The Enforcer

Tip: When Cheney asks you to go on a hunting trip, it’s time to reconsider your criticism of the administration.

If you haven’t heard the news, Dick Cheney shot someone, a friend in fact. The news reports mostly say ‘accidentally’ but maybe it’s really a message aimed at Bush’s critics? I mean if Cheney will shoot his friends, what won’t he do to his enemies? Heh.

Machinegun Cheney examining the tools of his trade.
"Yes. This will do nicely."

This has all been predicted, of course, by the more reliable liberal commentators on the left, and perveyors of liberal moderation in the blogosphere.

(Does anyone really believe that it's possible to 'accidentally' shoot a lawyer? I would assume lawyers are almost always shot for very good reason.)

Since there's much more to this story than will ever be reported you're lucky I am versed in all the various schools of conspiracy-think so that I can help you decode what's really going on.

Within the official cover story of this event is all the info we need to decipher what this really means.

[1] "They had no idea he was there," Armstrong said.

"[2] A bird flew up, the vice president followed it through around [3]to his right and shot, and unfortunately, unbeknownst to anybody, Harry was there and he got peppered pretty good with a spray of 28-gauge pellets," Armstrong said in a telephone interview. reuters.com

This is a calculated message to Administration critics and whistleblowers. [1] We don't know who you are yet, but to those [3] on the right (i.e. already within the administration, maybe ready to leak some sensitive information) who are ready to flee the coup [2], WATCH OUT! Don't do it-- you might get shot.

Well, there you have it. Enjoy.

Posted by Eric Simonson at February 13, 2006 12:58 AM
Comments
Comment #124081

From The Daily Kos:

Cheney is just testing to see how far he can take his theories of unitary executive power. Can he, in fact, kill — or have killed — someone within the borders of the US.

Posted by: Aldous at February 13, 2006 1:14 AM
Comment #124082

On the bright side…

We can now all be grateful Cheney got 5 Deferments in the Vietnam War. Just think of all those Veterans who wouldn’t be here now had Cheney done his Tour like a man.

Posted by: Aldous at February 13, 2006 1:18 AM
Comment #124083

From Sergeant D:

Damn, Cheney only enjoys a tiny percentage of endorsement from the American people. The lawyer he swiss-cheesed is an actual supporter.

You’d think he’d be a little more careful… only shoot his critics. The target pool is definitely larger.

Posted by: Aldous at February 13, 2006 1:19 AM
Comment #124084

I hope he decides after this to go hunting more often. He could take Elaine Chao, Karl Rove, Eddie Gillespie, Ken Mehlman heck even take Dubya with him at some point and others in the admin. I think we found him a hobby!

Frankly I’m just waiting for GW to chainsaw into his own leg while “clearing brush” on his phony farm in Crawford.

Posted by: Neo-Sobriet at February 13, 2006 1:24 AM
Comment #124085

From Aldous to Eric Simonson:

Actually, I already knew Cheney was incompetent before today. What is telling is the background of that “Ranch”:

“Pioneer Tobin Armstrong’s ancestor, Texas Ranger John B. Armstrong, bought the beginnings of the Armstrong Ranch in 1882 with the $4,000 bounty he received for capturing outlaw John Wesley Hardin. In 1944 Tobin’s older brother wed an heir of legendary King Ranch (see Fausto Yturria), linking two of the biggest ranches in Texas. The Armstrong Ranch has since gone global, with tracts in Australia and South America. In recent years, Tobin and his wife, Anne, have hosted many GOP dignitaries—including the first and second President Bush—on their 50,000-acre Armstrong Ranch in South Texas. “We go out when the dew is still on the grass, and then hunt until we shoot our limit,” Tobin said in 2000 of his ranch outings with Dick Cheney. “Then we pick a fine spot and have a wild game picnic lunch.” True conservatives might choke on their javelina steaks if they knew that Tobin Armstrong dunned the government for $11,336 in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2002, according to the Environmental Working Group. Anne Armstrong served as: a close advisor to President Nixon; President Ford’s British Ambassador; and approved covert actions on the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under Reagan. A veteran of blue-chip corporate boards, Anne Armstrong was a Halliburton director when that corporation hired Cheney. She is Kay Bailey Hutchison’s best friend, having helped launch the senator’s career as Republican National Committee co-chair in 1971. George W. Bush appointed Anne Armstrong as a Texas A&M regent in 1997. She and her husband were part of Laura Bush’s delegation to the funeral of Queen Mother Elizabeth in 2002. As a Kenedy County Commissioner in 2001, Tobin Armstrong expressed serious reservations about a short-lived Bush administration plan to relocate a Navy bomb-testing site from Puerto Rico to the fragile sand dunes of a local beach. Daughter Katharine Armstrong—formerly Katherine Idsal—and ex-son-in-law Warren Idsal also are Pioneers. President Bush invited Tobin, Anne and Katharine Armstrong to a White House sleepover.”

Posted by: Aldous at February 13, 2006 1:29 AM
Comment #124091

I was just reading the news on this one and Tobin’s wife said and I paraprase “It happens from time to time, I’ve been peppered a few times myself.”

She’s been hit with birdshot? they really need to stop hanging out with Dick seriously.

Also it’s reported he has a medical team following him around, I wonder why?

Posted by: Neo-sobriet at February 13, 2006 2:11 AM
Comment #124106

two words: gun control.

Posted by: mike at February 13, 2006 2:33 AM
Comment #124141

It is very fortunate for the nation that it was a Republican and friend that he shot. No doubt about it. He should go hunting more often. Practice makes perfect they say. :)

The only curious aspect of this story is the fact that the vicitm was coming up behind Cheney when Cheney followed a bird down to the horizon for the shot. Does a responsible hunter shoot into the horizon without first checking for humans? None of the hunters I know would do that.

Posted by: David R. Remer at February 13, 2006 5:04 AM
Comment #124170

There is this little tidbit:


The more than 18-hour delay in news emerging that the Vice President of the United States had shot a man, sending him to an intensive care unit with his wounds, grew even more curious late Sunday. E&P has learned that the official confirmation of the shooting came about only after a local reporter in Corpus Christi, Texas, received a tip from the owner of the property where the shooting occured and called Vice President Cheney’s office for confirmation.

The confirmation was made but there was no indication whether the Vice President’s office, the White House, or anyone else intended to announce the shooting if the reporter, Jaime Powell of the Corpus Christ Caller-Times, had not received word from the ranch owner.


Posted by: Aldous at February 13, 2006 7:09 AM
Comment #124187

My sympathy goes out to the injured one and his family,also,to the V.P.who must be in much emotional pain at injuring a person in such a way.I would be frantic and rightly so and probably never hunt again.I would question myself as to how it could have been prevented,much the same way the driver of a car who injured a person or any other incident where injury was caused.I see above and I’ll probably see more below the hatred of the V.P.and the complete lack of compassion for the victim and his family,and the V.P.and his feelings.Would you be as heartless if it had been Al Gore and a friend of his?I am always sympatatic in a situation such as this for both sides even if I find later the incident could have been prevented if the careless person had not been careless.I cannot imagine a person could make fun of this incident and consider themselves a caring compassionate ‘Christian’ or even a decent human being.This is a tragic incident and should be treated as such!

Posted by: RDAVIDC at February 13, 2006 8:12 AM
Comment #124188

I knew this was nothing to get excited about the minute I read it. Still, it is kind of amusing.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 13, 2006 8:13 AM
Comment #124194

As I read elsewhere earlier today: “I’d rather go hunting with Cheney than riding with Kennedy.”

Posted by: Owl Creek Observer at February 13, 2006 8:35 AM
Comment #124230

OCO-
Ehhh, I’m not quite sure that applies. One must consider the quarry: If Cheney had been hunting for deer, the guy would be dead.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 13, 2006 9:27 AM
Comment #124244

How come this lawyer didn’t wear his kevlar helmet and bulletproof vest while driving his personal Hummvee toward the VP’s machine gun?!?
Maybe “Duck!” Cheney have issue keeping his selfcontrol while he turn to his right. Maybe it’s hurtfull. Who knows…
Anyway, I hope his bird lawyer friend will be fine soon, though.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at February 13, 2006 10:00 AM
Comment #124254

I’ve been peppered pretty good on a quail hunt, but not that bad. Something like this is more common if they were shooting those “stomp and shoot” pen raised birds. I like that he was using a .28 guage though if the story is accurate.

