not sure anyone has gotten a major fine over it so Cheney should not either (if that is indeed the case).
Slapdash chickenshit lack of police procedure in one place doesn’t justify it elsewhere, although it is comforting to know that if I’m really pìššëd øff with someone, I can just go hunting with them in Oklahoma, shoot the crap out of them, claim, “Accident, my bad sorry,” and walk away from it with no investigation.
Of course, it helps when, as is apparently the case here, the victim is alive and well enough to speak. Had Cheney killed him there would have had to have been a different kind of investigation.
It’s not much different from a car accident. I haven’t had the experience, thank God, but I know people who have run into other humans and caused them injury and the amount of police investigation was minimal (In both cases the victim was well enough to corroborate the story.)
And if the you look at their responses so far, it’s followed the administration’s SOP for any crises: First, deflect all blame onto someone else (Have Matalin say that the VP did nothing wrong and it was Whittington’s fault for not announcing his location). Second, minimize the signifigance of the event (He was just “peppered” and now he’s “very stable”. These accidents happen all the time). Third, unleash the punditry and blogosphere to attack anyone questioning the official line as effete liberals. And fourth, issue a belated mea culpa before a sympathetic audience -but only as a last resort.
What times we live in–all that can be achieved in just 5 days! It used to take weeks for something like this to play out. George Carlin had it right: “this next song hasn’t even been released yet; at 10 this morning it was number one, and by tonight it’ll be a golden oldie.”
Of course, it helps when, as is apparently the case here, the victim is alive and well enough to speak. Had Cheney killed him there would have had to have been a different kind of investigation.
True, and there were other witnesses on the scene as well. If Ðìçk and Harry had been out in the woods by themselves and only one came back alive, then there would be cause for a full rectal probe into the matter. As it is, the timeline just suggests questions that should be clarified, which is why I lean towards the “Oh šhìŧ, we need to do some damage control” explanation rather then an actual cover up.
“My question is……Does NOTHING these people do please you?”
For me, the only thing I can think of that this administration has done that’s pleased me is pursuing Al Queada and their Taliban supporters in Afghanistan. That’s it. There’s not a single other accomplishment of this administration’s that I can think of that I can view in a positive light.
What times we live in–all that can be achieved in just 5 days! It used to take weeks for something like this to play out. George Carlin had it right: “this next song hasn’t even been released yet; at 10 this morning it was number one, and by tonight it’ll be a golden oldie.”
The wonderful world of the information superhighway is great, isn’t it? Of course, that also means that by next week, it’ll be old news and we can go back to talking about rich white girls who disappear while on a Carribean vacation.
Oh, and you’re welcome, Bill. I know we’ve butted heads before, but I’m willing to let bygones go if you are.
Oh yeah, we cool. When you came back with the samurai sword to take care of the two hillbilly rapists it settled all accounts. Your LA privilages are still revoked, however.
“Luigi Novi: You’re against hunting? Just out of curiosity, Peter, are you a vegetarian?”
No, and that’s pretty much irrelevant. I have no objection to people who hunt in order to eat. For that matter, fishermen who catch fish and then cook them up and eat them, I’m also not going to have an objection to.
People who go out and slaughter animals for fun is something I object to. Killing as recreation is vomitous.
PAD
PAD, I’m not sure that isn’t a pretty slippery slope. I don’t hunt but I fish. I eat the fish. That isn’t, however, why I fish. Obviously, I could go and buy a fish and eat it, for no doubt less than the cost of the license and gear. It’s the recreation. Which involves killing.
I’m also not sure that hunting, even the fairly unexciting type done by Cheney and co can be described fairly as “slaughter animals for fun”. There is a degree of skill and, as it turns out, risk involved. If one gets off just on slaughter there are far easier and more effective ways to go about it.
And while you may think it’s pretty much irrelevant, one of the things that would prevent me from being too critical of a hunter is the knowledge that the chicken I eat tonight had a far more miserable life and painful end than the quail that Cheney shot. I saw stuff at the Tyson Chicken Plant that would make Vlad the Impaler go vegan.
In other news:
Man Shot In Accident After Laughing At Cheney
My God! He’s gone on a rampage!
LAFAYETTE, Colo. Hours after laughing about Vice President Ðìçk Cheney’s hunting mishap, Josh Kayser was himself shot by a friend during a hunting expedition.
The 21-year-old Lafayette man was taken to the hospital Monday night after his girlfriend accidentally shot him while they were trailing a raccoon that had been preying on chickens on his family’s property.
“I read that thing about the vice president and said to myself ‘how can you shoot your friend with your gun?’ And look what happened,” he said Tuesday.
