It's been reported that Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot attorney Harry Whittington while quail hunting. Currently, Whittington is listed as being in stable condition in intensive care at a Corpus Christi hospital.

In my opinion, Cheney will lose his job over this. Between the Plame case and the thousands of jokes yet to be told regarding this incident, I believe the distraction will be too much. But with George "You're Doing a Heckuva Job" Bush at the helm, this isn't a sure bet. And hence, the crux of this debate:

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

What kind of political fallout?

Little. What? ....is he actually going to become less popular? Maybe some jokes off the shooting further highlighting his ineptitude. Jokes are about all I see coming.

Many probably referring back to the fish in a barrel hunting lodges Cheney attended with Justice Scalia where they essentially shot caged animal and maybe how the great outdoors houses too complex and intelligent prey and all that. That his laughable hunting sense works best when he controls the environment and the animals do not have a chance of escape. More or less stripping down his manhood. Mix that in with Vietnam deferments. More or less calling him a spineless coward without saying it. That will be the political fall-out from those who criticize.

As for him stepping down? Everyone was calling for Rumsfeld to step down including McCain. Nothing. Even if this man would have died Cheney would still be VP.


2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

For negligence? He has gotten away with it for so many years I don't see why it would hold this time .

Seriously I doubt it. Everything indicates that it was an accident. The man he shot is a major republican. Nothing will come of this. Just like the thousand or so other hunting accidents that happen each year. It's not like you can make a campaign issue out of this.

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?

It appears to have been a hunting accident - with the operative word being accident. Should that prove to be the case - and I doubt even Dick Cheney would shoot a lawyer, even a trial lawyer, in cold blood in broad daylight - there shouldn't be any political fallout. Some might try to make something of it, but I expect it will be better fodder for late night chat shows than the floor of Congress.

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

Again, if - as it seems - this was an accident, I wouldn't think so. I'm not sure how most hunting accidents are treated (where there's no death involved, I would think, if anything, maybe some sort of negligence charge), but this case should be no different.

1. Political fallout? Little to none. Cheney will give Jay Leno, David Letterman and Jon Stewart's gag-writers material for the next few weeks, but we've still got a Republican-controlled House and Senate. This will be written off as merely a "unfortunate accident" and that's about the extent of it.

2. What's the chances the victim is going to press charges against Cheney? Slim or none? While the prospect of seeing the Veep cuffed, read his rights, tossed in the back of a police car, fingerprinted and mugshot then walking into a courtroom in a bright orange jumpsuit would be falling down on the floor funny, I'm not holding my breath for THAT to happen.

But, boy it sure would be funny if it did!

Wonder if the guy was a liberal Democrat? Fox News would claim Cheney was acting in self-defense...

This is pretty much a non-issue. I suppose somebody somewhere is going to claim that this shows that the Vice-President is not capable of holding such a high office and so forth. Nonsense. There are plenty of reasons to be opposed to the policies of this administration without dragging a genuine accident into it. Certainly, there are no signs that any criminal charges are warranted.

What this incident indicates to me is the great danger involved with shooting sports. From the article:



So here we have a very experienced, very careful hunter who did everything by the rules, and there was still someone seriously injured. The comment by Armstrong seems to indicate that this was not a rare event, but something that a hunter should be prepared to face. Just another reason (as if any were needed) why I am never going to touch a firearm.

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?
If the Police determine that Cheney was reckless, then he should be charged. But since he's VP, its unlikely anything will happen unless the victim dies from the injuries.

No- if he didn't get charged in "accounting fraud" when he was the prez of Haliburton, how is a little shooting between friends going to get him to be charged?

Should Cheney be criminally charged?

I'm inclined at first to agree with everyone here, that in the event that this was an honest accident, he shouldn't be charged. But - I can't help but wonder what would happen if the tables were turned. What if Cheney had been on the receiving end of an accidental shooting? Would life take a very sour turn for the guy behind the barrel? I'm one to insist on parity. Whatever would happen to the guy who accidentally shot Cheney in that scenario, that's what should happen to Cheney in this scenario. If being the VP means that the law gives you more protection than the ordinary citizen from acts of violence, then correspondingly, it should mean that you're required to hold yourself to a higher standard than other citizens in terms of how you conduct yourself towards them.

