Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

February 15, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

CHENEY SPEAKS....Dick Cheney's interview a few minutes ago with Brit Hume was, like the rest of this whole story, bizarre.

First, Cheney acknowledged that the White House wanted him to issue a statement Saturday night, but he refused. "That was my call, all the way," he said. Translation: he doesn't take guidance from the White House. They take guidance from him.

Second, he said that he had held up issuing a statement because he wanted to make sure Harry Whittington was all right before saying anything. I don't even know what to make of this. Is he suggesting that his story would have been different if Whittington's injuries had been more serious? That the White House never issues statements about breaking news until it knows how things are going to turn out? Or what?

Finally, Hume suggested that since this was obviously a national story, Cheney should have informed the national press and gotten the word out sooner. Cheney's reply: "It isn't easy to do that. Are they going to take my word for what happened?"

Seriously? Cheney's story is that his own credibility is so poor that a statement from him would have been worthless? Is he really going to stick to that as his explanation?

And did Cheney ever speak with George Bush about this? Hume never asked. That's some serious journalism, Brit.

UPDATE: Apparently Hume did ask Cheney whether he had spoken to Bush. It's not part of the transcript on the Fox News site, but the White House has a full transcript:

Q Had you discussed this with colleagues in the White House, with the President, and so on?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I did not. The White House was notified, but I did not discuss it directly, myself. I talked to Andy Card, I guess it was Sunday morning.

....Q And what about when did you first when, if ever, have you discussed it with the President?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I talked to him about it yesterday, or Monday first on Monday, and then on Tuesday, too.

Kevin Drum 6:45 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (293)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Does Cheney really think we wouldn't believe he shot a man?

Posted by: John West on February 15, 2006 at 6:48 PM | PERMALINK

What about blowing off the sheriff's deputy that evening, and the mixed couples angle? Do real quail hunters shoot with other guys' wives?

Posted by: Hedley Lamarr on February 15, 2006 at 6:48 PM | PERMALINK

I wouldn't believe him. Still don't.

Posted by: TJM on February 15, 2006 at 6:48 PM | PERMALINK

But whereas most dictator's arrogance and evil goes only to "10," his goes to 11.

Wonder what would happen if he started telling the truth, practiced real contrition, and swore off selfishness?

He was responsible for this shooting all right. But damned if we know all that entails. Enter the Swiss Ambassador, stage left.

Posted by: Sparko on February 15, 2006 at 6:50 PM | PERMALINK

Are they going to take my word for what happened?

And yet, that's exactly what he's asking us to do.

Posted by: Dan on February 15, 2006 at 6:50 PM | PERMALINK

So he thinks that if he comes on Fox News and talks to Hume four days after the fact people will believe him?

Posted by: lib on February 15, 2006 at 6:51 PM | PERMALINK

Who ever said Hume was a journalist! He may have studied journalmalisim but he's no journalmalismist.

There's a report that Shooter (aka Big Time or Pig Heart) was drinking beer before going out hunting. I'll bet he drank the beer but didn't swallow it!

Posted by: red_neck_repub on February 15, 2006 at 6:52 PM | PERMALINK

Seriously? Cheney's story is that his own credibility is so poor that a statement from him would have been worthless? Is he really going to stick to that as his explanation?

Once again liberals like Kevin Drum are attacking Dick Cheney even after he apologizes. Look at how much Cheney has already gone through and yet liberals still can't hold back their mean spiritedness and vicious against him. And not only Cheney but the constant liberal posturing has also hurt Whittington who only wants to be left in peace from the chorus of liberals. But the libs will never say sorry for they have put Dick Cheney and Whittington through.

Posted by: Al on February 15, 2006 at 6:56 PM | PERMALINK

Cheny to Hume: No, Karl talks to -- I don't recall talking to Karl. Karl did talk with Katherine Armstrong, who is a good mutual friend to both of us. Karl hunts at the Armstrong, as well --

He cannot recall a conversation that may or may not have occurred just during the last five days!

He must be suffering from Alzheimers or Dementia.

Posted by: nut on February 15, 2006 at 6:56 PM | PERMALINK

"Look at how much Cheney has already gone through and yet liberals still can't hold back their mean spiritedness and vicious against him. And not only Cheney but the constant liberal posturing has also hurt Whittington who only wants to be left in peace from the chorus of liberals. But the libs will never say sorry for they have put Dick Cheney and Whittington through."

Al's right! Knock it off, you liberals! Getting shock in the face and heart by the vice president doesn't hold a candle to what you liberals are doing to poor old Whittington! And when did it become "open season" on the vice president? Hasn't he suffered enough?

Posted by: TLaemmle on February 15, 2006 at 6:59 PM | PERMALINK

"Look at how much Cheney has already gone through"

Yeah, it is so very very very rough to shoot a 78 year old guy in the face and heart!

Why must you liberals be so very very mean? And Darth Vader -- he thought his wife was going to die! He just had to blow up those planets!

Posted by: Gore/Obama '08 on February 15, 2006 at 6:59 PM | PERMALINK

Did Hume ask him why he refused to talk to the sheriff's deputies until 18 hours after the event?

Posted by: shortstop on February 15, 2006 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

Why all this focus on the poor victim? Haven't you guys considered Cheney's feelings in all this? He feels awful, just awful that he's getting so much bad publicity.

Posted by: Memekiller on February 15, 2006 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

Al: you are a parody too bizarre for words. I think you could be Cheney's next mistress.

I am hoping that Mr. Whittington survives to tell us what really happened, and then--maybe--we'll believe. But to Cheney, coercion is just the purest form of love.

Posted by: Sparko on February 15, 2006 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

By letting Armstrong break the story, Cheney had an opportunity to see how the notion of blaming in on Whittington would fly. When it became obvious that wasn't going to work, Cheney was free to make his own statement, taking more of the blame on himself.

Armstrong's statement became "inoperative" because it wasn't from Cheney.

See how it works?

Posted by: scottd on February 15, 2006 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

Oops. I meant to write "getting shot in the face and heart by the vice president." See? You liberals are getting me all upset, too! Don't you have any decency? I can't even type properly around here!

Posted by: Tlaemmle on February 15, 2006 at 7:01 PM | PERMALINK

Why is this important?

Posted by: Alexander Wolfe on February 15, 2006 at 7:01 PM | PERMALINK

Like a man he apologized without mincing any words. This will be adequate for most people except the rabid partisans whose hearts are filled with hatred for those who spy on American people and send our kids to die in faraway land on the basis of false pretenses.

Posted by: tbrosz on February 15, 2006 at 7:03 PM | PERMALINK

So it's off topic. So sue me. Just wanted to let you all know that the Danes are allright:

RISE IN DANISH EXPORTS TO US AND GERMANY OUTSTRIP ENTIRE EXPORT TO MUSLIM WORLD

Today's Jyllands-Posten says that the growth in 2006 in Danish exports to two countries alone is larger than our total export to the entire Muslim world. The two countries are Germany and USA, and the estimates are even made without considering the Buy Danish-campaigns, that are unfolding in these two countries. If they have an effect, it'll be an extra bonus.

"We must tell Europeans, we can live without you. But you cannot live without us," said Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawi, a leading imam in Qatar.

Posted by: clock on February 15, 2006 at 7:04 PM | PERMALINK

Once again, Cheney lies to us. It's quite simple...he shot his friend in the face to impress his new mistress. Then they they all sat down to a nice dinner.

Posted by: Tony on February 15, 2006 at 7:04 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney: Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!! Go Fuck Yourself!!!

Hume: Thank you Mr. Vice President. Back to you Shepard.

Posted by: enozinho on February 15, 2006 at 7:05 PM | PERMALINK

In the interview Cheney describes Whittington as standing in a 'depression or gully', rather below ground level, which does help to explain why he might have been harder the usual to see, but doesn't alter the fact, as we read earlier, that shooting at quail less than ten feet off the ground is illegal.

Cheney's shot must have been technically right at the ground.

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 7:07 PM | PERMALINK

"Why is this important?"

Well, for one thing, it explains why the GOP doesn't talk about the "character" issue anymore.

Also? The Vice President of the United States shot someone. Through sheer thoughtless carelessness - and possibly while DUI.

How can that not be important? Esp. since everyone knows Cheney's the one who really runs the WH.

Posted by: CaseyL on February 15, 2006 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

Did Hume REALLY ask Cheney if he hit a bird as well???

Posted by: JIm Bartle on February 15, 2006 at 7:09 PM | PERMALINK

Why is this important?

For Cheney, this is the summation of his life's effort. Everything about his personality and outlook reduced to a single incident.

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 7:10 PM | PERMALINK

Finally, Hume suggested that since this was obviously a national story, Cheney should have informed the national press and gotten the word out sooner. Cheney's reply: "It isn't easy to do that. Are they going to take my word for what happened?"

Smart move there Dick. The woman you designated to tell your story credibly has changed her story about 3 times, and has made statements that can't be possibly be true on top of that.

Posted by: Jimm on February 15, 2006 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK
Second, he said that he had held up issuing a statement because he wanted to make sure Harry Whittington was all right before saying anything. I don't even know what to make of this. Is he suggesting that his story would have been different if Whittington's injuries had been more serious?

This is perfectly consistent with a plan to lie -- or plead the 5th -- in the event Whittington died from his injuries and negligent homicide charges were filed.

It isn't consistent with any other rational explanation I can think of.

Posted by: cmdicely on February 15, 2006 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK

Brosz: The man does something incredibly callous and stupid, while engaging in something incredibly callous and stupid, but apologizes after he has been found covering up his acts and we're supposed to embrace him? He is a fraud, dissembler, and indifferent to anyone but himself.
But should his policies cause your life to collapse in a horrible calamity (as they have thousands of others), I do hope you remember that you were his champion. He will be sorry though and will have his people release a canned apology to you and yours.

Posted by: Sparko on February 15, 2006 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK

Everything about his personality and outlook reduced to a single incident.

It is kind of funny that after all the fuckups, his life's work is going to be relegated to contents of a Trivial Pursuit question.

Posted by: enozinho on February 15, 2006 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK

Why does this matter?
Yes, can we please go back to the days when the most pressing issues were haircuts, Travel Office, Love Story and Gore's choice of suit? This is just a VP who shot someone, probably with his mistress, probably while drunk, then tried to cover it up and blame the victim. And will probably not be held accountable in any of the ways us lowly citizens would be in a similar situation.

What shall we discuss? I know - Dukakis's goofy grin when he was riding a tank! Kerry's snowboarding! No - BOTOX!!!

Posted by: Memekiller on February 15, 2006 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

The Daily Show said it best: the intelligence was there were quail in the brush,everybody thought there were quail in the brush and if Cheney had it to do it over,he would still shoot Whittington in the face.