Oh. Well, ok then.
Eh, I hate LA anyway.
And if you think the chickens had a painful end, you should see how they lived. I once had the pleasure of seeing what one of those factory farms look like. The chicken manure in the basement was about five feet deep!
Still, I have a hard time seeing hunting these quailtards (thank you, Rob Cordry) as all that sporting. Maybe they’re a step above the pidgeon shoots that were once practiced in PA, but not by much.
Just for the record (since everyone’s just got to be panting for my opinion on the matter 🙂 —
If you hunt (or fish) because you need to in order to eat, more power to you.
If you eat what you catch, that seems reasonable, even if you don’t have to do so in order to survive.
If you hunt for pleasure, I don’t understand it. I particularly don’t understand those people who say “it’s for sport” and then have such incredibly lopsided odds that the hunt becomes almost literally a turkey shoot.
You want sport? Hunt mountain lions and wear clothes that rattle loudly. But hunting deer with armor-piercing bullets strikes me as carnage, not sport.
(Fishing seems a different type of thing to me, for some reason. I’m not sure why — maybe it’s on the order of “hey, if the fish are dumb enough to bite, you’re just taking advantage” or something.)
TWL
The ugliness of the animal matters. It shouldn’t but it does. Even if, by some miracle, the world was suddenly knee deep in panda bears I wouldn’t want to eat them.
Unless, of course, they tasted really really good.
I’ve often called that the “cute animal theory.” I formulated that theory when I was in college and everyone was campaigning to boycott tuna (which I hate, so I was already boycotting it) because dolphins were getting killed in the nets. Not one person ever told me to boycott tuna because tuna were getting killed in the nets!
Other cultures eat horses and dogs. We don’t because we think they’re cute. Cows, pigs, chickens are all ugly.
“Hours after laughing about Vice President Ðìçk Cheney’s hunting mishap, Josh Kayser was himself shot by a friend during a hunting expedition.
The 21-year-old Lafayette man was taken to the hospital Monday night after his girlfriend accidentally shot him while they were trailing a raccoon that had been preying on chickens on his family’s property.”
Uh oh! Did she call a press release? Who knew what when? Are they gonna GRILL her?! Maybe she was drinking…
Maybe she was. Maybe she was pìššëd øff at her boyfriend. Maybe he was cheating on her. Maybe they’d just had an argument.
Into all these maybes can be added the non-maybe that a staggering number of homicides are committed, not by strangers, but by friends and acquaintances.
So maybe every smug hunter out there who shrugs off such things as “Oh, well it’s just an accident” should allow into his gray matter the notion that ALL such incidents should be subjected to close scrutiny.
PAD
I see alot of people are missing the point about why this situation is bringing up so much debate. It’s NOT that we THINK Cheney did something most average citizens would get in serious trouble for, and used his influence to stop immediate investigation. It’s that as more facts come out, it’s obvious that he did indeed use his taxpayer funded little posse to skirt around immediate investgation that would normally result in any reguler person being fined and losing their hunting license for not having all the proper permits (or seals in this case), and obvious recklessness while using a deadly weapon.
Im more than confident if this situation happened to any one of us, our lives wouldn’t be buisness as usual. Im also disturbed that Hunting Accidents resulting in someone being wounded (hunting penned animals at that!) is being mentioned as being commonplace. It is not that common to shoot a buddy while hunting.
Far as I’m concerned, Cheney reaps what he sews–he gets to be the butt of ridicule of every late night host, sketch group, political commentator adn cartoonist in this country and others (folks have got to admit….he DID do a dumb thing)(and compounded it with his try to “spin” the events).
Leave it there. I just hope he feels as guilty as he should be….
Ok, more has come out now.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0216061cheney1.html
One thing–apparently the MSNBC folks got the early part really wrong (color me unsurprised). The accident happened at around 5:30, not 6:30. The police were contacted within minutes, not hours later.
According to the actual Sheriff, it was his decision to wait until the next morning to have the interview. The victim has testified that alcohol was not involved.
Needless to say, none of these facts will dissuade those who are unwilling to be dissuaded. Witnesses can be threatened and paid off, right?
Meanwhile, the Patriot act–declared dead by Harry Reid just a few weeks ago–is about to be extended by what looks like a big margin. The secret wiretapping controversy is being allowed to die by Democrats who didn’t like how the polls were shaping up on public opinion. Nobody even speculates any more about Karl Rove being indicted, much less expects it. On the big issues, this is not shaping up to be a good week for Democrats. But at least they got a few days worth of good jokes.