You know- I browsed the article the first time- and this "peppering" thing caught my attention this time- you know- you shouldn't hunt with these guys- I mean, I have been hunting in Texas with my dad for quail and whitewing and have NEVER had someone in our party "peppered" and have limited out nearly every time.

and BTW- I love whitewing and quail LOL

These guys are definately negligent hunters- that should be brought up at least,

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?

Carelessness and accidentally stepping into poo is a characteristic of the administration and by now an accepted standard upon which to suspend critical judgement. Cheney might get a medal, that's about it.

Shooting some unknown while hunting quail is not news. Shooting Quayle, now that would be news, maybe. If anyone remembers.

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

Hunting accidents aren't criminal. He might get the medical bills and find that nobody wants to be within 100 yards of his future hunts. The NRA should revoke his safety patch and make him write an essay on gun safety.

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?

Late-night punditry fodder is what this looks like (as Wertz has already pointed out), and for a few liberals, the acknowledgement that Cheney getting a deferment from being sent to Vietnam was actually a wiser move than we would care to admit.

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

Not unless the one he shot wants to press charges. Now had the other hunter been Cindy Sheehan...

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?

Well, the first BLOC that I expected to hear from was the NRA, reminding us that this was the first instance where a Vice President has shot someone accidentally. I did a quick Yahoo search however, and found: "Headline News - Aaron Burr Duel" The blurb from the search engine read:


Okay. They haven't managed to blame this on Hillary yet, but somehow they've found that a New York political Boss named Clinton was involved the last time a Vice President shot someone.

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

To what avail? So that we can hear George W. Bush quote Shakespeare as he signs Cheney's pardon? "I guess I needed to tell Dick that, 'First, we kill all the lawyers.' heh, heh, is bad advice here in Washington because, heh, heh, most of us here have been to law school, heh, heh."

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?

None whatsoever. Nothing.

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

For the shooting or his previous crimes?

Well, just to clarify why I think the political fallout could be much worse. And so far, it appears I am destined to be wrong on this...

The shooting itself is sort of a non-issue. Standing alone, it's simply late night fodder. My prediction was based on the recent revelation that Cheney was behind leaking classified information in the Plame/Libby case and this incident added with everything else is imply to much to continue fighting. It's one thing to use legalese to defend something (it depends on what the meaning of covert is), but another thing to be the poster child for everything that goes wrong from now on.

But the VP shooting somebody has been watered down to "sprayed with pellets" from a pellet gun (it was a 28 gauge shotgun) and the media seems to be clearly giving Cheney a pass so far. In fact, I'm waiting for Whittington to become another Rove casualty because he put Cheney into the unfortunate position of having to defend his actions. Many have already claimed Whittington was at fault for getting in the way.

I may’ve succumbed to the conspiracy meme. Upon hearing this the first question I asked myself was is Whittington a Democrat. No joke.

What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?


I wish you were on to something DR, but I think what you’re hearing is resignation that nothing sticks to this Teflon administration. This incident similarly won’t be the proverbial last straw. Otherwise it was a little, how shall I put it, a little too respectful for a Cheney spokesperson to defer to Armstrong to break the news to the press.


Maybe the media would be clamoring about how unsafe guns are if Democrats ran the show, the spineless shirks.

Should Cheney be criminally charged?

If Whittington wants Cheney to foot the bill, sure. We shouldn’t blow the accident out of proportion simply because Cheney sprayed a man’s face with pellets. However I doubt Wittington will press charges. There appears to be enough respect and admiration between Cheney, Armstrong, and Whittington to smother State of the Unions and high profile funerals.

