You took my statement out of context regarding Katrina and the Tsunami. I was responding to a comment about why can't we just be satisfied that he has now appologized? Let it go already? I was pointing out how this administration has a track record of not appearing to be very sympathetic to victims of a tragedies. The story here IS NOT a hunting accident. The story is how this administration handled the accident. We all understand accidents happen but it is how you handle it that speaks to your character. And I'm pointing out the lack of character this administration repeatedly shows in other events. ...and this from an administration that ran on a platform of compasionate conservatism that was to bring "dignity" back to the whitehouse? If you think this is about a hunting accident, you are being short-sighted. The respect was erroded when Republicans became empowered by the fact that they no longer had to even listen to other points of view due to their majority position. If Republicans would simply acknowledge the left without implying we are nut-jobs is the day honest conversation can resume.
You are probably right. I poorly stated my position. Let me rephrase. The left, generally, doesn't tend to railroad the conversation without leaving the possibility of other options. This administration puts out a single definitive solution and sticks their fingers in their ear if anybody should say otherwise. That is uniqely GWB tactic, IMO. Basically...take a STRONG position and be unwaivering in your support ESPECIALLY if facing opposition. The appologists get empowered by this and refuse to bother to learn about alternative ideas and instead feel a richous indignation in standing pat on said position. The end result is not a dialogue. Politically, that is great. Socially, it moves a little too far away from the purpose of a democracy ...to rule by popularity but ensuring full representation for all. But WOW. This is really off topic. Point is ...Cheney's response to this accident, IMO, is very typical of what we continue to see from this administration.
Too true. Personally I think this incident is being overblown & is taking the focus away from other much more important issues.
Funny, that's the same thing I've been saying about the Clinton blow-job scandal. Yet that resulted in an impeachment.
Funny, that's the same thing I've been saying about the Clinton blow-job scandal. Seriously, both sides do it equally. IMO if you think one side does it more than the other side, it's because you're biased, and I include myself in that too. If these boobs in Washington spent as much time serving the American people as they do trying to take each other out, we would...well, it doesn't matter because it will never happen.
I haven't had the chance to read through this thread since my last post but throwing my two cents in I think this is being blown out of portion. Everyone involved is calling this an accident and Cheney has come forward to admit that he is at fault. I agree he should've come forward sooner but all in alley his isn't that long. The only issue in my mind is whether Cheney should still be allowed to hunt which I would say is no.
well done. Yes, but the Repubs always seem to one-up the Dems. The Dems do stuff, yes, but the Repubs go for the gusto when they get involved in scandals. The Dems might steal $5k or comit adultry. The Repubs launder millions (Texans for True Majority) and max out bribe contributions. Yes, Dems have been indicated too but not nearly at the same scale. Getting a blow job between consenting adults is one thing. Trying to cover-up shooting somebody in the face (while potentially DRUNK but we won't know since he dodged the police for 24 hours) is a whole other matter. Dems do it too. Repubs just do it better.
A mc josh post --- As luck would have it, I spent Tuesday and Wednesday making my way through a really nasty stomach virus. So I didn't actually catch the Cheney interview live (or, at least, live as broadcast). But this Kevin Drum catch is great ... That's great. It's the Cheney-patented self-reinforcing cycle of bamboozlement and mendacity. I've covered up so many things that no one trusts me. So you can hardly expect me to start coming clean now, right? -- Josh Marshall
do you drink beer? may i assume then you wait at least six hours after each beer before assuming control of a deadly weapon (car)?
The witness Cheney appointed as the best witness claimed that only Dr. Pepper was served at lunch. It was only later that Cheney contradicted her, and said that he had had a beer. Why the deception? Why was she the best witness? She obviously didn't see what happened. She said she first thought that Cheney had suffered from a heart problems, before she realized the lawyer had been hit. Someone who clearly saw it would know what had happened. Furthermore she said that victim was clearly responding, and communicating with Cheney. Cheney said that the victim never responded when he talked to him. I am just curious why Cheney appointed this woman as the best possible witness to fill everyone in.
Are the police going to wait till the next day to question you after you hit someone with your car and put them in the ICU? Of course not. And if you tell them that you only had one beer 5 hours earlier are they going to take your word for it? Of course not.
Shooting Report is Wrong "In the only publicly available, official report on last weekend's accidental shooting by Vice President Dick Cheney, a diagram of a body shows where Austin lawyer Harry Whittington was hit by pellets fired from Cheney's Italian-made shotgun... The only problem is that the diagram is wrong, by all accounts," Newsday reports. "It shows Whittington hit on the left side of his face, neck and chest when Cheney, the Kenedy County Sheriff's office and the report itself say the wounds were on the right side." http://www.newsday.com/news/nationw...2010.story?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headlines
Case closed? Not so fast Sheriff's Report Corroborates Cheney's Account Because It's Based On Statements From Cheney And His Friends... When deputies from the Kenedy County Sheriff's Department finally got around to interviewing Harry Whittington on Monday afternoon -- nearly 48 hours after he was shot by Vice President Dick Cheney -- they found the 78-year-old attorney sitting in a chair in his hospital room. Whittington declined to have his interview tape-recorded, said that "foremost there was no alcohol during the hunt," then managed to get about halfway through the story of the shooting before a nurse told deputies that they'd have to wrap up their interview so that Whittington could get some rest. The sheriff's department says the case is now closed, and the Washington Post says the deputies' report "largely corroborates" the accounts of the shooting that Dick Cheney and Katharine Armstrong have provided to the press. Even if that were true -- Whittington's claim about alcohol squares only technically with Cheney's, and Armstrong's seems to change every time she opens her mouth -- it wouldn't be much of a surprise. The sheriff's department's report corroborates the account given by Cheney and Armstrong because it is the account given by Cheney and Armstrong. If their report is any indication, the deputies reached their conclusions based entirely on statements from members -- well, some members -- of the Cheney-Armstrong hunting party. Aside from their abbreviated discussion with Whittington, they interviewed Cheney, Armstrong and three other witnesses who had every reason to bolster the Cheney-Armstrong story: Armstrong's sister, a hunting guide who was working for Armstrong and U.S. ambassador Pamela Willeford. Whittington was allowed to pass on the tape recorder; the hunting guide was allowed to agree to provide a written statement down the road; and a second hunting guide, a former sheriff himself, was allowed to declare the incident an "accident" without, it seems, any further questioning at all. If the deputies took statements from the Secret Service agents who must have been nearby when the shooting happened, if they talked to anyone involved in serving lunch and beer to the hunting party, if they asked Whittington's doctors about his blood-alcohol level, if they asked Cheney's doctors about the possibility that even a small amount of alcohol, when mixed with the "long list" of medication he takes, might have impaired his shooting abilities -- well, if they did any of that, it's not reflected in the report that "corroborates" the Cheney-Armstrong account. We're not saying that the report is wrong. We're just saying that it doesn't appear to be the sort of definitive statement on the episode that warrants walking away from it entirely. -- Tim Grieve http://www.salon.com/politics/war_r...olitics/war_room/2006/02/17/cheney/index.html
Whittington looked pretty good during his press statement. Either that or his android made a great appearance.