Posted by: TJM on February 15, 2006 at 7:15 PM | PERMALINK

According to an on air interview with an official with the Texas Fish and Wildlife, in Texas you are not required to report a hunting accident if no one died. However, a hospital that receives a shooting victim is required to report it. Which means that at least 2 hospitals should have reported the shooting Saturday night.

I wonder if Whittington was first brought to the dinky local hospital (in the heart of Armstrong country) in the hope that, if he really was just "peppered", they could keep the incident quiet. Someone from the Texas Monthly was interviewed by Keith Olberman. He said one thing he found curious was why Whittington was brought to this little hospital first. He stated that it would have been a long, gruelling trip for the ambulance over the unimproved rural roads to reach this place.

One other thing Cheney mentioned was that He, Whittington and the Swiss ambassador were accompanied by a guide who handled the dogs. Why hasn't this person been identified and interviewed?

Finally, Cheney stated that Whittington didn't respond to him and had only ONE eye open. This conflicts a tad with the initial description by Armstrong.

Posted by: bridget on February 15, 2006 at 7:16 PM | PERMALINK

That was my first guess. They didn't want to tell the press while Harry's condition was still in question. They wanted instead to be able to play down the incident after Harry's condition had stabilized. Now on day five we found out that Cheney "peppered" his liver, heart, and larynx.

In other words he was much more seriously injured than Armstrong had let the press believe on Sunday. How many units of blood was he given? How many pellets was he hit with? What was the average penetraion? What distance was he shot from? Why exactly was he evacuated from the first hospital to a second by helicopter? Who made the decision?

Secondarily of course -- what was Harry's blood alcohol, does the VP regularily drink and shoot, does the VP drink before noon on work days . . . ?

Posted by: ranaaurora on February 15, 2006 at 7:20 PM | PERMALINK

This is important because it is evident that Cheney abused his authority as VP by ordering the Secret Service to interfere in the police investigation of the incident -- when the local police arrived that evening to talk to Cheney the Secret Service prevented them from doing so.

It hardly needs to be said that Brit Hume is a bought-and-paid-for Republican Party shill. It might as well have been Rush Limbaugh or Karl Rove himself interviewing Cheney. There is no "journalism" at Fox News. There is only robotic regurgitation of scripted, programmed Republican Party propaganda. This was as fake, phony, bogus, scripted, programmed so-called "interview". Brit Hume was probably literally handed a script by the White House and just read the questions from it, and Cheney recited his scripted replies.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on February 15, 2006 at 7:20 PM | PERMALINK
Finally, Hume suggested that since this was obviously a national story, Cheney should have informed the national press and gotten the word out sooner. Cheney's reply: "It isn't easy to do that. Are they going to take my word for what happened?"

Seriously? Cheney's story is that his own credibility is so poor that a statement from him would have been worthless? Is he really going to stick to that as his explanation?

Well, no, clearly the subtext is that he was forced not to talk by "liberal media bias". You haven't learned to understand winger code well enough yet.

Posted by: cmdicely on February 15, 2006 at 7:21 PM | PERMALINK


from an ABCnews story, quoted at RawStory,

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Daughter_of_shot_hunter_says_he_0215.html


"His daughter said after he was shot, the 78-year-old Republican supporter was unsure whether he was being taken to the hospital or the morgue."


Perhaps he thought Cheney meant it?

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 7:23 PM | PERMALINK
The Vice President of the United States shot someone. Through sheer thoughtless carelessness - and possibly while DUI.

Um, in which version of the story is there any indication that the VP was driving at the time of the shooting, whether under the influence or not?

Posted by: cmdicely on February 15, 2006 at 7:24 PM | PERMALINK

"Hume never asked."

That's Fox News in a NUTshell, so to speak.
.

Posted by: VJ on February 15, 2006 at 7:25 PM | PERMALINK

tbrosz,

Like a man he apologized without mincing any words. This will be adequate for most people

I think that Scottd's point is being glossed over:

By letting Armstrong break the story, Cheney had an opportunity to see how the notion of blaming in on Whittington would fly. When it became obvious that wasn't going to work, Cheney was free to make his own statement, taking more of the blame on himself.

Cheney's no stand-up guy. He was supposed to be the wise old man brought on board to temper the congential idiocy of President Bush and instead he's been at the center of this Administration's most colossal $#$%-ups. I do give serious thought to the proposition that his cognitive processes were diminished in some fashion by his health scares.

Posted by: TangoMan on February 15, 2006 at 7:25 PM | PERMALINK
He was supposed to be the wise old man brought on board to temper the congential idiocy of President Bush

A job for which, it is important to recall, he selected himself.

Posted by: cmdicely on February 15, 2006 at 7:26 PM | PERMALINK

this is the perfect campaign issue and I implore all democrats to add this to the list of winnable campaign measures including:
1. Being too harsh on Gitmo detainees
2. Nothing is wrong with Social Security
3. The Supreme Court is too far right
4. The Abramoff scandal (which includes Scary Reid.......oh wait.....)
5. We haven't given enough money to Katrina victims
And please send to the podium, Sheehan, Reid, Pelosi and Kennedy because they are very mainstream, I promise.
All of these very valid campaign issues and best voiced by your stellar representatives, unless of course you plan on winning

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 7:27 PM | PERMALINK

I'm actually a little freaked out the Vice President could vacation with lobbyists and girlfriends and shoot TAME Birds. Tame. That seems to peg out the twisted GOP meter to me.

Posted by: Sparko on February 15, 2006 at 7:28 PM | PERMALINK

It's important to remember that Dick Cheney, and not his sock puppet George W. Bush, is directly and personally responsible for the mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians in his illegal war of unprovoked aggression based on lies. And he simply doesn't care.

He doesn't care who he kills or how many people he kills. He is a genuine sociopathic killer, and, so far, one of the leading mass murderers of this young 21st century.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on February 15, 2006 at 7:28 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

A job for which, it is important to recall, he selected himself.

Good catch!

Posted by: TangoMan on February 15, 2006 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINK

Um, in which version of the story is there any indication that the VP was driving at the time of the shooting, whether under the influence or not?
Posted by: cmdicely on February 15, 2006 at 7:24 PM | PERMALINK

Discharge of a weapon Under the Influence

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on February 15, 2006 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

You always have to remember to use your Dick-lator.

When Dick bullshits, he nearly always tells the truth technically, so you have to parse him a little bit. As with the WMD, he likely knows that a skilled interrogator may watch the tape and intuit he's lying, so he tells the truth, but makes up his own frame for it. Thus, the deception doesn't show. So, he's telling the truth about waiting to see Whittington's condition, but he translates the question in his head so that he's answering it in his own frame.

Posted by: Jimm on February 15, 2006 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

Why exactly was he evacuated from the first hospital to a second by helicopter? Who made the decision?

That was probably a medical decision that was made when the doctors at the small hospital realized he was much more badly injured than they had been told and that their facility could not treat him properly. They probably got him stabilized and then sent him to a facility that could actually treat him.

An airlift under those circumstances would not be unusual, especially with an elderly gunshot victim who hadn't just been lightly "peppered."

Posted by: Mnemosyne on February 15, 2006 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

So, he's telling the truth about waiting to see Whittington's condition, but he translates the question in his head so that he's answering it in his own frame.

Also, the "one beer at lunch" is classic Cheney. How long did lunch last...15 minutes? What about the rest of the day? After lunch? Before lunch?

Posted by: Jimm on February 15, 2006 at 7:31 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely, just to speculate a moment, suppose whittington dies in a few months, from a heart attack.

is a wrongful death suit possible under such circumstances?

Posted by: howard on February 15, 2006 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK

Anti-Cheney sentiment in the White House gaining steam,

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20060214\ACQDJON200602141941DOWJONESDJONLINE000958.htm&


"NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- A source described as close to the Bush administration said people inside the White House are "livid" about the way Vice President Dick Cheney's office has handled the hunting accident he was involved in over the weekend, CBS News reported Tuesday.

According to CBS News, the source said the issue was no longer Cheney's view of press management but rather about Iraq, Hurricane Katrina and a range of other issues that play into the public's view of the administration's arrogance."

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK

Jay wrote: this is the perfect campaign issue and I implore all democrats to add this to the list of winnable campaign measures including ...

You are the perfect brain-dead, scripted, programmed, drivel-regurgitating, Republican ass-kissing Bush-bootlicking dumbass and I implore you to continue posting your stupid, inane comments so that everyone can laugh at the way you lick dogshit off the bottom of Bush's boot while he grinds it into your face and you whimper for more.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on February 15, 2006 at 7:33 PM | PERMALINK

I would add SecularAnimist's characterization of Cheney as a genuine sociopathic killer of tens of thousands of Iraqis to Jay's list of winning Democratic positions for 2006. It ought to play well with middle America, particularly if SecularAnimist can be recruited to evangelize it.

Posted by: Kevin P. on February 15, 2006 at 7:33 PM | PERMALINK

Ooooh, boo hoo. Cheney's been through so much. Bwaaahh. I want to cry. Five or six draft deferments as a chicken hawk Vietnam war supporter, six or so pig heart transplants, lesbian daughter on the gov't payroll, several million dollar residences, raking in millions from Halliburton, crone duchebag wife who used to write boodice-ripping lesbian love novels. So sad, a real charity case. Fuck all the wingnut trolls.

Posted by: red_neck_repub on February 15, 2006 at 7:34 PM | PERMALINK

secular, thanks for reminding me of the most important campaign issue; the illegal occupation of Iraq. That's a winner!!!!! please say that as loud and as often as you can because that issue needs to be at the top of the campaign. Full speed ahead.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 7:34 PM | PERMALINK

secular, are you angry or stupid? My vote is both.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK

Second, he said that he had held up issuing a statement because he wanted to make sure Harry Whittington was all right before saying anything.

Here's my guess: The victim was 78 years old and probably not looking good. Cheney may have wanted to hold off on an announcement until the patient's condition improved, allowing Cheney to portray the accident as minor instead of major. Unfortunately, with a 78 yr old body and a load of lead, it must have taken a while for the patient to stabilize. Apparently, he still hasn't.

Posted by: Francis Wilkinson on February 15, 2006 at 7:36 PM | PERMALINK

It might as well have been Rush Limbaugh or Karl Rove himself interviewing Cheney. There is no "journalism" at Fox News.

The way the right wing media strategy has been working, how long until Karl Rove really does become a TV journalist and/or reporter?

Imagine it...Really Hardball with Karl Rove.

Posted by: Jimm on February 15, 2006 at 7:37 PM | PERMALINK

red_neck_repub what have you got against lesbians on the government payroll. I thought you guys championed that issue. BTW, why do you hate lesbians?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 7:38 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely, just to speculate a moment, suppose whittington dies in a few months, from a heart attack. Posted by: howard

A few months? Shit, we don't even know what condition he's really in now. He in ICU. That can mean he's on life support.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 15, 2006 at 7:39 PM | PERMALINK

Anti-Cheney sentiment in the White House gaining steam,

Okay, now I'm POSITIVE that this is all just a setup to divert attention from all the other negative news.