What's clear is that political types largely don't have a sense of humor.
From the Left - anti-gun activist Jim Brady

From the Right - a poster to Michelle Malkin's website


They should leave the jokes to Jay Leno, but of course no one can resist. I'm just glad the guy is OK.


- Not sure how this shows "how unsafe guns are" - The Veep pointed the gun, pulled the trigger, and it worked exactly like it was supposed to. If I steered my car into someone on my right who I didn't see, they would be in a lot worse shape.

- If anything, the media is again revealing their lack of knowledge of guns and hunting (not that they live in a bubble). NPR informed me 2 or 3 times this morning that Cheney sprayed the man with "buckshot." I don't think anyone would be laughing about this if that had been the case. Buckshot is generally used for, um, bucks, and the larger pellets would have done more than "pepper" him at close range. For those of you who can't picture this, buckshot (one-ought or double-ought) is 3 or 4 times the diameter of #8 birdshot. That would, as they say, leave a mark.

My first thought on hearing this was “Well at least we know who leaked the CIA agent’s name”.

I don’t see much here, it was a hunting accident. Unfortunately it happens all the time and you have to consider that Texas doesn’t require fowl hunters to wear “hunter orange” which might have made a difference.

What bothers me is this story will over shadow the house electing a new leader that a few years ago was caught passing out checks from the tobacco industry on the house floor, his ex aide has ties to Abramof and his landlord is a lobbyist.

Shame really.

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?

Well, the media is up in arms. Today's press conference with Scott McClellan had the media grilling the White House spokesman with questions of who knew what, when and why wasn't the media informed earlier. One reporter asked if Cheney would resign over this incident, which McClellan dismissed. Other questioned if Cheney had a Texas hunting license (he does) or had attending hunting safety classes in Texas (no answer to that one...).

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

The local sheriff has ruled this an accident. Is it illegal to have accidents?

Cheney Shoots Fellow Hunter in Mishap on a Texas Ranch



The guy has "welts on his face" that look like chicken pox. Let's not make this into a near-death experience (as some reporters at the White House have done today). Certainly other hunting accidents are serious and can be deadly, but this one was not life threatening.

EDIT to add:


All of the hunters involved in this incident were wearing safety orange.

According to DR's article Armstrong said Cheney and Whittington wore orange vests. From what I've read this morning technically Whittington and Cheney are both at fault. You're not supposed to walk up to a party without announcing yourself, and you're not supposed to shoot quail until everyone's whereabouts is known.

I have to concur with most here, that this is pretty much a non-political event. I don't see a lot of repercussions from this.

I live surrounded by people who hunt and fish as a vital part of their food supply, I have no problem with hunting. I think hunting is ok if one needs to do it, but a bunch of rich guys hunting quail just smells like power-tripping to me. They don't need the food. Why are they doing it? Because they enjoy shooting living creatures? Wheee! To me, it says something about their character, to shoot and kill something because it's fun. I own a rifle, and shooting it is fun - so I go to a shooting range - I don't aim it at animals for no good reason.

One note - Carlitoswhey said


Are we speaking of the same Jim Brady, Reagan's first press secretary? What, because he supports handgun control he is suddenly a 'lefty?' Or is the idea of letting everyone run about loaded for bear such a core conservative value that his cause automatically denies him membership?

Fair point. Brady is only from the "left" as far as gun-control is concerned. I should have been more specific. I just didn't want to scour the internet for Al Franken quotes. How's this one from the official blogsite of the Democratic Party



I'll say it again - they were loaded for quail. Not deer and not bear. The question I would ask is why a reporter sought a gun-control advocate's view on a hunting accident. Lesly made the same connection, but I don't get it. John Kerry told me that he likes huntin' and fishin' and all dat regular-guy stuff, he's only for "common-sense" gun control, which wouldn't have prevented this accident.