Posted by: George in SC at February 13, 2006 10:23 AM
Comment #124260

From the home office, Dick Cheney’s Top 10 Excuses for Shooting That Guy:


10. Sure, like you’ve never seen seen giant game birds wearing day glo orange vests

9. Warrantless domestic spying revealed he was getting phone calls from al Queda

8. If the Vice President does it, its not against the law

7. Hoping to put him in a persistent vegetative state so the GOP could pass a law to keep him alive

6. Thought he was hunting Dan Quayle

5. The love between them could not survive back in Washington

4. Birds, Cows, People— with my eyesight I’m lucky I hit anything

3. Positive the guy’s family will welcome him as a liberator

2. Pheasants? I thought we were hunting peasants

and the number one Cheney excuse for shooting that guy:
1. Open season on liberals started early this year

Posted by: Aldous at February 13, 2006 10:36 AM
Comment #124280

Those who claim to be so concerned with constitutional rights never miss a chance to try reduce the bill of rights by one. The 2nd Ammendment remains the target of the Democrats. Perhaps once they achieve that goal they will ‘protect’ us from ourselves by banning the automobile. As most ‘accidents’ are not truly accidents at all. Just imagine the lives saved and health care cost reductions that could be achieved by this single noble act. Their goal of reducing the bill of rights by one has proved to be impossible at the ballot box and they have not been able to insert the proper judge at the federal level to ‘interpret’ the Constitution to their desired goal. But next chance they have they will try to bring it about through the U.N. through the control of small arms. Which by the way would also render the Constitution moot.

Posted by: pige at February 13, 2006 11:32 AM
Comment #124286

Isn’t it up to a Court of Law to determine if the shooting was accidental?

Posted by: bobo at February 13, 2006 11:49 AM
Comment #124287

Uh, pige. The left only believe the Amendments that support “their” agenda are worth fighting for. The rest can be changed to say what “they” want them to say.

Posted by: kctim at February 13, 2006 11:50 AM
Comment #124288
The 2nd Ammendment remains the target of the Democrats. Perhaps once they achieve that goal they will ‘protect’ us from ourselves by banning the automobile.

At least with the automobile we have a mechanism in place to determine if you’re a safe driver. Not so with guns.

Posted by: bobo at February 13, 2006 11:51 AM
Comment #124291

I do feel bad for anyone that gets shot, or for that matter someone that accidentally shoots someone. It’s a horrible thing to have to live with. Hunting accidents are terrible, and thankfully this one wasn’t fatal.

That said (and sincerely meant)- I will do everything I can not to make light here (no matter my personal disrespect for the administration). The jokes are simply too easy to make. It’s not sportsmanlike.

As opposed to say… “hunting” on a game farm. I don’t hunt anymore, but I once did and I accept that it’s part of life and part of our culture. Game farm hunting is a really more of a slaughter than a hunt. The animals are raised simply so that a person can shoot them as they get flushed out into your path. They have no hope of getting away. What kind of a craven jerk do you have to be to do this? He could just as well go “hunting” for cattle… with a hammer.

It was a preventable mistake, and as a proud NRA Memeber and sportsman, the Veep would surely have to accept full responsibility as he was the shooter. No excuses would be acceptable. NONE.

The reason for the delay in reporting it was to keep it out of the Sunday news shows. After a full week-long news cycle it can be more easily downplayed.
Executive privelege is a sweet thing to wield, indeed.

Posted by: John Klapak at February 13, 2006 11:57 AM
Comment #124292

Possesion of a drivers license certainly does not equate with the premise of a ‘safe’ driver. Thousands of drunk ‘safe’ drivers kill tens of thousands of us each year. The difference being if you negligently or deliberately kill someone with a firearm you will likely never be allowed out of prison to repeat the offense. Drunk drivers will most likely be allowed to repeat their offense many times over. But they may sleep well knowing they did it whilst being a ‘safe’ driver.

Posted by: pige at February 13, 2006 12:01 PM
Comment #124294

pige,

“Thousands of drunk ‘safe’ drivers kill tens of thousands of us each year.”

Yeah, and how many “hunts” are fueled by beer?

Posted by: Rocky at February 13, 2006 12:10 PM
Comment #124295

Also driving is a privilege the 2nd Ammendment is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. A right bestowed upon us by the founding fathers who had faced being subjects rather than citizens. A fate the left would once again impose upon us all, if given the chance.

Posted by: pige at February 13, 2006 12:10 PM
Comment #124297
Also driving is a privilege the 2nd Amendment is a right guaranteed by the Constitution.

And it goes hand in hand with the requirement of a well-regulated militia, a part of the 2nd Amendment almost universally ignored by the right wing

Posted by: bobo at February 13, 2006 12:20 PM
Comment #124303

Extremely irresponsible (and trigger happy).
You should always know what you are shooting at before you pull the trigger.

Posted by: d.a.n at February 13, 2006 12:36 PM
Comment #124304

Yeah Bobo, lets go ahead and read into it so it says what we need it to say to support our own personal views. Now we have a “requirement” huh?
“The right of the people” doesnt really mean “the people” does it.

I guess one could also say it goes hand in hand with what constitutes unreasonable searches and seizures also dont we.
You know, a part of the 4th Amendment almost universally ignored or exagerated by the left wing.

Change what Amendments you dont agree with and somebody else will try to change the ones YOU agree with but they dont.
Welcome to the 21st Century US. The beginning of our end.

Posted by: kctim at February 13, 2006 12:42 PM
Comment #124306

A ‘safe’ driver also is not required to pass an FBI background check to obtain an automobile before they proceed out onto our public roadways.

Posted by: pige at February 13, 2006 12:50 PM
Comment #124308

Why was Cheney hunting quail? Doesn’t he eat babies?
;-)

Posted by: TheTraveler at February 13, 2006 12:52 PM
Comment #124315

ummm. bobo you left out A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms.

Posted by: pige at February 13, 2006 1:02 PM
Comment #124349

With apologies to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, I offer:

The Song Of Tricky-Dicky

In the mighty land of Texas
(Home of Quantrill, Bush, and Delay),
Strode the hunter: Tricky-Dicky.
Like the balding `Murrrkan Eagle
(But with glasses and pacemaker),
Armed with shotgun, Secret-Service,
And a strong sense of Divine Right,
Strode he through the winter switchgrass,
Seeking for the quail, his quarry.
Mighty hunter, furrow’d of brow,
Sunlight glinting on his slick pate,
Did not see his fellow-hunter
Stop to seek the wounded quarry;
Cared not for the pansy weakling:
Who cares if the thing is but maimed?
Hearing motion, spun he quickly,
Raised his rod and placed the finger:
Palsied digit twitched the trigger
Loud the report, blue the gunsmoke;
True the shot flew to the target.
Oh, alas for Friendly Fire!
Smote he his friend, Tricky-Dicky;
Many were the foulmouthed curses;
No time for a decent cov’rup:
Many were the witnesses there,
No place safe to hide the body.
Rushed he to his fallen comrade,
Thoughts of Field-Days for the Press, now
Through his mind like small game running;
“Get this brave man to a doctor;”
“Do not worry, I know many!”
Quoth the mighty Tricky-Dicky
As he struggled with his dark heart.
For, in his mind, knew he turmoil;
Knew of Facts he dare not speak of:
That his comrade, making Motion,
Was a Target, right-and-proper,
Fit to fire on - after all it
Might be Weapons Of Destruction:
Best to shoot, ask Questions later

Posted by: Betty Burke at February 13, 2006 2:05 PM
Comment #124352

kctim and pige:

It’s always fascinating the way people read what they want into the 2nd Amendment. I never said I disagreed with the amendment’s grant of the right to keep and bear arms. I only wish you Conservatives could find something to say about the militia part.

Posted by: bobo at February 13, 2006 2:10 PM
Comment #124354

TheTra’velour’, (I upgraded your moniker to the smoothness of velour.)

LOL. It’s a popular myth that the Veep eats babies. I believe he just drinks their blood.

Posted by: esimonson at February 13, 2006 2:13 PM
Comment #124366

Eric,

LOL. It’s a popular myth that the Veep eats babies. I believe he just drinks their blood.