I mean, I'm sure that the accident was legitimate, and all - just the noise that's being made over what - let's be honest here folks, is not really all that big of a deal.

I mean - compare the accidental (even if in drunken negligence) shooting of a single 78 year old lawyer to the missing $9 Billion, Halliburton no-bid contracts, or the WMD lies, or the Plame outing to punish a whistleblower for the WMD lies, or 9/11, or Abu Ghraib, or every other fucking thing he's done.

I *do* give him credit for having the balls to go on national TV (even if it is the safe sandbox of FoxNews' fantasyland) - and taking the blame for the shooting, and apologizing, and especially, for NOT apologizing for the apparent coverup (though I don't think it was right for him to do that, I respect him for saying it was his call).

But at the end of the day, this story is just an absurd triviality when compared to all of his other crimes. I really think we (the left, not that I speak for the left or anything) are wasting valuable news cycles on something not at all worthwhile. In my mind, Cheney's interview is closure enough for me. Even if Whittington dies. Even if any of the conspiracy theories are true, we all know there's no way in hell that will ever come out or stick. This is a done deal. Time to MoveOn for Bob's sake.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on February 15, 2006 at 7:42 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin P: It ought to play well with middle America

As a Bush supporter, you belong to an increasingly tiny cultish minority, and are by definition ignorant of what "middle America" thinks about anything.

Jay: thanks for reminding me of the most important campaign issue; the illegal occupation of Iraq. That's a winner!

It sure is. Look at the polls. Clear majorities of Americans now realize that Bush and Cheney lied about the reasons for going to war, clear majorities of Amricans want the troops withdrawn ASAP, and clear majorities of Americans would prefer that the Democrats take control of the Congress away from the Republicans this November.

You right-wing Bush bootlickers belong to a sick cult of personality built around worshipping a career corporate criminal, you live in a tiny bubble of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and Little Green Fuckwads and Freak Republic propaganda, repeating the same bogus talking points to each other in a pathetic circle jerk, and you are totally out of touch with what is happening in this country, but you think you know what "middle Americans" think. You are a bunch of stupid, ignorant, mentally ill clowns and you are in for a rude, rude awakening.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on February 15, 2006 at 7:42 PM | PERMALINK

that issue needs to be at the top of the campaign

You betcha, Jay. All those parents who are now left wondering why their sons and daughters are dead or maimed for this bitch of a war are going to be guffawing over that campaign issue. You're a fucking genius, you are!

Posted by: SED on February 15, 2006 at 7:43 PM | PERMALINK

red_neck_repub, that is something I could never say (and would never), but it was funny as hell. if you could bottle that, you'd be an instant milionaire, with all the folks who share your feelings on the matter.

Posted by: dark comic critic on February 15, 2006 at 7:44 PM | PERMALINK

I haven't seen the interview - was Brit wearing a blue dress?

Posted by: Robert on February 15, 2006 at 7:45 PM | PERMALINK

Jay: secular, are you angry or stupid? My vote is both.

Are you twelve years old? Or maybe thirteen? My vote is twelve. Do your parents know you are using their computer?

Posted by: SecularAnimist on February 15, 2006 at 7:45 PM | PERMALINK

For that matter, what is the deal with calling Cheney "pig heart"? Is this some kind of new insult for people with heart conditions? You must be one of these tolerant liberals.

And what's up with the mixed company angle? So men and women should now not socialize together? And women should not be ambassadors to Switzerland but should stay at home with their husbands only? You are starting to sound like the Saudis.

I despair that the Democratic Party will ever pull itself together to present a credible alternative to the Republicans.

Posted by: Kevin P. on February 15, 2006 at 7:47 PM | PERMALINK

Jay, you should follow Silent Bob's example.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on February 15, 2006 at 7:47 PM | PERMALINK

That's it, all very winnable campign measures, run on it. I am a wondering though how all of you tolerant liberals can debate the conservatives point by point without resorting to name calling, I mean that is admmirable......oh wait......BTW, secular, you did answer my earlier question.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 7:47 PM | PERMALINK
cmdicely, just to speculate a moment, suppose whittington dies in a few months, from a heart attack.

is a wrongful death suit possible under such circumstances?

Sure, along, probably, with criminal charges for negligent homicide; and, of course, a civil suit for negligence is possible without anyone dying.

Posted by: cmdicely on February 15, 2006 at 7:49 PM | PERMALINK

But at the end of the day, this story is just an absurd triviality when compared to all of his other crimes. I really think we (the left, not that I speak for the left or anything) are wasting valuable news cycles on something not at all worthwhile. In my mind, Cheney's interview is closure enough for me. Even if Whittington dies. Even if any of the conspiracy theories are true, we all know there's no way in hell that will ever come out or stick. This is a done deal. Time to MoveOn for Bob's sake.
Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten

I disagree because of the possible sleaze element - broads and booze were obviously involved. I agree that in the larger scheme of things, it is small potatoes. But that's not the way the very small mind of America works. Anything that has a whiff of sexual misconduct (who in the world would want to be Cheney's side action - shudder - that's one fucked-up woman) is more interesting to the great unwashed (and disinterested) masses than all the "hard" stuff like lying about foreign policy and war and stuff.

Again, most Americans are not directly affected by the war in Iraq, so they don't care. Most Americans don't think they are affected by tax cuts for the rich.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 15, 2006 at 7:50 PM | PERMALINK

WellIts official.
A drunk Dick Cheney shot his buddy in the face and covered it up.

Should play well in 06, with the hunting buddy of a drunk vice president vote.

Call Mothers Against Hunting with A Drunk Vice-President
MAHADVP

Posted by: Fitz on February 15, 2006 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINK

I despair that the Democratic Party will ever pull itself together to present a credible alternative to the Republicans.
Posted by: Kevin P. on February 15, 2006 at 7:47 PM | PERMALINK

I despair that the real republican party will ever pull itself together to present a credible alternative to the neocon death-cult that has taken it over like an evil mind-control parasite from outer space.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on February 15, 2006 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II :


Anything that has a whiff of sexual misconduct (who in the world would want to be Cheney's side action - shudder - that's one fucked-up woman)

Hmmm, this seems like accusing the Ambassador to Switzerland of being an adulterous mistress ... I suppose this continues on in the tolerant liberal tradition...

Perhaps the ranch owner, a woman having the temerity to own a hunting estate can be accused of being the whorehouse madam?

Just trying to be helpful here.

Posted by: Kevin P. on February 15, 2006 at 7:55 PM | PERMALINK

I disagree because of the possible sleaze element - broads and booze were obviously involved.

But you'll never make it stick. There's no hard evidence, and if any such evidence surfaces, assume it's probably forged and planted by Rove.

There's more solid evidence of sexual misconduct in the Gannon case, because at least there, there's a logbook showing dozens of overnighters at the White House.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on February 15, 2006 at 7:55 PM | PERMALINK

sparko, tango man: That's the fake tbrosz. You're arguing with with a parody. (insert one of thousands of possible jokes about how much that's like arguing with the real tbrosz.)this is almost as fruitless as arguing with Jay, who doesn't know he's a parody.

cmdicely: I think that Kevin's being purposefully, sarcastically disengenious about Cheney's explanation for the way this came out. It's pretty obvious that it's a swipe at the (supposedly) liberal media. QAs you suggest, it buys him time in case he needs to change his story. it also means that it goes out to a likely uncritical audience first, someone in the Armstrong's backyard who's probably too happy to get the national scoop to ask too many questions.

I think the question is still: When did the president know that Cheney was the triggerman? and if it was at 8pm that night (as we're told) and there was a dispute between "the White House" and Cheney about when to say something (as we're also told) then where was Bush in this dispute? -I mean, if he knew, then I don't see how "The White House" (as opposed to "some within the white house" for instance) could really have a different opinion. and, if this was a disagreement between the President and vice President, what does that tell us aobut who's in charge? I know, that's three questions, at least.

Posted by: URK on February 15, 2006 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK

dang jeff II reminded me of another one: tax-cuts for the rich, how could I forget. You really have the start of a campaign that is a can't miss. Oh except in 2004, which missed badly and well, really is the same campaign. Nevermind. I wonder what Cindy Sheehan is doing?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 7:57 PM | PERMALINK

Osama,

I had a similar thought, but repressed it; but I think it's right.

Unless the dog handler, or Whittington, or someone else who was on the scene says something different, this probably should be the end of it.

Or, give it to the end of the week, he is the Vice President, but so far it's nothing to invest in, outside the slight insight it allows into the Texas hooked-up Republican crowd.

But then I thought --he shot the guy. At closer than thirty yards because pellets went into his heart and liver.

And the guy was standing in a depression, so he had to be aiming at ground level when he discharged, which, someone pointed out, is illegal in quail hunting.

And he didn't have the permit on his hunting license, and how often had he been hunting without the right permit?

And he said he'd only become an avid hunter within the last twelve to fifteen years, that is, about when he started having serious heart problems, suggesting there was some notable cognitive alteration associated with the onset of that condition, either organically or through medication.

And his older friends have often in public stated how he has changed in recent years.

And he did once butcher a box full of tame pheasant --70 of them --at a single go.

And he tries to encourage torturing people whenever he can.

There's a lot wrong in this, and now that I think of it, I think this story kind of brings that out.

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 7:59 PM | PERMALINK

I hope that all PR specialists are meticulously watching this ongoing case study in how not to handle a given adverse situation. A series of rolling disclosures is every PR flack's nightmare.

I wouldn't have said this two days ago, given what the White House spokesman Scott McClellan told us initially about this tragic story, but I have a sneaking suspicion that there's a lot more here than they're willing to discuss. It was an accident, for sure, but does Cheney's behavior meet the legal definition of reckless endangerment?

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on February 15, 2006 at 8:00 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin P,

The liberal tradition is very tolerant, except of one thing, intolerance. No one should be above painting these sewer rats with their own paint brush.

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 8:03 PM | PERMALINK

Blaming the victim for the abuse? How politically incorrect and extremely intolerant, cld. And how insensitive to women! I am disappointed.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 8:06 PM | PERMALINK

There's a lot wrong in this, and now that I think of it, I think this story kind of brings that out.
Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 7:59 PM | PERMALINK

That may mean something to you and I, but unless you've got access to hard evidence that's going to lead further, I don't see this gaining traction.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on February 15, 2006 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

Just in the interest of accuracy, Kevin - you said that B. Hume did not ask Cheney when he talked to Bush. According to the WaPo transcript of the interview, he did in fact ask him that question. Cheney said he talked to Bush on Monday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/15/AR2006021502005.html

Posted by: fishwife on February 15, 2006 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

Here's another tasty tidbit from the Austin American-Statesman (filed Monday):

Armstrong said Cheney visited Whittington at the hospital Sunday, and "they had a great time."