And back in Europe…
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=77773&d=14&m=2&y=2006
Solana Seeks to Quell Cartoon Rage
In what can only be described as the first confidence-building measure between Europe and the Muslim world, one of the highest ranking leaders of the European Union paid a visit to the secretary-general of the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) here yesterday.
Solana agreed with Ihsanoglu’s suggestion that the EU and the OIC should jointly make efforts to adopt a UN resolution on the lines of the existing Resolution No. 60/150, which calls for combating defamation of religions.
“The new UN resolution should prohibit defamation of all prophets and faiths,” said Ihsanoglu at a press conference addressed jointly by the two leaders.
(Solana said)“Unfortunately, people in the Muslim world feel that this is a new 9/11 against themselves. In Europe unfortunately Muslims have taken the place of Jews during World War II. There is a need for a UN legislation and clarification of existing conventions,” he said.
Soak that one in for a moment. Read it again.
In another account of the same meeting this shows up:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/EU-chief-tries-to-calm-cartoons-dispute/2006/02/14/1139679559999.html
Solana’s spokeswoman Cristina Gallach said the delegation now felt the tide was turning in the cartoon furore.
“They want mechanisms to guarantee this is not repeated and we should be able to find it in UN conventions on human rights,” she said.
What. The. Hëll? The U.N. is going to guarantee that no cartoons offensive to radical Muslims is ever published again?
Things are better in this country, except at University newspapers where people have been suspended for publishing cartoons. The reaction here has mostly been one of craven cowardice, not calls for legal capitulation. My standards have dropped low enough for that to be good news.
We never should have stood as passively as we all did when Rushdie was marked for death. Since then it’s become obvious that the radicals in the Islamic countries–with the open support of their governments–feel free to target any member of any other country for assassination based on nothing more than that person’s religious views.
Anyone who thinks this is the end of it is painfully naive. But none of this is worth wasting perfectly good media time on.
The bird’s altitude is irrelevant. First rule of hunting (and a large number of people in my office do hunt every year) is ALWAYS BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET BEFORE SHOOTING. The fact that Cheney managed to hit someone relatively close by, whom he KNEW to be nearby, indicates he neglected this fundamental rule.
Let us hope that, should he ever wind up President, and have his finger on the Button, he’s more careful.
Untuil then, am I the only one who, while reading the above posts, flashed back to Tom Lehrer’s THE HUNTING SONG?
http://members.aol.com/quentncree/lehrer/hunting.htm
“I went out to hunt some deer
On a morning bright and clear.
I went and shot the maximum the game laws would allow:
Two game wardens, seven hunters, and a cow.”
“One thing–apparently the MSNBC folks got the early part really wrong (color me unsurprised). The accident happened at around 5:30, not 6:30. The police were contacted within minutes, not hours later.
According to the actual Sheriff, it was his decision to wait until the next morning to have the interview. The victim has testified that alcohol was not involved.
Needless to say, none of these facts will dissuade those who are unwilling to be dissuaded. Witnesses can be threatened and paid off, right?”
Yes. They can. This is an administration that has a track record of retaliation against those who so much as criticize them. If you don’t think an administration capable of outing a CIA agent couldn’t possibly make certain that all ducks were in a row, all stories matched up, and all alcohol was out of Cheney’s system, then you are remarkably naive. The Bushites have no one but themselves to blame: Between their track record of stonewalling, retribution, and making sure that all their flunkies parrot the exact same party line, they’ve only themselves to blame when this comes across as more of the same.
“Meanwhile, the Patriot act–declared dead by Harry Reid just a few weeks ago–is about to be extended by what looks like a big margin. The secret wiretapping controversy is being allowed to die by Democrats who didn’t like how the polls were shaping up on public opinion. Nobody even speculates any more about Karl Rove being indicted, much less expects it. On the big issues, this is not shaping up to be a good week for Democrats.”
See,that’s the difference between GOP and Democrats. You guys consider it as not a good week for Democrats. We consider it as not a good week for America.
PAD
“See,that’s the difference between GOP and Democrats. You guys consider it as not a good week for Democrats. We consider it as not a good week for America.”
Amazing accurate. GOP knows they represent themselves. The Democrats think they speak for America.
Glad to know we agree on something.
“Amazing accurate. GOP knows they represent themselves. The Democrats think they speak for America.”
Ohhhhh, nice try. Not remotely (note the proper use of adverb) what I said, but nice try.