I’ve never actually seen him do that, although I did see him eat Edwards alive during the debate… Looked tasty!

Tra’velour’… I think that’s how Inspector Clouseau would pronounce it!

Posted by: TheTra'velour' at February 13, 2006 2:33 PM
Comment #124369

bobo
“It’s always fascinating the way people read what they want into the 2nd Amendment”

Tell me about it. Kudos to you though, for owning up to your mistake.

“I never said I disagreed with the amendment’s grant of the right to keep and bear arms”

Uh, it “grants” the people the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

“I only wish you Conservatives could find something to say about the militia part”

I’m hardly a conservative, but, its necessary to the security of a free state.
You know, the right to defend yourself from the govt that is trying to alter your 4th Amendment rights today.

It’s always fascinating the way people are willing to give up their rights in order to feel “safer,” isn’t it.

Posted by: kctim at February 13, 2006 2:37 PM
Comment #124398

bobo. The militia as the name implies was comprised of ‘citizen’ soldiers who could be called upon when needed and as needed. Therefore they would have by necessity been able to leave home with their arms when called upon to serve. The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service. An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.

Posted by: pige at February 13, 2006 3:53 PM
Comment #124407
I guess one could also say it goes hand in hand with what constitutes unreasonable searches and seizures also dont we. You know, a part of the 4th Amendment almost universally ignored or exagerated by the left wing.

“The point of the Fourth Amendment … is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime. Any assumption that evidence sufficient to support a magistrate’s disinterested determination to issue a search warrant will justify the officers in making a search without a warrant would reduce the Amendment to a nullity and leave the people’s homes secure only in the discretion of police officers… . When the right of privacy must reasonably yield to the right of search is, as a rule, to be decided by a judicial officer, not by a policeman or government enforcement agent.” Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13—14 (1948)

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at February 13, 2006 4:09 PM
Comment #124409

kctim and pige,

So what’s the reason for entirety of the 2nd Amendment?

kctim: You seem only to quote the Constitution tautologically: “it’s necessary to the security of a free state.” Well, the United Kingdom and many other Western democracies have stayed pretty secure without 2nd amendment rights.

pige: You talk about the milita but not about “gun rights.” Again: what’s the militia doing in the 2nd Amendment?

I just want to know, from people who support a very broad (perhaps even unrestricted) “right to keep and bear arms,” why the ENTIRE 2nd Amendment is written the way it is and what that means for the United States TODAY?

Posted by: bobo at February 13, 2006 4:12 PM
Comment #124420
The confirmation was made but there was no indication whether the Vice President’s office, the White House, or anyone else intended to announce the shooting if the reporter, Jaime Powell of the Corpus Christ Caller-Times, had not received word from the ranch owner.

For christ’s sake Aldous, they were all busy checking on the condition of the shootee - you know how sensitive they are, give them some credit.

Posted by: Schwamp at February 13, 2006 4:29 PM
Comment #124424

bobo
Western democracy’s are NOT Constitutional Republics, as our country used to be.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

It is the duty of every American to hold their govt in check so as we do not fall to tyranny.
It is the “right” given to us, by the 2nd Amendment, to have that ability so we do not fall to tyranny.

We The People…

the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people

The people means The people!

What does that mean for the US TODAY?
It means that the people have given up their 2nd Amendment rights and now fear the govt instead of the govt fearing the people

It means that instead of honoring the Constitution as it was written, you all would rather make it read as you want and we can keep arguing about what you want the 2nd Amendment to say and what the right sees as unreasonable searches.
It means the people now fear the govt and are arguing amongst themselves while the govt laughs.

Posted by: kctim at February 13, 2006 4:41 PM
Comment #124428

Now, I just want to know, why do the people who do not support the 2nd Amendment as it was written, do not believe it is as important today as it was then?
Why have you allowed the govt to use your fear against you and take away your 2nd Amendment rights?

Posted by: kctim at February 13, 2006 4:54 PM
Comment #124430

You know some people just shouldn’t play with WMD’s. Having known a person that was shot on a hunting accident by his friend, I can only wonder why it took the Vice President almost 12 hours to properly report the accident to the authority. However, I must ask the Republicans why did they have to ask Karl Rove if it was the right thing to notify the Preident that his VP just shot someone, especially considering that Rove is not a Lawyer. Or is it because the Republicans truely believe that they are Above the Law.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 13, 2006 5:03 PM
Comment #124437
instead of honoring the Constitution as it was written, you all would rather make it read as you want

I can see the eagle soaring high above you, and hear the Star Spangled Banner playing very loudly. Unfortunately, I also see you avoiding any serious discussion of my question.

Adios

Posted by: bobo at February 13, 2006 5:17 PM
Comment #124449

Eric:

It’s amazing what you can do. A prominent Republican does something wrong and you find a way to poke fun at liberals.

Your vice president shot a man and he did not bother to tell even the president the truth. He told Bush a man was shot; he did not say HE did it.

The man was in the hospital because they thought it was serious. Lucky for Cheney, the man lives.

And you make jokes.

Posted by: Paul Siegel at February 13, 2006 5:35 PM
Comment #124452

Ah yes Bobo, right on cue.
Sorry I couldnt make it easier for you and bring up “muh huntin rites” or “self defense,” but instead chose to use the original meaning of the Amendment.
To protect from tyranny is a serious answer and leaves plenty of room for serious discussion.
Not having a viable answer because it conflicts with your mindset is truly telling.

Adios indeed.

PS.
It is on the blue side where patriotic plugs are offensive. I happen to love my country and what it once stood for.

Posted by: kctim at February 13, 2006 5:44 PM
Comment #124468

I’ve read that the victim is in the ICU - that sounds a bit more serious then “peppered,” which incidentally is how I like my steak.

Seriously, while I haven’t hunted quail or dove in a long time, from what I remember, the VP must have broke some fundamental rules.

The story is that he turned around 180 degrees and fired with the sun in his face. Equally seriously, he shot his victim in the face, neck, and chest, which indicates he had his rifle at a pretty low angle, not super consistent with a flushing covey.

It seems like the VP did some really unsafe things, about 3 in rapid succession. If my dad were still alive, I’m sure he’d never hunt with Cheney again. I know he’d have slapped me silly if I spun around 180 degrees and shot looking into the sun without taking careful stock of my surroundings.

I shudder to think of gun control advocates using this issue to hurt the Dems more. More safety and common sense, please, not more restrictions.

Posted by: Arr-squared at February 13, 2006 6:19 PM
Comment #124477

I heard he was shot because he was going to beome a Democrat. :-)
Of course,
The best part is that it was while Quayle hunting!

Posted by: Dave at February 13, 2006 6:37 PM
Comment #124492

bobo. Get your bifocals out. You know the rose colored ones. Slow down when ya read. It’s right there after the special but equal clause. The quota clause and the gender based right to behead babies clause. How could you miss it?

Posted by: pige at February 13, 2006 7:20 PM
Comment #124507

Interesting how the WingNuts come out with knives when questions are raised on Cheney’s Irresponsibility on this.

d.a.n. is correct. Cheney was firing blind when he pulled the trigger.

Posted by: Aldous at February 13, 2006 7:49 PM
Comment #124513

Paul,

It’s amazing what you can do. A prominent Republican does something wrong and you find a way to poke fun at liberals.

Thank you. I aim to please. What can I say— it’s a gift!

I’m actually thinking that I should be paid for it. I think it was Adrienne who planted the idea in my head that someone should be paying me to do what I do so well. ;)

Your vice president shot a man and he did not bother to tell even the president the truth. He told Bush a man was shot; he did not say HE did it.

The man was in the hospital because they thought it was serious. Lucky for Cheney, the man lives.

And you make jokes.

I think he was in the hospital because he’s 78 years old —- and he probably backsassed ‘the enforcer’.

Though personally, I think he got shot because he’s a lawyer. Think about it: You have a loaded gun in your hand, and a lawyer standing in front of you. It’s like 2+2=4.

Posted by: esimonson at February 13, 2006 7:52 PM
Comment #124521

Paul,

I think I’ll use that quote for my blog as an endorsement.

“It’s amazing what you can do. A prominent Republican does something wrong and you find a way to poke fun at liberals.” ~Paul Siegal

I’ve got to dig out the other quote from David about how great I am too.