Whittington was alert, sitting up and being talkative Sunday, she said.

"It's all OK," Armstrong said. "It's not that big a deal. Even Harry will tell you that."

relder@statesman.com; 445-3671

Posted by: Jimm on February 15, 2006 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

For Mr. Cheney, is it 'not a big deal' or 'the worst day of his life'?

Posted by: Jimm on February 15, 2006 at 8:10 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II :

Hmmm, this seems like accusing the Ambassador to Switzerland of being an adulterous mistress (as opposed to a chaste mistress?) ... I suppose this continues on in the tolerant liberal tradition...

If she's the ambassador to Swizterland, what she doing at a "ranch" outside a hell hole like Corpus Cristi? Gee, as a European-based ambassador I think finagling a trip to the Olympics on the American tax payers would be preferable to winter in Texas with that group. Gee, what's the attraction? Can't be the food, which would certainly be better in Torino.

Perhaps the ranch owner, a woman having the temerity to own a hunting estate can be accused of being the whorehouse madam? Posted by: Kevin P.

Don't know don't care. I favor legalized prostitution. It's up to Lynne (I'm my daughter's role model) Cheney to decide the propriety of the weekend. Oh, and, as I wrote, the court of public opinion. The VP isn't likley to find much sympathy with them for kind of hanky-panky. Or have you forgotten Bill Clinton's wardrobe malfunctions?

Posted by: Jeff II on February 15, 2006 at 8:13 PM | PERMALINK

I am disappointed in you Jeff - you are weaseling out by punting the judgment of propriety to "the court of public opinion".

Allow me to quote you one more time:
Jeff II :


Anything that has a whiff of sexual misconduct (who in the world would want to be Cheney's side action - shudder - that's one fucked-up woman)

Stand behind what you wrote.

Posted by: Kevin P. on February 15, 2006 at 8:15 PM | PERMALINK

Another question Hume would have asked if he was a real journalist (as opposed to a Pravda / establishment image of a journalist):

If, as you now say, you were responsible for shooting your friend in the face and heart, why did the first two public statements, one from Armstrong and one from Matalin, BLAME WHITTINGTON when both of those people supposedly spoke to you, Mr. Cheney, before maing those statements? Matalin wasn't there -- where did she get the firsthand information she relayed, including the assertion it was Whittington's fault, not yours?

Posted by: nine on February 15, 2006 at 8:17 PM | PERMALINK

Dick Cheney spoke at the funeral of Katharine Armstrong's father, who is a "legendary" rancher and GOP honcho, and has hunted at the ranch frequently, so I'm not sure the mistress stuff is really applicable here. It's a huge ranch and hunting waystation for GOP dignitaries.

Posted by: Jimm on February 15, 2006 at 8:18 PM | PERMALINK

I'd ask Jay what on earth he thinks he's talking about, but I'm sure he can imagine most anything.

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 8:19 PM | PERMALINK

I can't believe you guys piling on poor old Dickie like this. The truth is he saved the dude's freakin' life, man!

If Cheney didn't travel with his own MASH unit Whittington would have died on the scene. So there you go, thanks to Dick's defective heart, he had a bevy of doctors and nurses right there on the ranch with him available to treat the terribly wounded Whittington.

The long delay in reporting the accident is no doubt to make sure Whittington had stablized. Their cover story that he was awake and not too badly injured has already been blown. The victim has been in the ICU for four days. There's no way in hell that Cheney and crew thought he was minorly injured on Saturday. They thought he was going to die.

That or their little party was just a reenactment of The Secret History.

Posted by: kidkostar on February 15, 2006 at 8:20 PM | PERMALINK

Allow me to quote you one more time:
Jeff II :


Anything that has a whiff of sexual misconduct (who in the world would want to be Cheney's side action - shudder - that's one fucked-up woman)Stand behind what you wrote.
Posted by: Kevin P

I never said I didn't write that. In fact, I elaborated by finding it odd that, as ambassador to a European nation, that she's in Texas. Was she on vacation? Again, picking anywhere in Texas outside of Austin to visit is further proof that she's one fucked-up woman. And that she'd be there to hang with that crowd . . . Then again, she is a hardcore Republican. So by definition she's damaged goods beyond her taste in chickha . . . er, I mean "men."

Posted by: Jeff II on February 15, 2006 at 8:22 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney finally talks!!! To Brit Hume!!! That took guts!!!

Posted by: Shelly on February 15, 2006 at 8:27 PM | PERMALINK

jeff II, why do you hate Texas?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 8:30 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney finally talks!!! To Brit Hume!!! That took guts!!! Posted by: Shelly

Really!!!

No. Guts would have been sitting down with someone other than a GOP operative of Fox News. Guts would have been a press conference - his first ever.

However, Dick "Don't fuck with me" Cheney doesn't answer to anyone.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 15, 2006 at 8:31 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin P.,

'Propriety' is the court of public opinion.

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 8:31 PM | PERMALINK

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30742

The question is...who's next?

Posted by: Fitz on February 15, 2006 at 8:32 PM | PERMALINK

jeff....I guess you couldn't read my sarcasm...

Posted by: shelly on February 15, 2006 at 8:34 PM | PERMALINK

C'mon guys don't lose your momentum on this one. This is a BIG story and future campaign issue. Full speed ahead....hey I wonder what Cindy Sheehan is doing?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 8:35 PM | PERMALINK

Liberals can read?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 8:36 PM | PERMALINK

Thanks for the clarification, Jeff. This gets better and better! You have managed to insult most Texans as well - many of them born Democrats.

Posted by: Kevin P. on February 15, 2006 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

Finally, Hume suggested that since this was obviously a national story, Cheney should have informed the national press and gotten the word out sooner. Cheney's reply: "It isn't easy to do that. Are they going to take my word for what happened?"

Translation: "I didn't know if I had actually killed the guy, so I waited to see if died so I would know if I needed an attorney present during any questioning."

Cheney understands the legal system.

ash
['If this was some non-vice-presidential personage, on the other hand, I'm sure the veeper would say he was guilty as hell.']

Posted by: ash on February 15, 2006 at 8:38 PM | PERMALINK

This must gain traction because this is the character issue. He only seems like someone sane, look twice and he's nuts.

If he weren't in high office, if he were the guy next door, would you want your kids to know him?

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 8:39 PM | PERMALINK

The Republican attitude toward our feathered friends,


http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/stevebell/0,,1353911,00.html

A bird in the hand.

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 8:44 PM | PERMALINK

What are the drinking/hunting laws in Texas? Is there a zero tolerance for drinking while hunting?

I doubt that he was completely wasted, but to me, this is similar to a DUI incident. If Cheney had been drinking at all, and that was against the law, he knew he would have been in big trouble. That is why he avoided seeing anyone official until morning, so that he could not charged with being intoxicated.

Interesting that this could be like Watergate, where the coverup was or is more serious than the crime.

Posted by: terry k on February 15, 2006 at 8:45 PM | PERMALINK

This just in...

http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2006/02/14/news/106530.txt

Posted by: Fitz on February 15, 2006 at 8:47 PM | PERMALINK

Saddam use shotgun to kill enemys. man shot must be enemy. Evil Cheney try to kill man and make like assididnt. We like press because helps Muhajadene.

we like American protestors.

Posted by: Mohammad on February 15, 2006 at 8:49 PM | PERMALINK

Apparently if there is an accidental shooting in the state of Texas, the victim and the shooter are both tested for alchohol. Why wasn't Cheney?

Posted by: Shelly on February 15, 2006 at 8:50 PM | PERMALINK

Well it appears as though this issue may be losing steam, much in the tradition of:
1. Bush lied
2. Abu Ghraib
3. Torture at Gitmo
4. Rathergate
5. Plamegate
and my personal favorite
6. Domestic spying
Just. Can't. Get. Traction.
Hang in there though, there is more baseless indignation in store. Full speed ahead.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 8:51 PM | PERMALINK

The title of my next screenplay,


Good Dick Hunting

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 8:52 PM | PERMALINK

I want some of whatever Jay is smoking today.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on February 15, 2006 at 8:55 PM | PERMALINK

If you look at the transcript, it seems like Cheney interprets the question "Was anybody drinking in this party?" to mean "Was anybody drinking at the exact same time you were hunting?" So, given that they didn't return to hunting until "sometime after 3:00 p.m.," about the best you could say is that they had left off drinking by 3 or so.

The Washington Post had an article about drunk driving arrests last New Year's Eve
, and one of the commonest lines from people pulled over is that they "only had two beers." Police write this up as "The operator admitted consuming alcohol."

Posted by: Mr. P on February 15, 2006 at 8:55 PM | PERMALINK

Theater of the absurd. From today's interview with Brit "GOP Lap Dog" Hume.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, it's a great relief. But I won't be, obviously, totally at ease until he's home. He's going to be in the hospital, apparently, for a few more days, and the problem, obviously, is that there's always the possibility of complications in somebody who is 78-79 years old. But he's a great man, he's in great shape, good friend, and our thoughts and prayers go out to he and his family.

Q How long have you known him?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I first met him in Vail, Colorado, when I worked for Gerry Ford about 30 years ago, and it was the first time I'd ever hunted with him.

Q Would you describe him as a close friend, friendly acquaintance, what --

THE VICE PRESIDENT: No, an acquaintance.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 15, 2006 at 8:59 PM | PERMALINK

Just. Can't. Get. Traction.

Let's see. Bush is at 39% approval, Cheney is at 19%. Congressional Dems have 10% more support than Congressional Republicans nationally. Yeah, by any measure our traction sucks. I sure wish we could capitalize on all these Republican scandals and fuck-ups.

Posted by: ranaaurora on February 15, 2006 at 9:01 PM | PERMALINK

Oh gee. The fair and balanced boys and girls at fox left out when unka Dick said: "Yeah... I was bombed out of my mind..."

Posted by: Pechorin on February 15, 2006 at 9:01 PM | PERMALINK

I don't know what is more disgusting.

1) Macho men who drive to where a covey of tame quale is, get of the car and start blasting.

2) having 2 non-shooting women in the hunting party, whose role seem to be to gush admiration at the manlyness of the killers.

Posted by: MonkeyBoy on February 15, 2006 at 9:02 PM | PERMALINK

Are we seeing the outline here of it, the Republican rat factory spinning this like Poor ol' Dick is the Victim?

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 9:03 PM | PERMALINK

Apparently if there is an accidental shooting in the state of Texas, the victim and the shooter are both tested for alchohol. Why wasn't Cheney?