One thing we all have to realize is that serious crimes are taking place each day and people collectively don't care. Bush lied us into Iraq? No, he didn't. He just didn't tell us the truth. Bush's illegal wiretaps are illegal? No they're not. Cheney isn't involved with Halliburton so he's not helping them. The money he gets every year as an ececutive? Doesn't mean a conflict of interest. See people? Nothing means anything to anyone anymore. The craziest to me is the "my illegal wiretaps are not illegal". It almost makes it sound like there hasn't been a system of law in place for the past 200 years ready to deal with those who try hurt America's security.

Nope. It's not illegal to have an accident, but even now, can't these guys get their story straight?

White House chief of staff Andy Card told Bush Saturday night about Cheney’s involvement in the shotgun accident.

McClellan was informed Saturday night that someone in the Cheney hunting party was involved, but he didn’t know that Cheney was the shooter until the next morning, the spokesman said.

McClellan said when he learned, around 6 a.m. Sunday, he urged the vice president’s office to get the information out “as quickly as possible.”

The White House did not inform the national media of the accident, but the vice president’s office confirmed the story after journalists called to ask about the report on the Caller-Times Web site nearly 24 hours after the shooting.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11312757/

Nearly 24 hoursafter the shooting???? A private citizen makes the report? What---Cheney doesn't have a press spokesperson?

CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer reports Texas authorities are complaining that the Secret Service barred them from speaking to Cheney after the incident. Kenedy County Texas Sheriffs Lt. Juan Guzman said deputies first learned of the shooting when an ambulance was called.

But the Secret Service told a different story, saying agents had informed the local sheriff of the shooting about an hour after it happened and that the vice president had been interviewed about the accident by local authorities on Sunday morning, CBS News White House correspondent Bill Plante reports.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/13/...in1309344.shtml

Wow. Good thing Cheney didn't kill the guy. We might have never found out. Does Harry Whittington look anything like Lewis "The Snitch" Libby?

And as of this moment, the Vice-President of the United States STILL hasn't made a public comment. Not even a, "oops, my bad, dude."

Wonder what Dick's blood alcohol level was? Before and after the "accident."

Once again, the truth and The White House aren't on speaking terms. A cynical man might think these guys had something to hide...

So you've found a joke about the incident... I'm not really sure what your point is carlito. I don't think I need to remind you how many times people drag that thing about Ted Kennedy into debates here, and not in a nice way either.

I fail to see how that quote you cited represents any sort of attempt to capitalize on this politically, either in general or specifically on gun control.

Thanks for that one, got a chuckle from me.

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?
Very little, unless the Left decides that this will be their much sought silver bullet to destroy the Bush Administration, or at least take down the CreepyVP. In which case those looking to count coup over this incident will once more demonstrate their irrationality to the general public. We will, of course, give the anti-hunting folks a pass on using this, because, well, they're just anti-hunting and this incident is legitimate ammunition for them.

2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?
Only in Cindy Sheehan's wildest dreams.

"Shhhhh....be vewy vewy qwiet, I'm hunting Webublicans....hehehe...."


I don't think there will or should be any political fall out because of this. Thank God the man isn't dead or blind because of the ACCIDENT.

And since it was an accident, I'm sure statistically, eventually, when you use fire arms something is going to go wrong. No charges or anything should be brought up. I'm sure the VP feels awful enough.

How could anyone possibly think the Democrats need to resort to using this as political leverage when there are so many other issues that are legitimate and much more damaging. A small laundry list proving why this won't be news by the end of the week:

- NSA Wiretapping
- Iraq
- Patriot Act
- Plame investigation w/ Libby flipping on Cheney and others
- Brown telling the truth about Katrina
- Abramoff and lobbying

And that is just the scandals, not even the policy differences.

With all of that do you seriously think "the left" needs or wants to use this weak incident? It is good fodder for jokes and will probably continue to be good fodder for a while, but that is all it is.

So, the democratic website saying "Cheney Shoots 78-Year-Old Man, Bin Laden Still at Large" is not trying to capitalize on this politically. OK.

You are right about this though - there is really no nice way to bring a tragic accident into a political debate. Something we should keep in mind more often here at - the cheap shots at Kennedy don't add to our discourse, and neither will the Cheney jokes. Although Franken's "just to watch him die" was funny, it's a little soon for that when the guy is still in the hospital IMHO.