Posted by: esimonson at February 13, 2006 8:03 PM
Comment #124588

What more can we expect from Cheney — or any Neocon for that matter — with these guys its always shoot first, avoid all questions later.
Of course the rightwing spin is that this was “just a few flesh wounds” that are nothing to get excited about, but anybody with half a brain in their head who has ever actually fired a shotgun knows that he could have very easily murdered the guy.
The White House is already trying to place the blame elsewhere (so what else is new?) this time on the person shot, when in reality, what Dick actually did, asthis article points out, is break the #1 rule of hunting — to always be sure of what you’re aiming at. He also violated the law (again, what else is new?) by not buying a hunting stamp to kill a bunch of birds in what really is the least sportsman-like manner possible — on a game farm.

“I’m actually thinking that I should be paid for it. I think it was Adrienne who planted the idea in my head that someone should be paying me to do what I do so well.”

Ha. It’s so damn obvious you’re already on the GOP payroll, Eric.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 13, 2006 11:01 PM
Comment #124596

Adrienne,

Ha. It’s so damn obvious you’re already on the GOP payroll, Eric.

I wish, Adrienne. I wish.

You don’t mind if I use some of your comments on the resume I send to the GOP, do you?

Posted by: eric 'on the payroll' simonson at February 13, 2006 11:14 PM
Comment #124613

Teddy Roosevelt shot 2 people during his administration AS PRESIDENT. One man said “I was in his way”. This was an ACCIDENT!! From the investigation BY POLICE and the accounts of both the rancher and Whittington himself, they both said that Whittington was not following the “rules of hunting” when hunting at sundown and in a group without announcing his return. I love how libs sit here and talk about this like they have ANY clue about hunting whatsoever. It’s assinine to think that EVERYTHING that the Bush administration does is a scandal. This wasn’t even a part of the administration. This was two men (and I DO mean men b/c libs won’t do it—it hurts the animals) out hunting for sport…enjoying the outdoors and company of friends. Accidents happen. Get USED TO IT. Hell, We elected Slick Willy twice…

Posted by: Robert at February 13, 2006 11:56 PM
Comment #124615

Wingless pen-raised birds? God, these republicans cheat at everything!

It wasn’t even a real huting trip, they were all wearing orange vests (I’m assuming republicans are so stupid they think pheasants can’t see orange—it’s deer that can’t see orange, but what does it matter they were wingless pen-raised birds) AND the president still sprayed him in the face with birdshot.

A family member of said 78 year old victim said it looked like a case of the mumps. Yeah mumps that smoke.

Posted by: Translator at February 13, 2006 11:58 PM
Comment #124617

Adrienne…if you knew ANYTHING about a 28-guage shotgun you’d know that it’s like a bb-gun. It’s used for SMALL birds like doves or even smaller. And prove that he violated the law…you people are AMAZING! You defend a guy that blatantly breaks the law by lying under oath (and it WASN’T about a bj!!!) and then sit there and call the kettle black. I’m sorry, pot I can’t hear you, I’m on another stove.

Posted by: Robert at February 14, 2006 12:03 AM
Comment #124619

I meant “vice” whoops typo.

Posted by: translator at February 14, 2006 12:07 AM
Comment #124626

Robert,
I am a Liberal and I know plenty about all kinds of guns and quite a bit about hunting because all the men in my family (also Liberals) have always hunted (though in a sportsman-like manner, unlike those who go “shooting” on game farms). When I was growing up, we always ate whatever they killed on their hunting expeditions: deer, pheasants, and ducks for the most part. I’ve fired guns of all kinds (I used to be a pretty decent shot, though I haven’t done it in years), and shotguns of all kinds — so I’m aware of how they fire the shot in every direction and can very easily kill someone — no matter what the gauge happens to be.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 14, 2006 12:19 AM
Comment #124628

Gun Control is hitting what your aiming at.
Chaney was just giving us a lesson in what happens when you don’t have gun control.
Did the shoot back? If he did he’s as bad a shot as Chaney.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 14, 2006 12:28 AM
Comment #124669

Oy Vey!

Hunting accidents happen fairly often to even
the best hunters. What’s interesting about this
hunting accident is how quickly the vultures
have all descended and in such great numbers.
Don’t get me wrong. The vultures belong to ALL
political parties and they ALL swoop down at the
first sign of weakness from their political
rivals.

I could join the chorus and make the obvious
jokes about whether I’d rather hunt with Chaney
or have my sister drive with Ted Kennedy, but I
will try to steer away from that and try to
cross that bridge when I come to it. But I
digress.

What we have here is a failure to contemplate.
Everyone is either jumping to conclusions or joking about someone who’s been shot based on
their obvious hatred of the person who did the
shooting. What does that say about us as a
cultured, intelligent, civilized society? How
petty do you want to be? Here’s an example of
what I mean.

You’ve probably heard the worn out, chant of
those on the left, “At least when Clinton lied,
nobody died!” That’s a serious accusation and
should be examined. Not be made fun of. But to
demonstrate how giddy and childlike we can
become at a misfortunate accident, I’ll now do
what many on the left are doing now. To quote
Jay Leno…”at least we know Chaney has better
aim than Clinton.”

I personally don’t find anything funny about
what happened to Chaney, his hunting friend or
ANY President who demeans the office of the
Presidency. I’m sure many of you are thinking…
“lighten up Dale!”. I’ll try to. A little. If
some of you will promise me,and yourselves, to
grow up…a little.

Posted by: Dale Garland at February 14, 2006 3:22 AM
Comment #124692

Allright,

I wasn’t going to take this shot on the blogs because it’s a little bit of a cheap shot, but…it CERTAINLY FITS:

Doesn’t it seem odd that in this administration, which manipulates inteligence to jump to conclusions that send Americans in harm’s way…

THE VICE PRESIDENT CAN’T BE BOTHERED TO TAKE A SIMPLE HUNTER SAFETY COURSE!!!???!!!???

There is an epidemic of disregard for the safety of others among these folks, isn’t there!

RGF

Posted by: RGF at February 14, 2006 5:08 AM
Comment #124751
I see above and Ill probably see more below the hatred of the V.P.and the complete lack of compassion for the victim and his family,and the V.P.and his feelings.Would you be as heartless if it had been Al Gore and a friend of his?

Oh, get off your high horse. We all know that if Al Gore had done this as VP he would have been relentlessly mocked by Fox and right-wing talked radio for weeks. You guys would claim that he thought he was “above the law” because he didn’t march down to the nearest police station and turn himself in. So don’t give me your crocodile tears…

Posted by: Woody Mena at February 14, 2006 8:25 AM
Comment #124775

Secret Service notified local law enforcement who then invetigated the incident. You guys musta missed that? ‘Course if it wasn’t reported live on CNN you liberals have no idea what went on.

Posted by: pige at February 14, 2006 9:29 AM
Comment #124781
Secret Service notified local law enforcement who then invetigated the incident. You guys musta missed that? ‘Course if it wasn’t reported live on CNN you liberals have no idea what went on.

pige,

Don’t blame the Liberals for that; don’t blame the media for that. Blame the White House. Here’s why:

This is (despite what you might think) a BIG NEWS STORY and the White House did not gather information, did not hold press briefings, and did not tell the media what they knew and did not know at that time. The White House made no effort to dispell rumors and set the record straight.

So basically, the White House left it to the media to gather the facts together, as best they could, and report the story. The White House could have very easily brought a briefer into the press room late saturday or early sunday to report the facts as they knew it, and one of those first facts would be that the Secret Service notified local law enforcement. But they didn’t. As late as monday afternoon I was hearing national media report that they didn’t know if local law enforcement was notified. What the heck do we have a White House communications office for? THINGS LIKE THIS!

There are going to be a lot of conservatives out there reporting how “bad” or “biased” the media is because of the way this was reported. The fact is the way this has been reported (and still is being reported) is a direct result of the White House’s withholding of information.


Posted by: Steve K at February 14, 2006 9:53 AM
Comment #124782

O.K. I think many of the jokes about Cheney are pretty funny. And it doesn’t matter what the guy did; Cheney is still responsible for the lead coming out of his barrel. That said….

The liberal press is making a fool out of themselves with this story by not knowing a darn thing about hunting. My wife, a farm raised Southern woman, laughed her butt off at Chris Matthews last night. He should have gone with Tip on a hunt or two and learned some of the basics. And we were left with Ronald Reagan Jr. to speculate about what might have happened and with Pat Buchanan to disect the quailgate cover-up…..