Um, he was too busy with the squeeze to talk to the po-leez?

Jeff II nails it. At least half of America thinks he was drunk, and however many more think he was playing Love Shack Weekend. This stuff doesn't go over well with the base. For some reason, the right can't stand the idea of another guy getting a blow job.

Posted by: shortstop on February 15, 2006 at 9:03 PM | PERMALINK

that's it ranaaurora, you're half way home. Stay on those themes for the campaign and it is a slam dunk. I mean, that's the same basic campaign that worked so well for you in '04 and.......oh wait. Never mind. If there were only more funerals where you could get your message out.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 9:04 PM | PERMALINK

What themes? I don't control the media or the justice department.

The opinion polls are significantly different than they were in 2004. I'm just reporting them. If you and your brethren fucks don't turn them around in the next 8 months your going to lose the midterms. That's just democracy 101.

Posted by: ranaaurora on February 15, 2006 at 9:09 PM | PERMALINK

Contract With Abramoff
Contract With Abramoff
Contract With Abramoff
Contract With Abramoff
Contract With Abramoff
Contract With Abramoff
Contract With Abramoff
Contract With Abramoff

Cross to a vampire, baby :)

It's the only response you'll *ever* deserve.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 9:11 PM | PERMALINK

Welcome back bobbie!

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 9:13 PM | PERMALINK

There, there, li'l Jay-man ...

*turning Jay over, inserting unlubed enema tube up his ass *mmmmmffh*, pumping freshly mixed SacRete up his colon until a death rictus blossoms across his cute li'l face*

Posted by: Mummy on February 15, 2006 at 9:19 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop you have to be kidding me; "half of America thinks he was drunk"! Wow, 150,000,000 people! I knew you guys were good pollsters but that's insanely good. Unless your lying? Do liberals lie?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 9:21 PM | PERMALINK

Wow mummy, I'm hurt. I thought we were going to be freinds. I thought my views would be accepted here in the traditional tolerant liberal fashion. Disappointing, I guess is it what it really is.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 9:23 PM | PERMALINK

Jay:

"Officer, I just had one beer."

*cop writes down: "Admits consuming alcohol"*

Zero tolerance for drinking and driving.

Zero tolerance for drinking and hunting.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 9:24 PM | PERMALINK

Seriously, Jay -- is it crack or meth that you're on?

Posted by: Mnemosyne on February 15, 2006 at 9:26 PM | PERMALINK

Mnemosyne:

Mexican ice :)

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 9:27 PM | PERMALINK

Still do not understand why D'asCoyne didn't announce himself after he retrieved the quail?

Posted by: stupid git on February 15, 2006 at 9:29 PM | PERMALINK

Wow! So now a liberal wants to get tough on crime! Who would have thunk it! You guys just continue to stay ahead of the curve. Did you poll that first Bob?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 9:29 PM | PERMALINK

The idiot Jay hijacks one more thread with his psychopathological rants.

Posted by: lib on February 15, 2006 at 9:32 PM | PERMALINK

Jay:

No, just using common sense.

Cheney thinks that by admitting that he had "one beer," he's going to elicit sympathy. He's wrong. Since the 80s, people have been so beaten down by the new DWI regime in most states (certainly in NJ where I live) that people won't have a shred of sympathy for him at all.

Instead, they'll be asking themselves why the motherfucker wasn't breathalyzed immediately afterward.

Because after all, if any of *them* shot their buddies hunting, that's exactly what would've happened.

This candy-assed rich boy shit rubs the weekend hunting demographic precisely the wrong way.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 9:35 PM | PERMALINK

Lib,
he only wishes he could hijack it. Have you noticed that the rest of us are getting past him quite nicely.

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 9:36 PM | PERMALINK

You know, Bob, I've heard the stuff coming up from Mexico is much stronger than what was getting cooked up domestically in trailer parks.

Now we have Exhibit A to prove it, right here in our own thread! Cool!

Posted by: Mnemosyne on February 15, 2006 at 9:36 PM | PERMALINK

I was wrong: I thought Hume would go after him.

I particularly figured he would catch on to the angle (literally): 'Wait, you say this guy was behind and below you, and you were there to shoot at birds above and in front of you -- how long have you been a member of the NRA, Mr. Vice President?"

Or: "Why do you think the press would have trouble believing you?

I didn't THINK Hume would go this far, but I thought it at least possible that he might even ask about the delay: "Why? I'm sure you'd want to say how sorry you were if he died, but what right do you have, surrounded by taxpayer-provided bodyguards, to use them to avoid answering the kind of prompt questions by police that any other citizen would have had to answer?"

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 15, 2006 at 9:37 PM | PERMALINK

jcricket, I beg to differ. Seems as though I have distracted quite a few ADD liberals.

And Bob, you're right. All of those hunting states including the Southeast and the Northwest will all be going Democratic now just like in '04. Oh wait.......nevermind. Hey I wonder what's on AirAmerica? Are they still on the air?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 9:42 PM | PERMALINK

Americanist:

The only excuse Cheney gave that had a whiff of legitimacy was wanting to inform Whittington's family so they wouldn't have to read about the shooting in the news.

Of course, that might excuse a two or three hour delay.

A 12-hour delay I'm not so sure ...

Wouldn't you love to know what went on in that phone call to Rove ....

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 9:43 PM | PERMALINK

"I thought Hume would go after him"

I don't think "Wait, you say d'asCoyne was behind you and below you......" was in the script that MM handed Hume.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on February 15, 2006 at 9:48 PM | PERMALINK

Jay:

Love how you admit you're trolling :)

Weekend-sportsmen Reagan Democrat "The Deer Hunter" NRA types have genuine reason to be appalled by all the excusemaking.

That's precisely why I predicted that Cheney had no choice but to admit on Fox that it was his fault because he and he alone pulled the trigger.

I give Cheney props for coming clean there. It may have helped defuse the thing to an extent.

But until Whittington is out of the woods medically, this is a major news story. Negligent homicide is not a scintillating resume-builder.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 9:50 PM | PERMALINK

Methinks the apologists do not understand the elementary concept of ordering numbers. Why should they be celebrating if only 40% of Americans approve of their leader and 60% disapprove?

Here is the proof positive.

Posted by: lib on February 15, 2006 at 9:52 PM | PERMALINK

Bob, I troll, therefore I am.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 9:52 PM | PERMALINK

Oh no, it's proof positive!!! 60% of the wingnut wing of the liberal base disapproves of the current administration! Does that include Sheehan?

If only the seething rage and anger can be sustained for two more years, there will be a plethora of winnable issues, including but not limited too:
1. We don't spend enough money on entitlements
2. Tax cuts only benefit the rich
3. Islamic extremists are people too
4. Civil rights are eroding
These issues are all mainstream, and if Nancy Pelosi could spearhead this effort, well that would be even better. Get to work now, there's another campaign to lose.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:00 PM | PERMALINK

Why should they be celebrating if only 40% of Americans approve of their leader and 60% disapprove?

Posted by: lib on February 15, 2006 at 9:52 PM | PERMALINK

'cos it means there political strategy was brilliant.

Posted by: McA on February 15, 2006 at 10:03 PM | PERMALINK

Isn't the timeline Cheney proposes for informing the WH different from the one the harpies in the press corp were finally able to rip out of Scotty?
And Cheney didn't speak to (giggle) his boss until Monday?

Posted by: Timeline ? on February 15, 2006 at 10:03 PM | PERMALINK

Jay, I know you're here to hack on liberals and disrupt any sensible discussion. I know the mockery and the sneering laughter as Mr. Whittington struggles for life in a hospital bed is all part of the pose. But could you please tell us what you personally think of this incident. Forget the political dimensions for a moment. What do you think of the Vice-President's actions? After all, he shot another man in the face at close range. He was massively careless with a loaded firearm. He obstructed justice. He covered up the real story. He had his associates try to blame the victim. He was hunting without a license. Do you think any of that is OK?

OBF, I usually agree with you but I think this story is important. Way important. This one has personal resonance for liberals and conservatives alike. And it's out in the open. More questions raised than answered. GOP voters can apparently excuse torture, illegal war, institutional corruption, cronyism, etc. as long as it can framed as necessary for the war on terror or if it can be dismissed as liberal conspiracy fantasies.

But how do you bury this story the same way? People have now been shown Cheney's careless violence, his lack of remorse, his betrayal of a friend, his sloppy and devious behaviour. And if he walks it will only be because he's the VP. He'll be shown to be very clearly above the law. And that's not supposed to happen in a democracy.

Posted by: exasperanto on February 15, 2006 at 10:06 PM | PERMALINK

"didn't speak to the Pres until Monday"

Well, there is the problem of a "need to know" basis. Twiggie was simply "out of the loop".

Posted by: thethirdPaul on February 15, 2006 at 10:08 PM | PERMALINK

Mr. Whittington was sitting up in bed and working today which is what this story should be about. Personally, I think it's a tragic mistake and feel bad for the victim. Whatever the consequences are, Mr. Cheney will have to face them. I disagree though that this is a big story and strongly disagree that Mr. Cheney would have been treated harsher had he been a civilian. We would have never heard of this had this been some average Joe. The police, and all involved have strongly stated that this was a horrific accident and even an average Joe would have been slapped on the wrist and the attention would have been focused on the victim.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:16 PM | PERMALINK

Jay:

> 1. We don't spend enough money on entitlements

I agree. We need to spend even more on kickbacks
to private health insurers and Big Pharma. After
all, why look at how much senior citizens are
growing to *just love* Medicare Part D(isaster) :)

Mmmm ... donut holes ! :):):):)

> 2. Tax cuts only benefit the rich

Who *would* you expect a regressive
tax cut to benefit? Homeless people? :)

> 3. Islamic extremists are people too

Well, if you can call Pat Robertson a "human being," I guess
fair play demands that you extend this to Osama bin Laden :)

> 4. Civil rights are eroding

You know, the Muslim vote used to be split about evenly, as a lot
of Muslim immigrants are high-tech workers and fairly well-to-do.

Now I think it's safe to say the Dems can pocket that vote :)

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 10:17 PM | PERMALINK

BTW, your last paragragh is nothing more than pure opinion and baseless. Mr. Cheney did not betray his freind, was not devious and you have no idea how apologetic he was. No one does. But why let the facts get in the way of liberal rage, huh?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:20 PM | PERMALINK

Bob, are you referring to those standing-room only Iraqi immigrants that lined up to vote on three successive occasions last year on which democratic direction their country would go and who proudly sported purple fingers afterwards. You mean those immigrants? Their voting democrat? Wow, who would have thunk it.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:24 PM | PERMALINK

"an average Joe"

Well, this is not an average Joe - This is the "leader of the free world" - It leaves no doubt that Cheney is the head of our country. Bush is a puppet - Rove is a puppet - Cheney and his staff control the government. He called the shots to Rove about this situation - Bush did not even have a need to know. Cheney is a power hungry, arrogant, blood lusting son of a bitch. This story has lost it's humor - Cheney is vile.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on February 15, 2006 at 10:26 PM | PERMALINK

That's it thirdpaul, that's the rage that will carry you to victory in '08 just like it did in '00 and '04......oh wait. The more unhinged and conspiracy minded you are the better, it is very mainstream and is a slam dunk Democratic platform for the next campaign. Well done!