Specifically to gun control, I think my point still stands. Why would anyone anywhere publish what a handgun-control advocate has to say about a hunting accident? Unless, the "gun control" movement is really an anti-gun movement, and "common sense gun control" is code for something much more comprehensive.

I thought I was getting it, now I'm sure I'm not getting it. =\

Common sense says you don't use an elephant round to bring down a deer. I don’t think anyone has overlooked this. However, you can’t just go pumping or waving a beebee gun in the middle of a busy street and take aim over people’s heads, let alone a shotgun (not handgun). Accidents also happen with people-killing munitions. Why would the anti-gunners pause to reflect that Cheney chambered quail killing-pellets? He could’ve killed a lost toddler that stumbled into the group.

It’s the phallic symbol that matters Carlito, the phallic symbol!

Sorry about the off-beat response. This thread is taking a weird turn and somehow I had something to do with it. =\

Similar to tying this to gun-control or handgun-control, now you're comparing it to bringing a shotgun to a busy street, or saying that a lost toddler may have been out there? I see where you're going, and that is exactly my reason for asking the question - what the heck does this incident have to do with gun control, other than Cheney displayed a lack of it. Car accidents happen even when everyone is acting safely and following the rules, and no one interviews anti-car people who point out that cars can hurt people. Yet I'm sure I'll hear from gun-control advocates on my ride home, pontificating about the deeper meaning of all this.

edited to add a functional James Brady link...

edited to add - this link really did work just now when i edited my post, and the second time i tried it, it no longer worked. not a conspiracy, but weird.

There is nothing at the brady center website, so i'm guessing the story on yahoo! news was a hoax. Weird.

Here is the whole thing from the cached page - reads like a parody.

Yep that's pretty much what I'm saying Carlito unless you happen to believe that Letterman, Leno, Stewart, and virtually every comedian in the world is part of the vast left wing conspiracy. It just happened, there are a million jokes that can be made about the incident and people will make them. It wouldn't matter if the public figure was a democrat or republican. You do something this stupid, you are going to get made fun of in public.

Now if the Democratic party is still talking about this In September, October, November then maybe you'll have a case.


I don't know Carlito, that original link you posted to a yahoo news story isn't valid anymore. However I'm assuming it was an AP story. So perhaps you ought to contact the AP and ask them.

Or is this part of the liberal media conspiracy? I'm trying to keep my conspiracies straight.

I don't know which Democratic webpage carlitoswhey is referring to, but the one I found treats it, just as CJ said, as a joke, not as a political opportunity.

http://www.democrats.com/node/7817



Where do you make reminder notes for quotation of the year.

Maybe, Cheney no longer has much of what the Coke commercial calls " the real thing," so his shotgun is his manly pride substitute.

The second most powerful (public consumption version only) man on the planet shoots a man and it's treated as a joke. Not partisan booty. Not tasteless politics (isn't it all), but instead a joke.

TruthMarch were not talking about what should but what is. It's the old thing about theory vs. practice.

Your post gets to the reality of the matter. Astute observation.

Then again CJ's and Lesly's observations were equally astute.

To answer your question, not a whole lot. But then, when did lobbyists/political action committees disavow the type of exclusionary thinking that keeps the donations coming in? An example on the Right would be pro-life/"pro"-family organizations wringing their hands about the HPV vaccine. As if vaccinating newborn girls who probably won’t even grow up knowing they’re immune to HPV would turn them into insatiable sex fiends upon discovering their superhero power.

As for the link to the DNC blog, the last time I posted there I admonished readers to not follow one of the blogger’s suggestion of fighting GOP Astroturf with DNC Astroturf. Even passing on bad, original letters to newspaper editors are better than spectacular fakes.