On the Young Turks last night they were building up the “special” virtues of the .28 gauge shotgun and its “extra wide” spray. And on Bill Press this morning he said he didn’t know about quail because he was a duck hunter, but that when he duck hunted he used 00 Buck.

The fact is “peppering” is normal occurrence in bird hunting, and yes that is the term that is commonly used. Usually it is not necessary to take someone to the hospital, unless it is the guy who did the peppering after he gets his ass whooped. If someone did show up at the emergency room around here with some bird shot in their cheeks (either set), the last person called would be the sheriff to investigate a “shooting.”

I did think about this though: Cheney’s medical team was in the field with them. They might have even had an ambulance near by. Could they not arrest the VP for shooting a lawyer over a baited field?????

Posted by: George in SC at February 14, 2006 10:02 AM
Comment #124791
Secret Service notified local law enforcement who then invetigated the incident. You guys musta missed that? Course if it wasnt reported live on CNN you liberals have no idea what went on.

Back in the Hypothetical Al Gore Scenario, that’s part of the “cover up”. Think of the secret service like the DC park police. Are the really going to reveal that Al Gore shot someone who was sleeping with Hillary Clinton? Not likely. :>

Posted by: Woody Mena at February 14, 2006 10:22 AM
Comment #124793
The liberal press is making a fool out of themselves with this story by not knowing a darn thing about hunting. My wife, a farm raised Southern woman, laughed her butt off at Chris Matthews last night. Posted by: George in SC at February 14, 2006 10:02 AM
Chris Matthews is a liberal!!??!!? Holy crap! I haven’t laughed that hard since Cheney fired a shotgun into his friends face! Man what a week this is going to be for Stewart and Colbert. The first half of last nights Daily Show was excellent, too bad I have to wait to see the second half and the Colbert Report this evening. (past my bedtime, boo hoo) Posted by: Dave at February 14, 2006 10:25 AM
Comment #124794

George in SC,

People who don’t know about hunting are “fools” to talk about it? I saw the same folks on TV as you did and,as I recall, every one of the people you cited mentioned that they weren’t knowledgeable. You left out the fact that Hardball also had Alan Simpson on — who is a hunter — and filled in a lot of the details on hunting for the “non-hunters.”

And as for people “speculating what might have happened:” see my previous post. The White House could have avoided that by just coming clean with the facts. It chose not to.

Posted by: Steve K at February 14, 2006 10:25 AM
Comment #124796
The liberal press is making a fool out of themselves with this story by not knowing a darn thing about hunting.

Darn those media liberals! I’m sure Dick Cheney could teach them a thing or two about thing about hunting. He isn’t the kind of clueless girlyman who would, oh, accidently shoot someone in the face

Posted by: Woody Mena at February 14, 2006 10:26 AM
Comment #124797
The first half of last nights Daily Show was excellent

For the first time in months I actually stayed up late to watch TV! I especially enjoyed the “the best available intelligence said that there was quail in the brush, not a 78-year-old man.”

Posted by: Steve K at February 14, 2006 10:28 AM
Comment #124801

George in SC
You are wasting your time my friend.
Just like liberals without kids think they can tell parents what is the best way to raise children, liberals who have no clue about hunting or guns think they can tell us what “really” happened.

Posted by: kctim at February 14, 2006 10:31 AM
Comment #124802

Today is tuesday. The ‘facts’ as they know it are available. Untruths, half truths and outright misrepresentations of the incident by the MSM has nothing to do with when information is made available. It’s simply much to do about what is basically a non event. The left is simply feeding their Bush hate. Trying to invent some new ‘conspiracy’ theory. It’s more about politically motivated ‘reporting’ on a very unfortunate accident. Perhaps if the National Enquirer were to have an embeded reporter for each member of the administration this would provide the fair and balanced flow of immediately available the left feels it deserves?

Posted by: pige at February 14, 2006 10:32 AM
Comment #124805

pige,

Basically, all you’re saying is that the media has no business reporting this story, and it’s OK for the White House to ignore it. In other words, the White House — not the press — determines what is “newsworthy,” and the media ought not be trying to gather information.

Is that a fair and accurate phrasing of your opinion? If it’s not, please be crystal clear where I’ve misinterpreted your views. I want to be certain of my facts here!

Posted by: Steve K at February 14, 2006 10:44 AM
Comment #124829

So; George, pige, and Tim, you think Chris Matthews is a liberal, all liberals are undeducated and parentless, hate Bush, and think “conspiracy” every time the White House screws up (i.e. almost always).
Does that sum your total input?
I mean “What really happened”? I think some old guy got shot in the face by Cheyney. Yet, since the “best intelligence at the time was there were in fact quaile (notice the ‘e’?) in the Bush” the White House wasted no time in saying Dick would have shot anyway, even with the current information, given the pressing threat of the caged & farm grown birds in the bush.

Posted by: Dave at February 14, 2006 11:32 AM
Comment #124847

Steve K-

My bad. I should have used the work ignorant instead of fool.

And yes, most, including the Young Turks who I happen to like to listen to, stated up front that they were unknowledgeable. That didn’t stop them, however, from making uninformed comments about bullets and extra powerful .28 gauge shotguns (I’m actually impressed Cheney is good enough to hunt with one). Or Matthews going off about how it was being called a peppering and not a shooting. Except Bill Press the duck hunter that is, who probably does hunt them with 00 Buckshot.

Woody-
I did not mean to offend by using the term liberal; I apologize if my comments were taken that way, but at least I didn’t call them Damned Yankees (we are trying improve down here).

And Matthews was a O’Neill staffer and Carter speechwriter. While he’s not an out of the closet liberal like Press and the Young Turks, he does have credentials. I think he did go to UNC but that was before Southern Culture on the Skids started playing….

Posted by: George in SC at February 14, 2006 12:09 PM
Comment #124848

kctim:
“liberals who have no clue about hunting or guns”

So now I’m a liar, is that what you’re saying?

“think they can tell us what “really” happened.”

All I know is that if that guy had taken enough shot in the jugular vein, Cheney could have easily killed him. As for what really happened, obviously our leaders don’t think the public has the right to know much about any of their activities.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 14, 2006 12:13 PM
Comment #124860

Ahh. Now i figured out where these liberal ideas come from. I reread all my posts to be sure. Nowhere do I find where i made any mention of anything to do with Chris Matthews. It must be that ‘living’ document thing? Things only liberals can see tucked away in the text. Who is Chris Matthews, anyway?

Posted by: pige at February 14, 2006 12:33 PM
Comment #124861

As most of yaall know there’s been blizard conditions on the East Coast. In fact things were so bad that Chaney couldn’t see the hunters and accidently shot a bird.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 14, 2006 12:33 PM
Comment #124868

I believe there was a second gunman. This was all a setup to get Cheney out of the way by mking it look like he killed Wittington. The SS is hiding the fact that they failed to find out in time.
There are coverups from both sides here people!

The truth is out there…

Posted by: TheTraveler at February 14, 2006 12:55 PM
Comment #124869

If you don’t see me posting here for a while, it will be a safe bet to assume that my last post hit a little close to home and I’m at Gitmo. ;-)

Posted by: TheTraveler at February 14, 2006 1:00 PM
Comment #124872

I’m laughing at you so called conservatives (read liberal, in the sense of playing fast and loose with the U.S. Constituion as well as American and International law) now. Assumption after assumption based on nonsense.

I hear accusations of liberals not knowing anything about hunting??? in light of recent events can you really be serious?

I’m a PROUD liberal. Grew up in Texas. Hunted the same country as Cheney did many times. I had sense enough to take and pass multiple hunter safety courses starting from the time I was about ten on into adulthood. I still value reviews of such knowledge and habits because hunting is an inherently dangerous activity.

I’ve NEVER EVEN COME CLOSE TO SHOOTING ANYBODY MUCH LESS SOMEONE NEAR ENOUGH TO ME TO GET PEPPERED BY SHOT FROM A SHOTGUN!!!

Why could’t Cheney have simply taken a basic hunter safety course? Why did Cheney think it unnecessary? …much like thorough inteligence is unnecessary, I suppose!