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:29 PM | PERMALINK

Jay,

Fact: They blamed the victim.

Fact: He hid from the police.

Fact: He refused to make a statement. (He's the VP, for God's sake.)

No rage here, just observation.

Posted by: exasperanto on February 15, 2006 at 10:29 PM | PERMALINK

Jay:

"Working"? Harry Whittington's a 78-year-old retired guy. Until he grants an interview with the press we don't know what kind of mental state he's truly in. My guess is he's pretty heavily medicated, whether he's conscious or not.

You're wrong about this. Your first mistake is to confuse being "peppered" by buckshot (a fairly common occurance) with being shot at nearly point-blank range with enough force for the pellets to penetrate to the heart. "Peppered" is shit that falls on you from above or gets blown at you from the side.

Had this happened to any average Joe in any community in America -- you can damn well be certain it would have made the police blotter if the shot guy was put in the ICU.

And it's more than likely that the shooter would have been extensively interviewed by the cops and breathalyzed, and not be allowed to get away with simply *asserting* that he "had one beer."

Of course an average joe would not have had a medical team at his disposal to make sure that his victim got first-rate first aid. An average joe would have had to have called the cops, and an ambulance and surely wouldn't be allowed the luxury of being interviewed by the authorities the next morning ...

These are the factors that the "average joes" are going to be mulling as they weigh this incident and come to their own conclusions ....

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 10:31 PM | PERMALINK

you guys need to give me a new scorecard. I thought Rove was the brilliant mastermind and Cheney was some dark lurking figure in the background. Now Cheney controls the levers and Rove is a puppet? When's intermission?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:33 PM | PERMALINK

Wow, Bob that's the kind of tough-on-crime stance that could win an election. Careful. But wouldn't the ACLU be there for him? Where's the ACLU?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:35 PM | PERMALINK

jay has certainly become my favorite blithering ass (as well as a demonstrable racist in some of his past comments), but the idea that if i shot someone in a hunting accident, i could schedule a convenient discussion with the law some 14 hours later is, quite simply, insane.

and the idea that we should have anything but contempt for the fact that it took cheney until today to say what his press release should have said on the night the shooting occurred - it's my fault, and my hopes and prayers are with my friend - is simply the mark of the cult of personality in action....

Posted by: howard on February 15, 2006 at 10:36 PM | PERMALINK

You're not talking about violating his civil rights are you Bob? You know cause there's a lot of erosion of civil rights lately.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:36 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney went a long way to defuse the story this afternoon. I thought, and still think, that the biggest mistake he made was sending Kathryn Armstrong and Mary Madelin out to tell folks that the shooting was Harry Whittington's fault. Cowardly. He took that story away this afternoon.

Unless somebody can obtain a semen sample off the ambassador's dress I don't think the sex issue will have legs. Why? Bill Clinton is a ladies man. Everybody knows it. Before Monica people had been trying to catch him for years. Cheating was a stupid and childish game he played. Dick Cheney is not Bill Clinton. A lot of folks would smile approvingly if they thought the old man could even get it up. His heart is so bad I doubt he can even tolerate Viagra.

On the other hand, where was Lynne anyway?

Posted by: Ron Byers on February 15, 2006 at 10:36 PM | PERMALINK

Jay, are you sure that it is the others that have been distracted? it sure looks to me that you have been kept quite busy while the grown ups have been talking.

...and that after all, is what a really good babysitter is supposed to do? (Thanks to all of you who took one for the team keeping Jay busy.)

You are just too plain stupid to realize that you have been sitting at the kid's table at Thanksgiving Dinner all evening. What a putz.

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 10:36 PM | PERMALINK

Personally, I believe the Chainmeister. Why would he lie to us? Ask any impartial Right Wing goose-stepping Neo-Nazi masquerading as a Republican and they will tell you..."The Chainmeister is an OK guy"? Am I right Goose steppers? Go ahead and write in and tell these people how much you love Der Fuer.....oops the Chainmeister.

Posted by: murmeister on February 15, 2006 at 10:37 PM | PERMALINK

Ron, i think you're right: the story will fade somewhat after this interview - unless whittington takes a turn for the worse.

but it need not have been a story at all if cheney had simply said what he said today initially.

hell, when even scott mclellan disses you for holding back information and not handling things well, you fucked up big time, and that's what cheney did.

Posted by: howard on February 15, 2006 at 10:39 PM | PERMALINK

Did you say something jcricket? Where you been?

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:39 PM | PERMALINK

rmck1

People who get "peppered with buckshot" mostly die or are seriously injured. Being "peppered with birdshot" is a different matter. A person gets hurt, but probably doesn't die unless the shot is close. At close range, however, birdshot can be lethal. A lot of folks recommend civilians use a 12 gauge loaded with birdshot for home defense. It will knock a bad guy down but won't kill the baby in the next room.

For the record, it is a joke when somebody is shot in the ass with a light load of rocksalt. It is murder or attempted murder when they are "peppered" in the ass with buckshot.

Posted by: Ron Byers on February 15, 2006 at 10:45 PM | PERMALINK

"demostrable racist"! Wow, be demonstrable howard! enlighten me! Point to specific racist remarks I have made or I might have to think you're a "liar". That's a word you liberals are very familiar with so I thought you could aprreciate it.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:47 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, i did say something, and I liked it so much, I'll post it again...


Jay, are you sure that it is the others that have been distracted? It sure looks to me that you have been kept quite busy while the grown ups have been talking.

...and that after all, is what a really good babysitter is supposed to do. (Thanks to all of you who took one for the team keeping Jay busy.)

You are just too plain stupid to realize that you have been sitting at the kid's table at Thanksgiving Dinner all evening. What a putz.
Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 10:36 PM | PERMALINK


Wisdom is worth repeating (and the correction of a typo.)

As to where I've been....don't change the subject, putz.

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 10:47 PM | PERMALINK

Now you're getting aggressive jcricket and always remember passivism is the best liberal virtue.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:49 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney is no ladies man?

Here is a WMV of Cheney checks out Cate Edward's ass after the VP debate.

Posted by: MonkeyBoy on February 15, 2006 at 10:51 PM | PERMALINK

Ron:

I agree with you; the sex thing is sort of silly. Cheney would probably keel over dead if he took Viagra :)

I also think the alcohol issue is probably being overblown; my gut tells me that Cheney wasn't falling-down drunk -- just careless. However, the alcohol incident's salient to the extent that *nobody else* would be able to *get away with* merely *asserting* that they "only had one beer" after putting somebody in intensive care. There's a huge resentment factor at play with regular-joe hunters who'd never be able to escape being grilled and/or brethalyzed by the cops over their alcohol consumption after an incident like that.

Jay:

Civil liberties has nothing to do with anything. You have no unalienable right to either drive drunk or to hunt drunk.

And Iraqi immigrants voting in the Iraqi elections? Well, I'm sure a bunch of them are passionately pro-Bush -- much like Cuban Americans are passionately pro-GOP and anti-Castro. But I'd also doubt it's a monolithic bloc. It's entirely possible to vote in the Iraqi election and hope they make a go of it with a democracy -- while still hating Bush for wrecking your country.

And Iraqi-Americans are only a small fraction of Muslim-Americans. And even Iraqi-Americans run a much greater risk of being profiled by the FBI/NSA than your average white American, naturally.

So yes -- all things considered, the Dems have the Muslim vote locked up this year.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 10:52 PM | PERMALINK

Count on it Bob! We'll see you in '08.

Posted by: Jay on February 15, 2006 at 10:54 PM | PERMALINK

Howard,

I hate to tell you this, (because I don't like it either) but Osama Been Forgotten is right. Even if Whittington dies, this will not be the straw that breaks Cheney's back. Not with a bunch of Gannon blackmailed republicans in congress. The only thing that could possibly keep this alive out into the heat of the mid-term elections is if Whittington dies AND someone comes forward with extremely contradictory forensic evidence --- apart from their own testimony to the facts.

The only solice in this gruesome episode is that yet a greater number of moderates will understand Cheney's human depravity. And that is probably the best we can hope for out of this. Of course, in addition to the recovery of Mr Whittington.

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 10:57 PM | PERMALINK

...always remember passivism is the best liberal virtue.

And there I was thinking it was education.

Posted by: floopmeister on February 15, 2006 at 10:59 PM | PERMALINK

Okay....everybody check your shoes....someone brought some dogshit in with them.........Jay!!!

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 11:00 PM | PERMALINK

Ron Byers:

re: buchshot/birdshot -- I stand corrected. I should have just used the generic phrase "peppered," which Katharine Armonstring initially described as being "no big deal" -- and which Cheney supporters have maintained ever since, and believe is a fairly common occurrance while bird hunting.

The distinction, I think, is between being "peppered" and being *shot*.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 11:01 PM | PERMALINK

Ask Jay how old he is.

Posted by: cld on February 15, 2006 at 11:02 PM | PERMALINK

Monkeyboy ~ that clip was really disturbing. My gag reflex jumped into action. Gak!

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 11:03 PM | PERMALINK

jcricket, i never for a second thought that this would "break cheney's back," although i personally suspect that if whittington died, he'd be pushed into resigning (frankly, it's hard for me to imagine - and this is why i posed this question to the highly knowledgable cmdicely up above - that whittington's family wouldn't file a wrongful death suit). nothing is going to break the back of the bush-cheney regime: i simply want a steady drip of diminution of their power and ability to strong arm congressional republicans.

this entire fiasco of poor judgement will contribute to that diminution.

jay, mon cheri, perhaps you wipe your memory clean of the nonsense you spout every day, but it's really been only a week or so since you were claiming that the civil rights act and voting rights act freed blacks to demonstrate their high capacity for unemployment and out-of-wedlock births and using that to prove that the dems didn't have the interests of the african-american community in mind when they pushed those two laws through.

really, though, despite your racism, i do get a kick out of you: one rarely sees so clearcut an example of how the college republican mind works. unlike some of the folks posting here, i don't think you're a 12-year-old; i think you're one of those pricks who studied propaganda in college and know nothing but how to spew it, and i get a kick out of the pure sickness that motivates you.

Posted by: howard on February 15, 2006 at 11:05 PM | PERMALINK

cld ~

That is not a fair question! When he holds up his fingers, how are we supposed to see it???