PAD
Posted by The StarWolf at February 16, 2006 08:54 PM
The bird’s altitude is irrelevant. First rule of hunting (and a large number of people in my office do hunt every year) is ALWAYS BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET BEFORE SHOOTING. The fact that Cheney managed to hit someone relatively close by, whom he KNEW to be nearby, indicates he neglected this fundamental rule.
He fired at a sound behind him. If Whittington had died, and i were the Prosecutor in that county, i would definitely have gone for *at* *least* negligent homicide.
Untuil then, am I the only one who, while reading the above posts, flashed back to Tom Lehrer’s THE HUNTING SONG?
Me! Me!
Just like i flashed on Bogdanovich’s TARGETS during the DC sniper thing and on Malcolm McDowell’s first film, …if… after Columbine…
If you don’t think an administration capable of outing a CIA agent couldn’t possibly make certain that all ducks were in a row, all stories matched up, and all alcohol was out of Cheney’s system, then you are remarkably naive.
Never suggested any such thing, sir. Obviously, it is possible. It is also possible (in the sense that it is not impossible) that Vince Foster really was murdered and dragged to the park to make it look like a suicide but absent any actual evidence I will regard both possibilities with the respect that they deserve.
See,that’s the difference between GOP and Democrats. You guys consider it as not a good week for Democrats. We consider it as not a good week for America.
We? We? Who is this we, kemosabe? If what I have read is correct it is possible that the Patriot Act–which passed with tremendous support from your America Loving Democrats–may be extended with support from those same America Loving Democrats. Evidentially many of them do not consider passing the Act to be bad for America. Neither do I, with reservations.
My point was that in first claiming opposition to it and then backing down they weakened themselves–rather unnecessarily, it seems to me. What was the point? To confirm to many the suspicion that they are the party that follows polls more than principles?
“Never suggested any such thing, sir. Obviously, it is possible. It is also possible (in the sense that it is not impossible) that Vince Foster really was murdered and dragged to the park to make it look like a suicide but absent any actual evidence I will regard both possibilities with the respect that they deserve.”
There is a vast difference between possible and likely. Making a conjecture based upon a pattern of behavior is one thing; making a conjecture based purely on slanted conspiracy theory is quite another. However, I do appreciate your tacit admission that the right wing pundits would happily have ascribed all manner of sinister motives to Clinton or Gore had one of them been involved in a hunting shooting incident.
“See,that’s the difference between GOP and Democrats. You guys consider it as not a good week for Democrats. We consider it as not a good week for America.
We? We? Who is this we, kemosabe? If what I have read is correct it is possible that the Patriot Act–which passed with tremendous support from your America Loving Democrats–may be extended with support from those same America Loving Democrats. Evidentially many of them do not consider passing the Act to be bad for America. Neither do I, with reservations.”
I’m sorry, I’m unsure what part of “you guys” was unclear. When I’m speaking of “Democrats” I’m not referring to the politicos who knuckled under to the Bush White House. I’m referring to the Democratic Americans who are not interested in giving up essential liberties to obtain a little temporary safety, consequently deserving neither.
PAD
Evidentially many of them do not consider passing the Act to be bad for America.
Most of them also don’t know their heads from their áššhølëš.
And none of them give a flying fûçk about this country.
However, I do appreciate your tacit admission that the right wing pundits would happily have ascribed all manner of sinister motives to Clinton or Gore had one of them been involved in a hunting shooting incident.
“The” right wing pundits? No. “Some” right wing pundits? Of course. I would never suggest that it is the left wing that has a monopoly on craziness, though they ARE more willing to display it in public.
I’m sorry, I’m unsure what part of “you guys” was unclear.
Neither am I. I thought it referred to GOP, as opposed to Democrats. I thought you were talking about the parties. I certainly was.
The implication–and if I’ve misinterpreted this I apologize–that my saying this was a bad week for the Democratic party is somehow different from believing that it was a bad week for America is dubious. You are missing the larger point. I’ve said it several times in previous threads (not that I think or expect you to be keeping close tabs on What Bill Believes) that if the Democratic Party goes down in flames it will be a disaster for the country.
I will not try to deny that I vote Republican more often than not but I am in no way eager to see the GOP have uncontrolled dominance. I think it could be a good thing for the Democrats to at least take back the house.That is, of course, contingent on the party standing for something, “we’re not the other guy” is obviously not a winning strategy and I won’t support any group so stupid that repeated defeats have not yet driven that home.
As for essential liberties, well, I never actually thought that if I got a phone call from overseas there wasn’t a pretty good chance it might be monitored. I DID think, however, that I lived in a country where people could publish cartoons without fear of death. So I guess that’s the issue that seems more serious to me at the moment. Right now my own government does not seem like the most dangerous thing we face.