I am a LIBERAL (really, conservative in the sense that I believe in what this country is founded on, laws, the CONSTITUION, etc.) I grew up around guns and horses and I am a practicing Catholic. I am laughing at the idea that a republican vice president could swing a gun, fire a shot without seeing his target, hit a friend in the side of head and neck and his supporters would use this opportunity to accuse the other party of not knowing about guns and hunting. HA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Do you folks have ANY IDEA how rediculous that sounds? I’m guessing it never even occured to you.

Over and over again I have said the following of things I hear from so called conservatives these days, it sounds like the thirteenth chime of the clock. It casts doubt not only on itself (by its obvious false statement) but also on all previous statements (by clearly demonstrating its unreliability).

RGF

Posted by: RGF at February 14, 2006 1:03 PM
Comment #124879

If this victim was so lightly hit, why did he spend almost 48 hours in the ICU? He was just released from the ICU to a private room this morning.

So he’s still hospitalized. Maybe the VP used red pepper in his wittle BB gun.

Posted by: Arr-squared at February 14, 2006 1:18 PM
Comment #124880

RGF,

You forget that hypocracy and zealotry are the mainstays of Repubglican thought these days. There is no need for “fact” since what they “believe” is the only “reality”. Where there is a contradiction, we are simply “liberals” too “stupid” to understand.

(I was so hoping that someone else would like my quayle/potatoe referrence:-()

Posted by: Dave at February 14, 2006 1:20 PM
Comment #124883

The Republicans need some cold buckets of water and a few slaps upside the head here. At best, the left is going with some small though valid quibbles. The VP went hunting without proper licensing, for one thing. For another, according to people who do hunt, once you pull the trigger, it’s your responsibility. The White House staff tried to imply that it was that guy’s fault for jumping into shot.

Additionally, there’s a legitimate question of whether we should have learned so long after the fact that the Vice President of the United States was involved in an accidental shooting.

Keep in mind, this stuff’s minor. But it does demonstrate some of this Administration’s foibles.

It likes to pretend that its their right to keep everything, even minor matters, hushed up. This is an administration so clammed up, even Nixon’s White House Counsel, John Dean, was saying its secretive.

The incident can also be said to be indicative of the aristocratic attitude they have towards the rules. Things like hunting licenses are for the little people.

Y’all on the right should realize that you don’t get reputations like this overnight. Cheney has earned his distinction as a secretive, arrogant, corrupt archconservative with his choices. Of course y’all can blame the liberal media for that perception, but then you folks constantly blame the liberal media for your image problems regardless of the facts. Therefore, it’s a meaningless excuse.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 14, 2006 1:23 PM
Comment #124888

OK, can all the hunters out there please read QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VEEP WHO COULDN’T SHOOT STRAIGHT and please tell me if it is accurate or not? More importantly, exactly what they agree with, and where they disagree and WHY?

I’m approaching this with an open mind. the author of the blog is a liberal, but reports what his conservative brother, who is a hunter, says about the “facts” in this story.

I’m not a hunter. I haven’t fired a gun in over 30 years. I’m really, really curious.

To quote dragnet: just the facts, please.

Posted by: Steve K at February 14, 2006 1:31 PM
Comment #124889

Eric,

Hilarious.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at February 14, 2006 1:31 PM
Comment #124890

RGF
Your right, They’re so called conservitives.
I grew up with a loaded gun in every room of the house, except for us youngins rooms. We never shot anyone accidently. Hell none of my sisters ever shot anyone. The reason is we were taught how to handle a gun. And not to play with them.
I find it sad that someone in Chaney’s position could be so dumb that he’d shoot at anything without knowing where the others are.
BTW, I go hunting with a couple of liberals every year. Both are excellent hunters and I’m not worried about them shooting me. Even though they say they’re going to and make it look like an accident.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 14, 2006 1:32 PM
Comment #124894

pige,

Since you cannot answer my question and I am up against a deadline here, I guess I’ll just have to assume you agree with my rephrasing of your opinion.

I hope the above helps explain to you why the White House needs to keep the press informed.

Posted by: Steve K at February 14, 2006 1:38 PM
Comment #124908

More bad news. Hunter Shot by Cheney Has Heart Attack

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas - The 78-year-old lawyer who was shot by Vice President Dick Cheney in a hunting accident has some birdshot lodged in his heart and he had a “minor heart attack,” a hospital official said Tuesday.

Peter Banko, the hospital administrator at Christus Spohn Hospital Corpus Christi-Memorial, said Harry Whittington had the heart attack early Tuesday while being evaluated.

He said there was an irregularity in the heartbeat caused by a birdshot pellet, and doctors performed a cardiac catheterization. Whittington expressed a desire to leave the hospital, but Banko said he would probably stay for another week.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 14, 2006 1:53 PM
Comment #124910

Adrienne
“So now I’m a liar, is that what you’re saying?”

I would NEVER say you were a liar ma’am. Respect.

“All I know is that if that guy had taken enough shot in the jugular vein, Cheney could have easily killed him”

All I know is that being peppered with birdshot is not that big of deal.

“As for what really happened, obviously our leaders don’t think the public has the right to know much about any of their activities”

Your probably right.
But a hunting trip IS a personal matter. Should we really be prying into peoples personal lives, lol.

Again, sorry if it sounded as if I was calling you a liar.
As a huntress, you know how shotguns have a pattern that keeps spreading as it leaves the gun. Being peppered, especially with birdshot, is not anything new to bird hunters.
It was an accident and since the old dude was in his late 70s, it probably affected him more.
Why they didn’t release info about it? Only they know why.
Anything on our part is nothing but speculation.

Posted by: Tim Huff at February 14, 2006 1:56 PM
Comment #124913

Steve K
I cann’t say about Texas but in Georgia hunting from a vehicle of any kind is illegal. Even on your own property.
I have a problem with Chaney claiming he didn’t know where the guy was. If your not sure where the others in your party are DON’T SHOOT. You ALWAYS make sure of your target. I’d rather let a bird or buck get away than accidently shoot someone.
Im having a problem with the whole story myself. It’s just like with Kennedy up in Chappawhitick. Neither just don’t ad up.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 14, 2006 1:57 PM
Comment #124915

If Whittington dies, since Cheyney was at fault, will there be a trial?
I consider negligent homicide at least as bad as perjury.

Adrienne,
Bad news?

Posted by: Dave at February 14, 2006 1:58 PM
Comment #124921

Tim Huff,

“All I know is that being peppered with birdshot is not that big of deal.”

The dude was in the ICU for 2 days. Pellets lodged in his heart. Would you let me pepper you with my 28 or .410?

And some quotes from those liberals who don’t know guns at the San Jose Mercury News:

“Particularly identify the game that you are shooting and particularly identify your surroundings, that it’s safe to shoot,” said Mark Birkhauser, the incoming president of the International Hunter Education Association, a group of fish and wildlife agencies. “Every second, you’re adjusting your personal information that it is a safe area to shoot or it’s not a safe area to shoot.”

Safe-hunting rules published by the National Rifle Association and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department echo Birkhauser’s advice.

“Be absolutely sure you have identified your target beyond any doubt,” the NRA says in the gun-safety rules on its Web site. “Equally important, be aware of the area beyond your target. This means observing your prospective area of fire before you shoot. Never fire in a direction in which there are people or any other potential for mishap. Think first. Shoot second.”

On its 10 Commandments of Shooting Safety, Texas Parks and Wildlife lists being sure of your target as the third commandment. “Know what is in front and behind your target. Determine that you have a safe backstop or background.”

That stupid old lawyer and his silly walking around behind hunters.

Posted by: Arr-squared at February 14, 2006 2:02 PM
Comment #124925

If Whittington dies, since Cheyney was at fault, will there be a trial?

I would hope so, but he won’t die. If there’s anyone who knows how to survive a heart attack, it’s Cheney!

Posted by: TheTraveler at February 14, 2006 2:04 PM
Comment #124941

Steve K-

1. The “around” 5:30 is suspicious.

Speculation.

2. Texas quail might be different from Iowa quail, but in Iowa when a shotgun goes off, every quail within earshot flutters away.

If they were shooting “stomp and shoot” birds then the other coveys would not have risen.