Be a role model for the children. :)

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 11:06 PM | PERMALINK

buchshot = buckshot
Armonstring = Armstrong -- sheesh!

jcricket:

I don't agree with you. I think this story has legs because it encapsulates everything about the *ahem* Cheney Administration we all despise. It's the perfect meme -- the right wing's answer to Monica.

It won't play out with the partisans like us. It will play out in the lumpen media. It is comedy fodder for months.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 11:09 PM | PERMALINK

And I agree with howard:

If Whittington dies, there will be a wrongful death suit and Cheney will resign.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 15, 2006 at 11:12 PM | PERMALINK

Howard ~
Apologies if it seems that I was ascribing to you the phrase of 'breaking Cheney's back'. That was my own exasperation of these executives not being accountable for anything they do. Whatever happened to the damned "Character Issue" that they all yammered about before taking office?? That question sounds rhetorical, but if anyone has an honest answer (troll copy and paste need not apply), it would be interesting to hear it.

Personally, I doubt that there will be a steady drip of dimunition of power. Rather, I think that once they are out of power, facts will cascade out that completely obliterate the fantasy that the extreme, religious right wing has. BUT, the caveat to that is, that there has to be an exodus of power, not a transfer of power to an accomplice after-the-fact. The truth may take quite a while to percolate through if that is the case.


Cheney's depravity is such a depressing thing to observe...

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 11:18 PM | PERMALINK

Bob,

I hope you are right ultimately, and I despise the VEEP to the same depth as you. If Whittington dies, I am interested to know, what innuendo or info do you have that would make it likely that there would be a wrongful death suit? This is not a challenge or a confrontation, but Cheney and his ilk are not of true humanity...how do you know they will not threaten or otherwise twist Cheney's fat ass out of this one with all the resources of the U S of A behind them?

(Jaded a bit, huh?)

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 11:26 PM | PERMALINK

打折机票

北京机票

酒店预定

成都机票

机票预定

广州机票

广州五星级酒店

北京数码银座酒店

北京大宗饭店

北京亚洲大酒店

北京新闻大厦(酒店)

北京帝景豪廷酒店

北京北京金融街洲际酒店

广州四星级酒店

北京海博大酒店

北京世纪龙都国际公寓

北京玫瑰山谷戴斯酒店

北京雍景台酒店

北京国都大饭店(首都机场)