You should know by now that I’m pretty liberal about speech. Browse the comments below the example you cited. I’m not sure what credentials if any apply to being a DNC blogger, but it’s no worse than Coulter joking about deciding to pass up taking a hit on Clinton. At least the object of their derision is Cheney, not Whittington. I suppose this kind of thinking is what allows conservatives to revisit Kennedy's courage under duress.

Hence my moniker. What is and what should be. That is the question. To me, how can you know what really is unless you know what should be as a guideline? In other (rather crass) words, how do you know you're beautiful if you don't have homely people around you to remind you?

Setting aside our different takes on some of those, the reason why the Left may try to ride this horse home is simple, none of the items you've listed are going to get sufficient traction. Folks from the Gray Lady are more likely to end up in jail than Administration officials over the NSA matter. Dem's are reduced to sniping on Iraq at this point, the Patriot Act obstruction doesn't have popular support (which means it won't be effective against the Bushies), Plame is guttering out, Brown is completely eclipsed by the incompetence of local officials, and Abramoff is a Congressional scandal, not WH.

The Left wants something, and your list hasn't gotten the job done. Now, I merely hope that they'll try to get some mileage out of this incident, but I don't expect them to seriously try. Pro forma kneejerk anti-Bush/Cheney pathology, nothing more. Who knows though how the Kossacks will take this...

KOSSACK : FireDogLake's blogging.

Darn Bikerdad, you are right I should have read the meeting minutes from my left wing conspiracy meeting a little more closely last night, the "left" does want to use this incident to propel them into the 2006 elections. How could I have missed it? It's right there next to thhe talking points on the King funeral.

The list I made in my post is getting the job done right now, denials from your side aside. We'll know for sure how effective it is in November.

I stand by my statement that this will make for some good late-nite comedy and won't become part of some grand conspiracy by the monolithic "left".

Unless I've missed something, the 2006 elections are Congressional.

Bikerdad, I wouldn't bet the ranch just yet on the Abramoff scandal not causing serious damage to Republicans.

Tom "DDT" DeLay still has legal problems in Texas and I wouldn't preclude him having to eventually face federal charges.

1. What kind of political fallout would you expect from this incident?

I don't expect any long term political fallout. I think this might be a last straw type of moment between the mainstream media and the White House. They truly don;t see any justification for the delay in reporting.

It is a strange story and it is stranger that the Veep seemed to control the story. It is very hard to believe that Cheney would rather have had a private citizen put this information than his president. I think he was holding out hope that the incident might be quashed. That seems a ridiculous hope if that was the case.

It will however be a story that lasts for a long time.



2. Should Cheney be criminally charged?

For?? I think a public relations gaffe was made in the delay. I don't think this will be a great moment in time for the gun lobby.

As for criminal charges. Unless a Tom Clancy storyline was going on that I don't know about. This was a hunting accident without a hint of a seemy underside.

Ah- now I know why the chicken hawks never had to serve- they can't shoot straight- well, at the enemy anyway. They are real good at hitting US Citizens!

I mean, as a hunter- it is pretty embarrasing- I mean, not ONLY did he not look where he was shooting- but they say "well, it happens time from time somebody gets peppered"-

I have been hunting birds, bears, moose etc all my life- I have yet to see one "peppering" incident.

I am going for high blood alcohol.

I've since seen an article which stated that Cheney turned roughly 180 degrees while following a bird through his gun-sight - and that's how Whittington came to be peppered. I hunted only a couple of times as a youth, but that strikes me as something that a hunter just doesn't do. I stand by my original assessment that this should have no impact on Cheney's vice presidency, but he should definitely resign from hunting.

As to the delay, I wonder if Cheney actually thought the whole thing might be quashed. Like CruisingRam, though, I'm also wondering whether a certain amount of alcohol consumption may have been involved. That's one thing that might account for the delay - and for the fact that there was no police report filed.

As punditry has been raised a couple of times, I though it might be worth posting the first item I've come across in this regard. I don't tend to catch much television, least of all late night chat shows, but I do, of course, keep up with what the right considers insanely biased blogs. So here's a slightly adapted "top ten" list (à la the Letterman show) from a contributor to Daily Kos:


I'm sure there'll be more to follow.