3. None of the stories have commented on the fact that they were “road hunting”, or hunting from a car. M

any of these ranches use Gators or modified golf carts to take guests to the next hunting spot. Again it is speculation but it sounds as if these guys were in the field (probably in a straight line) and not in the vehicles.

4. The Quail stamp was addressed by the White House today.

5. This is all just more speculation bs.

Look, I didn’t mean to light off the liberal conservative flaming, and I did not intend to use liberal derogatorily. Two of the three shows I referenced are billed as Liberal Talk on Sirius, and while I did lump in Matthews that was because he went 45 mins last night without knowing a thing about what he was talking about.

My comment was that while Cheney looked foolish in this story, and while the John Stewarts and the David Letterman’s rightly had great fun with it (which I enjoyed), the so called journalists and commentators looked equally as bad (no longer using foolish so as not to offend) by their ignorance of the subject matter.

Posted by: George in SC at February 14, 2006 2:19 PM
Comment #124947

kctim:
“All I know is that being peppered with birdshot is not that big of deal.”

I strongly disagree.

Ron:
“I cann’t say about Texas but in Georgia hunting from a vehicle of any kind is illegal. Even on your own property.”

It’s despicably unsporting. The kind people who hunt from a car are lazy, have no respect for the creature or for the challenge of a hunting, but only get off on the killing.

“I have a problem with Chaney claiming he didn’t know where the guy was. If your not sure where the others in your party are DON’T SHOOT. You ALWAYS make sure of your target. I’d rather let a bird or buck get away than accidently shoot someone.
Im having a problem with the whole story myself.”

Me too, Ron. It just doesn’t seem to make any sense.

Dave:
“Adrienne,
Bad news?”

Yeah, it is bad news. Because it’s people like Cheney that give other hunters and the whole idea of hunting, a bad name.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 14, 2006 2:24 PM
Comment #124953

And based upon the update on the story I will speculate that Wittington was a lot closer than 30yds from the end of Cheney’s barrel. I base that on the number of pellets took (head, neck, shoulder, and chest) from a small gun (.28 gauge) and the fact that at least one pellet penetrated deep enough to somehow get into the heart.


Posted by: George in SC at February 14, 2006 2:30 PM
Comment #124969

So lets get this straight BJ in the oval office is a personal matter but an accident halfway across the country is white house business. Steve?

Posted by: pige at February 14, 2006 2:57 PM
Comment #124979

It looks like us liberals have been jumping to conclusions about this accident. I, for one, thought that Cheney just got a few tiny pellets in the guy’s face. Now we know that a pellet lodged in his heart and caused a heart attack. Next time I won’t trust the WH and its apologists when they do their “no big deal” act…

Posted by: Woody Mena at February 14, 2006 3:13 PM
Comment #125023

pige wrote:

So lets get this straight BJ in the oval office is a personal matter but an accident halfway across the country is white house business. Steve?

That’s at best an oversimplification of the issue, and at worst an obfuscation of what’s going on. I never said anything about the Clinton business (I assume that’s what you are referring to). That’s you putting words in my mouth. We’re talking about what’s going on with the sitting vice-President, not the actions eight years ago of a former president. Please stop it.

Clinton — unlike Cheney — got up in front of the cameras and answered questions. I’m only suggesting that the current White House do the same.

Whether or not Clinton lied, or Chaney lies, or Scott McClellan lies is a different subject entirely and not worth discussing. Lying is lying and I’m against it, and the liar should pay the consequences no matter who does it.

My point is that the silence from the Bush Administration is fueling speculation, creating rumors, and creates the impression that the White House is trying to hide something.

Posted by: Steve k at February 14, 2006 4:11 PM
Comment #125032
Dave: “Adrienne, Bad news?”

Yeah, it is bad news. Because it’s people like Cheney that give other hunters and the whole idea of hunting, a bad name.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 14, 2006 02:24 PM


I’m sorry you got the impression I was talking about “hunters”, I was refering to how much longer comediens could milk this. Posted by: Dave at February 14, 2006 4:20 PM
Comment #125061

It’s the job of law enforcement to investigate any incident of this nature, first. Which was done. It’s at that point the press may do their “investigating”. No ONE is required to call in the press period. The press may have a 1st. ammendment right but their is no requirement to notify the press. The local press got the ‘scoop’ and the ‘ambulance’ chasers are angry.

Posted by: pige at February 14, 2006 5:20 PM
Comment #125065

The press is trying to create the impression of something being hidden. Again the local paper got the story first and the ‘ambulance’ chasers are mad they got scooped. The press does not have a right to be called every time someone makes a mistake they deem newsworthy. They have a right to report the news when it becomes ‘news’.

Posted by: pige at February 14, 2006 5:27 PM
Comment #125073

“Would you let me pepper you with my 28 or .410?”

Depends how far away you were.

This is all speculation people. Nobody but the people there know what really happened.
One side thinks Cheney is at fault because they don’t like him or his politics and the other side says its probably no big deal.
To make anything out of this at all is silly. Accidents happen and lessons learned.
The dude who got hit will make sure everybody knows where he is the next time he goes hunting and Cheney will probably become over zealous in his knowing where everybody is.

Posted by: Tim Huff at February 14, 2006 5:47 PM
Comment #125089

pige,

“The press is trying to create the impression of something being hidden. Again the local paper got the story first and the ‘ambulance’ chasers are mad they got scooped.”

This wasn’t some liquored-up yahoo, out on a joe safari hunting expedition, this was the Vice-President of the United States.
At the very least this shows an extreme lapse in judgement.
This is the man that is a heartbeat away from the Presidency.
Please don’t tell me this is nothing.

And for all you hunters out there, no offence meant. Take it in the spirit it was written.

Posted by: Rocky at February 14, 2006 6:28 PM
Comment #125105

Hey, I got an idea. Let’s put all of our money into investigating EXACTLY what happened. We can create committee whose sole purpose is to capture, in detail, the events that lead to the shooting of this guy.

Clearly, this is the most baffling conspiracy that has ever come out of the whitehouse and we MUST find out what happened. There has never been something so necessary.

Posted by: Recipher at February 14, 2006 6:45 PM
Comment #125177

Speculation, Tim Huff?

Speculation is when you’re just guessing. We’re dealing with the facts here. There’s no need to guess at how serious the man’s wounds are. They weren’t immediately life-threatening, but they where surely pretty bad if he’s got a pellet in his heart, and a two-day stay in the ICU.

Additionally, we’re not guessing that Cheney screwed up, in the hunting sense. He should have made sure the coast was clear, and not just fired on impulse, as he apparently did.

Also, Cheney’s big mistake, no matter what his level of responsibility, was not coming clean immediately. The stamp, as it turns out was not that big of a deal, but the fact that he kept this under wraps for an entire day, given his responsibilities as vice president has likely made what could have been just a simple accident much worse. As a public servant, his life is not entirely his own, and the public has the right to know about things like this immediately, and fully.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 14, 2006 8:59 PM
Comment #125182
The press is trying to create the impression of something being hidden.

McClellan’s failure to answer questions to the White House press corps prove your comment wrong, pige.

Posted by: Steve K at February 14, 2006 9:04 PM
Comment #125193

The complete lack of civility exhibited by the Washington press corps they deserve to be thrown into the street.

Posted by: pige at February 14, 2006 9:21 PM
Comment #125313

With acknowledged concern for Mr. Whittington’s health, I cannot help but cite how an innocent, unfortunate accident has now blown up in Cheney’s face, a result of the same machinations the White House would employ to counter a perceived political threat.

Criticize my partisan take, but Cheney’s handling brings to mind the tactics used against Cindy Sheehan, John Murtha and Max Cleland.

Cheney has taken the one incident where his conduct cannot justifiably be assailed, and has responded, nonetheless, in a manner that confirms all the negative suspicions swirling around him. The crisis mode Op in response to the incident strongly suggests a variable to warrant such control over the story. If Cheney had no problem being the butt of late night monologues for a few days, he would’ve called McClellan first. But, if he truly despises the media (more likely) or there was something more un towards, his unilateral handling of the incident should not be a surprised.

Posted by: Bert M. Caradine at February 15, 2006 4:47 AM
Comment #125360

Pige-
I’m not sure how your people feel qualified to give lessons on civlity, given your unremitting hostility to the press. You want cheerleaders, not reporters, and because of that, all negativity is treated as a personal attack.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 15, 2006 8:17 AM
Comment #125375

Stephen
Everything up to the guy being shot is nothing but speculation on our parts, we were not there.
It was an accident and accidents happen. Place the blame on whoever it best supports your needs, it does not matter.
Criticizing how the matter has been handled is valid in my opinion, but this is hardly anything to get giddy about.