My point exactly. All of the other items on CJ's list can logically be linked to the WH, but Abramoff? Capitol Hill all the way.

Again, Capitol Hill, which gives puts them into a different category than QuailGate. QuailGate won't provide any political traction, and the Left would be fools to try to use it as such, especially in regards to the 2006 Congressional elections. Are some elements on the Left so far gone in their pathology that they'll do it? I wish that our political climate was such that I could say for certainty that they wouldn't. Mind you, I don't think that they will, but I can't rule it out.

CruisingRam, your pride in your hunting prowess is heartwarming, but, unfortunately, such accidents are not uncommon.

California Gov't Site: In 1998, there were 445 non-fatal ("peppering"?), two-party shotgun accidents in the US and Canada (less some states and provinces.).

Grace and peace, BD

1. The comics will have a field day with it (as they are). Cheney will NOT lose his job over this. It's ludicrous. It's like Clinton losing his job after breaking his ankle after a "boy's night out" beering it up with Greg Norman. No way. It was an accident. Period. The comics and the press already hate Bush/Cheney and they don't miss a day bashing them so that's nothing new.

2. Criminally charged for what? Is the person who was shot going to "press charges" for something?? It was a hunting accident. And, frankly, as a hunter, the person who was responsible was the guy who got shot. Quail hunting is an intense and busy activity especially in a group. Dogs frequently are shot. A person who leaves the party and then returns must announce his presence so that all the hunters know where he is. He didn't. When the birds flushed and Cheney fired, there was no way he could know that the victim had walked up in that area.

This episode has (once again) demonstrated the extreme egomaniacal nature of the "network press". They blew a gasket yesterday at the White House Press Briefing because THEY were not immediately informed of this. Yes, THEY are what it's all about. It must have really burned a hot-shot like David Gregory that HE got scooped by a local hometown paper who broke this story.

The "mainstream media" should start focusing on bringing fair and balanced stories about the Iraq war instead of the endless negative tone that they've all obsessed on since day one instead of bashing Cheney over this accident. There are plenty of successess, heroic and selfless acts, and clear indications of progress in that country that are covered up by the mainstream press who don't venture beyond the hotel bars in the green zone and then pontificate on how evil the US, President Bush, and the military are when they hold court on TV.

In my view, this episode is just more evidence in the virtual tsunami of evidence that the press is biased to the left. They cut the previous president slack at every turn even when he was accused of felony perjury, was impeached, sued (and accused by others) of sexual harassment and even RAPE.

Yet, they bash our current president daily and have since January of 2000.

Their true colors have been exposed once and for all.

As the story unfolds, Cheeney did break the law, albeit a minor infraction. Seems he didn’t have the required upland game bird stamp. The closet thing to an official statement claims his staff wasn’t told about the bird stamp requirement.

Now tell me again about that personal responsibility thing?? He’s not responsible but his staff is.



That’s what I get for not reading the updated story in the thread. I actually heard the story break listening to a hunting/fishing show on the radio (for the fishing) and they discussed “the group rules” for avoiding an accident like this.

But actually as much as I dislike the VP I kind of feel for him. I would assume he feels bad for what he did and then there’s the whole “really screwing up in front of the guys doing a guy thing”.



We usually don’t see eye to eye on many issues but I agree 100% with your comments. Watched the press conference and for the most part they looked like a bunch of spoiled kids that had their Play Station taken away.

Ya, no bias with you there is there LH LOL- even my Dad called the guy a couple letters starting with D and A LOL

I mean, you want a guy with possible nuke launching capability that can't even be safe hunting quail? LOL " Oh &%$# I meant to hit Tayran and hit Houston- oh well they can go *&^% themselves"

What, and the best thing they can say is "well, 445 other folks shot each other"- and I bet it all started with "hey, hold my beer, I think I heard some quail"

What a moron LOL

I went duck hunting this fall, bagged over 65 ducks and 3 geese, and probably 200 spruce hens (or ptarmigan, they weren't white yet, so we call them spruce hens until they get thier white feathers) and never shot at or near another hunter- and sometimes we had 20 or more hunters in our party.

I guess this administration is so arrogant they don't even have to obey basic safety traditions with hunting either.

If I were the NRA- I would at least be demanding a PSA and apology, so the greenie nutjobs don't go crazy with it- oh, right, I forgot- Republicans don't take responsibility for thier actions- they blame it on Clinton LOL

You know, interestingly enough- there might be a tad of political fallout over this- among some hunters- I am hearing alot of disgust over his cavalier behavior towards shooting a friend in the face- something that is, you know, pretty taboo among hunters- as it should be.

Y'know, I wondered how long it would take the Bushniks to find a way to blame this on poor Bill Clinton. Thank goodness lord helmet came to our rescue to expose the evil workings of the vast left-wing conspiracy attempt to humiliate our beloved Vice-President, undermine our glorious war effort to liberate Iraq for Haliburtion and demean the great and wise King George the Younger.

Vice President Richard Cheney shot a man in the face. Whether he "peppered him with birdshot" or blew him away with a .357 Magnum makes no difference to me. To decry the national media's interest in this story is a know-nothing attitude. It would be a bit easier to accept your argument LH if it weren't for the fact that a hardcore Clinton hater such as yourself would be screaming "cover-up" and "liberal media bias" if Al Gore were the triggerman.

Then again, whenever they royally screw up, it seems to be the typical tactic of the Bush Administration and their apologists to go after Clinton. What's the statue of limitations on acts by prior Chief Executives?

When the second most powerful man in America shoots somebody that is news. Not to cover the story and ask questions of a White House that doesn't want to provide answers would be an act of journalistic malpractice.

Cheney is demonstrating how arrogant he is by burrowing back into his hidey-hole rather than stand in front of the cameras and microphones to explain his version of the event.

Oh, and by the way, Lord Helmet, even a rabid Clinton-hater like you probably understands that an accusation of RAPE (your emphasis, not mine) is not PROOF under our system of justice. If you've got any, why not pass it on to Ken Starr instead of rehashing ancient history over and over to the point of inducing nausea.

This explains a lot as far as some people's thinking is concerned. How they'll do and say anything to maintain their mode of thinking. Drinking with the boys and shooting a man in the face with a shotgun. Hmmmmm. Anyone think Saint Peter would have a problem with this one?

Assuming you actually watched or read the press briefing yourself and didn't catch soundbites on FoxNews you might have noticed something else besides the "extreme egomaniacal nature" of the press Lord Helmet.

You might have also noticed that McClellan can't even tell the truth on something minor and insignificant. I'm of the opinion that this was just an accident and no one was really at fault and there certainly wasn't anything sinister going on. It should be incredibly easy for an experienced White House press secretary to explain the situation and move on, but that isn't the picture the press conference paints.

And it is also worth noting that the reason that a local paper scooped the white house press core is because the owner of the ranch made the story public because Cheney's people were keeping it quiet.

So I came into this thing believing this was a complete accident and bad luck and not some sinister plot or argument but why all the lying and coverups and suspicious circumstances? Is this White House capable or telling the truth about anything?

I can't remember who said it about which Bush press secretary, but it went like this "He has a passing familiarity with the truth."

During the recent NSA hearings, one of the blogs (i think Gay Patriot) commented that Alberto Gonzalez is just like the Queen of Hearts (from through the looking glass) - "Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast"

As lordhelmet noted, the White House press did have their panties in a bunch regarding how they weren't informed in any case. Whether this is due to their solemn duty to inform the people or whether they just didn't like Cheney disrespecting them by not briefing them and leaking to a local paper is for us to decide I guess.

I think McClellan dancing and the confrontational approach of Helen Thomas, David Gregory, Terry Moran et al are a symbiotic (or is it parasitic) relationship though. They feed off each other.