Posted by: kctim at February 15, 2006 9:03 AM
Comment #125437

If Whittington dies, since Cheyney was at fault, will there be a trial?
I consider negligent homicide at least as bad as perjury.


Posted by: Dave at February 14, 2006 01:58 PM

No! But there should be one. The law applies to the Vice President as much as it does you and me. Maybe more so sense he took an oath.


Yeah, it is bad news. Because it’s people like Cheney that give other hunters and the whole idea of hunting, a bad name.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 14, 2006 02:24 PM

You think they might revoke his hunting license? Probably aint got one.
You or me would be cooling our heels in the local cross bar hotel for something like this.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 15, 2006 12:18 PM
Comment #125439

So lets get this straight BJ in the oval office is a personal matter but an accident halfway across the country is white house business. Steve?

Posted by: pige at February 14, 2006 02:57 PM

Shooting someone os a lot more serious than geting a BJ ever will be. Besides it wasn’t the BJ that got Clinton into trouble, it was lying to Congress under oath.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 15, 2006 12:22 PM
Comment #125485

Holy moly,
Ron is starting to make sense to me. Could be the topic or just maybe one of us is coming to our senses…

Posted by: Dave at February 15, 2006 1:43 PM
Comment #125492

“Could be the topic or just maybe one of us is coming to our senses…”

Welcome Dave!

Posted by: kctim at February 15, 2006 1:57 PM
Comment #125514

Now now, kc… don’t get too excited. I’m still a hard core social liberal moderate globalist fiscal conservative.

Posted by: Dave at February 15, 2006 3:14 PM
Comment #125537

Dave-

Now that’s a label. It makes my “moderately conservative libertarian” moniker (I got this from some online political test) look like an abbreviation!

Ron-

Cheney’s office put out a statement on the license issue, and the Texas people say the most he would have gotten was a written warning since the stamps were new.

As to the shooting, there’s a lot of speculation going on. I’ve seen where they think they have identified Cheney’s ammo as a spreader shell, possibly a Poly-Wad, and according to the Fox News article on his interview Mr. Wittington was hit with around 200 pellets. That’s about 60% to 75% of the pellets from a 28 gauge; he’d had to have been standing just a few yards away and not 20 to 30yds as reported.

Posted by: George in SC at February 15, 2006 3:55 PM
Comment #125646

“Also it’s reported he has a medical team following him around, I wonder why?”


Because he is the Vice President and happens to have a heart condition… It really is that simple.

Posted by: MJ Shaw at February 15, 2006 8:51 PM
Comment #125654

Just when I think this story ought to fade away…

After my last post when I was obviously entertained by the sillyness of these knee-jerk supporters of Cheney (…and Bush), the White House did something ABSLUTELY rediculous: The White House issued a statement that blamed the incident on the man who was shot. Huh? Again I am amazed that anyone on the right side of this country’s political spectrum would accuse the left of not knowing about hunting and guns in light of this.

FOR THE RECORD:
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ONE WHO PULLS THE TRIGGER TO BE SURE OF THE SAFETY OF THE SHOT HE/SHE IS TAKING. NO ONE ELSE. CHENEY MUST NECESSARILY BE THE ONE AT FAULT. NO ONE ELSE.

It just doesn’t get any more simple than this. Any one who knows anything at all about gun safety and hunter safety KNOWS this.

RGF

Posted by: RGF at February 15, 2006 9:21 PM
Comment #125681

kctim-
There are facts not in dispute. Whether you’re there or not, the fact is, we didn’t hear of the VP’s little incident until a day after the fact, and not from him.

Second, we were lead to believe this was minor when it landed somebody in the ICU, and then gave them a heart attack.

The Bush White House is much too private in their attitudes for a bunch of public servants.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 15, 2006 11:01 PM
Comment #125713

Holy moly,
Ron is starting to make sense to me. Could be the topic or just maybe one of us is coming to our senses…

Posted by: Dave at February 15, 2006 01:43 PM

Could be, but I’m doing what I always do. Calling it like I see it. Unless of course I want to annoy Liberals. Then I call it like the Reublicans see it.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 16, 2006 12:20 AM
Comment #125714

George in SC
Are you sure Chaney didn’t fire more that once? 200 pellets is one hell of a lot.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 16, 2006 12:23 AM
Comment #125837

Ron,

And a real sense of humor showing too! Awesome!

Posted by: Dave at February 16, 2006 8:42 AM
Comment #125850

SD
I see now, you are talking about the aftermath and I am talking about the accident itself. Probably me not being clear enough, I cant remember now.
It was an accident, none of us know what happened.
Why did they handle notification the way they did? Who cares. The proper authorities were notified and whatever actions were taken.

Posted by: kctim at February 16, 2006 9:24 AM
Comment #126058

“I WOULD RATHER GO HUNTING WITH DICK CHENEY THAN RIDE IN A CAR WITH TED KENNEDY” - UNKNOWN

Posted by: CHRISTINA at February 16, 2006 5:38 PM
Comment #126069

kctim-
I’ve learned as a storyteller, student of history, and an avid newshound that if you want to sustain people’s interest in something, hide a lot of information and tell people they can’t be told about it. If you want to really get people interested, lie! Then everybody will absolute have to know what you’re hiding, and will make it a personal battle to find out!

If this administration were more open, and more considerate of the seven-tenths of America that is skeptical of it, they would have been much less controversial. As it is, though, they have tried to control people’s view of them, and that has ironically (or poetically) backfired on them.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 16, 2006 6:17 PM
Comment #126171

I’m gonna go off an atangent here that I haven’t seen anyone hit yet…

There is this idea of Right to privacy that some of our Lib friends may have heard off that only applies to themselves and their own personal issues….BUT maybe just possibly Mr. Whittington’s Family Might have wanted a little privacy while this event was going on, before the press would mob them, their houses, the hospital.

Yes Being the VP does make one out in the open, it is his mistake and his fault for the accident, that much is not in debate. But i do think what would the poor guy’s family be like if while concened about their husband’s father’s grandfather’s health, if an hour after it happened the news trucks pulled in and shoved mics in their faces.

Maybe some info should have been released sooner, BUT I see no reason to Jump Mr. Whittington’s family with a media assult.

Posted by: Ray at February 16, 2006 10:36 PM
Comment #126220

“I WOULD RATHER GO HUNTING WITH DICK CHENEY THAN RIDE IN A CAR WITH TED KENNEDY” - UNKNOWN

Posted by: CHRISTINA at February 16, 2006 05:38 PM

It would seem that either one is dangerous.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 17, 2006 1:25 AM
Comment #126378

SD
EVERY administration and every person, tries to control how they are viewed.

Posted by: kctim at February 17, 2006 11:34 AM
Comment #127501

Robert
It’s clear to me that you don’t realy know that much about guns. A 28 gauge can kill someone. Saying it’s just like a bb gun is like saying that a .22 is just like a cap gun. Both are wrong.
As far as that goes, it is possible to kill someone with a bb gun. It might not be very likely, but it could happen.
In any case you never fire a weapon without being sure of your target. None of us were there, but from what I’ve got of it is Chaney turned and fired. It would appear to me he wasn’t sure of his target and he sure as hell didn’t know whre ALL the members of his party were.
There are some safety rule that need to be followed when hunting.
1.Never point a weapon at anyone. Keep it pointed up or toward the ground. The latter preferably.
2.Never fire into the safe zones.
3.The safe zones are behind you, and on both sides of you.
4.If your not sure of your tatget, DON’T FIRE.
5.Always know where the other members of your party are.
6.Never walk into the kill zone without making sure that every member of your party knows your there.
7.Never fire into the kill zone when a member of your party is in it.
8.The kill zone is in front of you and 60 degress on each side of you.
9.ALL GUN SAFTY RULES APPLY.
10.Use the brain God gave you.
I would venture to say that Chaney wasn’t practing these rules. But then he’s the Vice President, rules and law don’t apply to him.

Posted by: Ron Brown at February 19, 2006 4:32 PM
Post a comment