北京国际会展酒店

广州三星级酒店

北京西翠宾馆

北京新北纬饭店

北京王府井东单银地宾馆

北京艾尼森酒店

北京华泰饭店

北京国际竹藤大厦

广州酒店

北京东方晨光青年旅馆

北京大方饭店

北京汇园酒店公寓

北京大地花园酒店

北京中民大厦

北京安怡之家宾馆(小西天店

深圳酒店

深圳永安大酒店

深圳河东宾馆

深圳好来登酒店

深圳凯利莱酒店

深圳好时光公寓-华隆店

深圳航空大酒店

海口酒店

海口金海岸罗顿大酒店

海口寰岛泰得大酒店

海口宝华海景大酒店

海口泰华酒店

海口国际金融大酒店

海口海南鑫源温泉大酒店

厦门酒店

厦门鼓浪别墅酒店

厦门华闽酒店

厦门合佳酒店

厦门美都环岛酒店

厦门富信源酒店

厦门绿晶酒店

福州酒店

福州福州大饭店

福州金源国际大饭店

福州金源国际大饭店

福州温泉大饭店

福州西湖大酒店

福州酒店预定

珠海酒店

珠海步步高大酒店

珠海银都(嘉柏)酒店

珠海裕卓国际会议中心大酒店

珠海石景山旅游中心

珠海酒店

釜山

汕头酒店

汕头华侨大厦

东莞新都会怡景酒店

汕头金海湾大酒店

汕头海景酒店

汕头华侨大厦

汕头酒店预定

东莞君爵酒店

东莞新都会怡景酒店

汕头海景酒店

汕头金海湾大酒店

东莞太子酒店

东莞海悦花园酒店

国际机票、国内机票热点追踪

北京国际机票最新特价

北京国内机票最新特价

上海国际机票预定

最新上海机票定购信息

上海国际机票特别推荐

成都机票为您提供成都机票信息

直飞航班特价成都机票

成都打折飞机票

天津机票价格

天津机票

天津航班时刻表

北京到贵阳机票,北京到贵阳航班时刻表

贵阳机票国内机票列表

贵阳国内特价机票

昆明出港国际航班

昆明出港国内航班

昆明国际机票

上海到桂林机票详细信息

桂林机票价格

北京到桂林机票,北京到桂林航班时刻表

北京机票

机票

北京机票价格

北京机票

北京机票预定,北京打折机票预订,北京航班预定

北京到台北机票,北京台北国际机票,北京台北特价打折机票

北京打折机票,北京打折航班,北京打折机票预定

北京机票

北京机票价格

北京特价机票,北京特价机票预定,北京特价航班查询

北京机票价格

上海机票专区

机票预定网

上海打折机票,上海打折机票价格,上海打折机票查询

上海打折机票,上海机票,上海打折机票预定

上海广州打折机票

上海国际机票,上海国际打折机票,上海国际机票价格


上海国际航班

上海机票价格

上海旧金山打折机票

上海特价机票,上海机票,上海航班

北京机票

上海机票

成都机票

天津机票

贵阳机票

昆明机票

桂林机票

返回首页

上海机票预定

上海国内航班查询

上海国际航班查询

上海打折机票,上海特价机票,上海机票查询

上海最新机票查询

北京机票预定

热门城市特价机票精选

特价机票信息发布

最新民航机票新闻发布

打折机票信息发布

广州机票预定

广州国际航班

广州国际机票

广州国内机票

广州机票价格

深圳机票预定

西安国际机票

深圳国内机票价格

深圳出发到全国各地机票

深圳国内机票

西安机票预定

西安国际机票

机票

特价机票预定成都 - 西昌航班查询

昆明机票预定

厦门机票,厦门打折特价航班预定,以下报价均不得签转,不含税

杭州到大连机票查询

机票预定

重庆机票

武汉机票

沈阳机票

哈尔滨机票

乌鲁木齐机票

郑州机票

济南机票

西安机票

南京机票

桂林机票

长沙机票

福州机票

温州机票

贵阳机票

机票预定

航班时刻表

航空公司

便宜机票

航空公司

航班查询

酒店预定

海南航空

南方航空

酒店预定

首页

打折机票

机票预定

国际机票

民航售票

酒店预定

北京机票预定

上海机票预定

广州机票预定

深圳机票预定

成都机票预定

昆明机票预定

西安机票预定

厦门机票预定

青岛机票预定

乌鲁木齐机票预定

重庆机票预定

杭州机票预定

武汉机票预定

沈阳机票预定

大连机票预定

温州机票预定

海口机票预定

长沙机票预定

哈尔滨机票预定

其他城市机票预定

国际机票

北京国际机票

上海国际机票

广州国际机票

上海国际机票

上海国际机票价格

上海国际机票信息

上海国际机票热门城市精选

上海国际机票发布信息

北京国际机票

广州国际机票

北京国际机票最新推荐

北京最新特价机票推荐

北京国际航班机票

广州国际机票

广州热门城市机票查询

广州特价机票打折机票折扣机票信息

广州学生特价机票

广州国际机票

深圳国际机票

深圳国际机票乘机知识

深圳国际机票

深圳国际机票

深圳国际机票深圳到各大城市机票价格

国际机票特价信息

成都洛杉矶旧金山国际机票

昆明国际航空公司昆明国际机票

西安东京国际特价机票

国际机票

便宜机票

航空公司

航班查询

酒店预定

海南航空

南方航空

酒店预定

首  页

打折机票

机票预定

国际机票

民航售票

酒店预定

北京国际机票

上海国际机票

广州国际机票

深圳国际机票

成都国际机票

昆明国际机票

西安国际机票

厦门国际机票

青岛国际机票

重庆国际机票

乌鲁木齐机票

杭州机票

武汉机票

沈阳机票

大连机票

温州机票

海口机票

长沙机票

哈尔滨机票

其他城市打折机票

北京飞机票

上海飞机票

成都飞机票

广州飞机票

天津飞机票

重庆飞机票

西安飞机票

沈阳飞机票

昆明飞机票

桂林飞机票

酒店预定

北京酒店

上海酒店

深圳酒店

上海机票

上海机票,上海特价机票预订查询

国内特价:乘全日空国际航班,并在24小时内转乘国内航班

北京机票

北京飞厦门航班,中国国际航空公司

成都机票

成都出港机票价格

成都出港机票价格

广州机票

广州国内特价机票/广州国际特价机票

广州 - 昆明特价打折航班预定

天津机票

天津机票

天津信息发布

重庆机票

重庆国内特价机票/重庆国际特价机票

重庆机票预定

西安机票

西安机票

西安-广州 3折起

沈阳机票

沈阳机票为您提供沈阳机票信息,专业服务,值得信赖

沈阳航班信息

昆明机票

昆明机票优惠打折,昆明至各城市机票价格最低,机票价格实时查询预定,明折明扣信息一目了然,昆明市内免费

昆明特价航班

桂林机票

桂林机票网

上海打折机票

最新上海机票定购信息

上海大阪国际机票

上海国内机票特别推荐

上海国际机票特别推荐

北京打折机票

广州打折机票

运输旺季即将到来 广州机票价格已开始上涨

广州机票为您提供广州机票信息

广州机票价格

【广州国内机票】

深圳打折机票

深圳国内机票信息

国际航线优惠动态

最新深圳机票推荐

提供深圳机票查询和深圳机票预定服务

西安机票

信息

【特价机票打折机票折扣机票信息】

【学生特价机票】

【西安国内航班】

【西安国际机票】

机票

成都打折机票厦门机票双流机场-高崎机场

春节国航北京-昆明航线特价

厦门航班,厦门最近始发航班优惠价格

杭州8月最新打折机票

打折机票

重庆机票

北京打折机票

武汉打折机票

上海打折机票

广州打折机票

深圳打折机票

成都打折机票

杭州打折机票

厦门打折机票

昆明打折机票

大连打折机票

青岛打折机票

重庆打折机票

长沙打折机票

乌鲁木齐打折机票

温州打折机票

海口打折机票

哈尔滨打折机票

沈阳打折机票

西安打折机票

天津机票

成都打折机票

天津打折机票

昆明打折机票

桂林打折机票

贵阳打折机票

沈阳打折机票

飞机票

北京飞机票

上海飞机票

成都飞机票

广州飞机票

天津飞机票

重庆飞机票

西安飞机票

沈阳飞机票

重庆机票价格信息

重庆机票查询

重庆机票价格

重庆机票价格打摆子 乘客出行有点难

重庆特价机票价格

重庆机票价格

重庆机票

重庆机票预定,重庆机票查询,重庆机票价格

重庆机票预定,重庆机票查询,重庆机票价格

重庆机票,重庆机票查询,重庆机票打折,重庆特价机票,重庆机票价格

重庆打折机票,重庆打折机票预定,重庆打折机票预定

重庆机票

重庆到上海最新特价飞机票

重庆机票

西安机票价格

西安机票价格

西安国际机票

西安机票

西安国际机票

西安国际机票预定,西安机票查询,西安机票价格

西安机票价格,西安机票预定,西安机票查询

西安国际机票预定,西安打折机票,西安特价机票预定

西安打折机票价格,西安特价机票,西安特价机票预定

西安机票

最新西安飞机票团队价格

西安机票

天津机票预定

天津机票价格

天津出港航班时刻表

天津-上海虹桥航班时刻表

天津特价机票

天津机票价格

天津大连机票

天津机票

天津机票价格,天津机票预定,天津机票查询

天津机票预定,天津机票查询,天津机票价格

天津机票信息,天津机票价格,天津打折机票

天津机票,天津机票价格,天津机票查询

天津机票

天津飞机票

天津机票天津机票天津机票天津机票天津机票天津机票天津机票天津机票天津机票

沈阳机票价格

沈阳航班时刻表

沈阳机票价格

沈阳航班查询

沈阳打折机票

沈阳机票查询,沈阳机票价格,沈阳机票预定

沈阳机票价格,沈阳打折机票,沈阳机票预定

沈阳打折机票预定,沈阳特价机票预定,沈阳机票预定

沈阳打折机票,沈阳特价机票,沈阳打折机票预定

沈阳机票

沈阳机票

上海机票价格

上海国际航班查询

上海航班查询

机票

上海国际机票价格

上海打折机票信息

上海机票价格全线上扬

上海机票价格

上海机票

上海浦东机票,上海国际机票

上海国际机票,上海国际机票预定,上海国际机票查询

上海机票预定,上海机票查询,上海机票价格

上海打折机票,上海机票预定,上海打折机票查询

上海浦东国际机票,上海打折机票,上海特价机票

上海机票预定,上海打折机票,上海特价机票

上海国际飞机票,上海圣彼得堡飞机票等

上海机票

广州特价机票

广州机票价格政策

广州国内特价机票/广州国际特价机票

最新广州打折机票信息

广州国际机票价格

广州国际机票价格

广州机票价格普涨一成多

广州机票

广州国际机票

广州巴黎机票,广州巴黎机票预定,广州巴黎机票查询

广州特价机票,广州特价机票预定,广州特价机票查询

广州国际机票,广州国际机票预定,广州特价机票

广州机票,广州机票预定,广州打折机票预定

广州国际机票,广州机票预定,广州机票查询

广州机票,广州机票预定,广州特价机票

广州机票,广州打折机票,广州打折机票预定

广州飞机票

广州飞机票广州飞机票广州飞机票

广州飞机票

成都机票价格

成都机票价格

成都特价机票信息

成都打折飞机票预定

成都机票价格

成都机票信息

成都打折机票,成都特价机票

成都机票

成都特价机票,成都特价机票价格,成都特价机票预定

成都打折机票,成都机票预定,成都打折机票查询

成都打折机票,成都打折机票查询,成都打折机票预定

成都特价机票,成都特价机票预定,成都机票查询

成都机票,成都机票预定,成都航班预定

成都特价打折飞机票预定电话

成都打折飞机票

成都飞机票

成都机票

北京特价机票

国际机票价格查询

最新北京机票信息

北京机票价格

北京机票价格

北京机票信息

北京机票价格开始全面跳水

北京机票

北京国际机票

北京特价飞机票,北京特价飞机票预定,北京特价飞机票查询

北京飞机票,北京飞机票预定,北京飞机票查询

北京机票预定,北京打折机票预定,北京特价机票查询

北京国际机票,北京特价机票,北京打折机票

北京机票,北京打折机票,北京打折机票预定

北京机票,北京特价机票,北京打折机票

北京飞机票

广州五星级酒店

广州四星级酒店

广州三星级酒店

广州酒店

珠海步步高大酒店

珠海银都(嘉柏)酒店 

珠海裕卓国际会议中心大酒店

珠海石景山旅游中心

珠海酒店

厦门体育大酒店

Posted by: david on February 15, 2006 at 11:27 PM | PERMALINK

Get your bumper sticks on quick kids:

CHENEY WAS DRUNK.

Posted by: koreyel on February 15, 2006 at 11:38 PM | PERMALINK

Well, i've been surfing the blogs and have found that (of course) The General has got his masterly and manly finger on the pulse of current events. It is all explained here

Posted by: jcricket on February 15, 2006 at 11:40 PM | PERMALINK

Second, he said that he had held up issuing a statement because he wanted to make sure Harry Whittington was all right before saying anything. I don't even know what to make of this. Is he suggesting that his story would have been different if Whittington's injuries had been more serious? That the White House never issues statements about breaking news until it knows how things are going to turn out? Or what?

I assumed this was about waiting to see if Whittington was going to die or not. And I wonder whether the point wasn't that, had Whittington died on Sunday, Cheney just would have resigned.

Posted by: Jeff on February 15, 2006 at 11:58 PM | PERMALINK

If you're going to shoot a lawyer you'd better finish him off becuase, you know, those things remember.

Posted by: cld on February 16, 2006 at 12:19 AM | PERMALINK

jcricket, "When he holds up his fingers, how are we supposed to see it???"


We ask him to draw a picture and we can put it up, like on the fridge. The 'web gallery'.


Posted by: cld on February 16, 2006 at 12:22 AM | PERMALINK

Bob

I understood your point all along. A common mistake people make is how they use the word "buckshot." Buckshot is the shot that is used to shoot bucks (deer.) It is lethal. Nobody is ever "peppered" with buckshot. When liberals talk to NRA types they ought to at least know the lingo. When they hear somebody talking about a "peppering of buckshot," they just laugh their asses off.

All of that said, I basically agree with you. Nobody else could get away with claiming they had one beer. Nobody else could delay their interview with the investigating officer until the next day. Those facts could be mined for resentment, but I don't think it is the kind of thing that is going to change the mind of the koolaid drinkers. It might be a minor point helping change the minds of some of the NRA hunter types who want the public lands to remain available for hunting.

Posted by: Ron Byers on February 16, 2006 at 12:37 AM | PERMALINK

Ah....but of course. Do you think he will make us one of those nice handprint-turkeys, too?


Everything else he came up with tonight was as if he is practicing for it. It could be his greatest achievement!

Posted by: jcricket on February 16, 2006 at 12:37 AM | PERMALINK

What evidence is there Cheney was drunk? What evidence ist there Cheney was having an affair? None. Who is drinking the Kool-Aid around here? Looks like everybody.

Yikes, what kooks. This blog has become a joke. Kevin, try to shed some of these wackos and regain some credibility like you had while at Calpundit.

Posted by: Kook Watch on February 16, 2006 at 1:08 AM | PERMALINK

What evidence is there that Cheney wasn't drunk?

Posted by: BatGuano on February 16, 2006 at 1:17 AM | PERMALINK

Sigh... memories....

I remember blowing out a tire. The cop stopped, asked me what was wrong. Then assumed that I must have hit something to blow out the tire.

"Did you have anything to drink this evening, Mr. Guano?" the cop asked.

"Just one beer a few hours before I left--" The truth, but wrong answer.

I was given the full drunk test. I passed. But a cop knows if someone says they "just had one beer" a few hours earlier, you better check them out.

Posted by: BatGuano on February 16, 2006 at 1:20 AM | PERMALINK

I thought my views would be accepted here in the traditional tolerant liberal fashion. Disappointing, I guess is it what it really is. - Jay

Jay, you are like some mangy dog dragging his ass across the carpet during a dinner party. Your 'views' are meant to incite and all you are here to do is throw bombs, so yeah, it IS what it really is. Us bitch-slapping your dirty mangy ass to the curb.

Go wipe your ass on your masters rug.

Posted by: Eric Paulsen on February 16, 2006 at 1:20 AM | PERMALINK

I just Googled "Kevin + Drum + conspiracy + theory" - 428,000 hits.

Congratulations to Kevin Drum - you are now an official member of the Lefty Fever Swamp.

Posted by: BigRiver on February 16, 2006 at 1:41 AM | PERMALINK

powerline+conspiracy+theory = 612,000 hits
"little green footballs"+conspiracy+theory = 430,000 hits

Posted by: JS on February 16, 2006 at 2:19 AM | PERMALINK

Of course, BigR, those create and spread conspiracy theories don't usually refer to their work by that term. A blogger who actually uses the term is doing something different, don't you think?

Posted by: JS on February 16, 2006 at 2:27 AM | PERMALINK

Speaking of conspiracy theories, it's good to see that not all conservatives are willing to trade in their democratic values in support of this administration's attempts to subvert the US Constitution. Here is George Will on the subject in tomorrow's Washington Post.

Excerpt: This monarchical doctrine emerges from the administration's stance that warrantless surveillance by the National Security Agency targeting American citizens on American soil is a legal exercise of the president's inherent powers... The administration, in which mere obduracy sometimes serves as political philosophy, pushes the limits of assertion while disdaining collaboration. This faux toughness is folly...

Posted by: JS on February 16, 2006 at 2:40 AM | PERMALINK

BigRiver+nut+case yielded hundreds not thousands but give it time...

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 16, 2006 at 3:08 AM | PERMALINK

False alarm, JS. I thought you were pointing us at George Will defending the republic. But instead he went on to say:

Immediately after Sept. 11, the president rightly did what he thought the emergency required, and rightly thought that the 1978 law was inadequate to new threats posed by a new kind of enemy using new technologies of communication. Arguably he should have begun surveillance of domestic-to-domestic calls -- the kind the Sept. 11 terrorists made.

In other words, tut-tut. The president hardly knows which fork to use. Of course the present situation requires reducing the republic to a feudal state, but the forms must be observed!

Posted by: bad Jim on February 16, 2006 at 4:56 AM | PERMALINK

Wow, you guys from the left are PISSED today. This is the most hardcore I've ever seen this board.

OK, serious poll question. Do you think:

1) Nothing new will come to light, and this story will fade away in the next day or two? Or

2) Another piece or pieces of information will be uncovered, and the story will continue through the weekend at least? (you know there have to be a million reporters scouring for evidence behind the scenes, wanting to be the next woodward and bernstein. If there's something else to this story, they're going to find it.)

Posted by: sportsfan079 on February 16, 2006 at 6:44 AM | PERMALINK

This was a hunting accident. Human beings make mistakes, even republican human beings. So what he didn't tell the press imediately. BFD. Isn't it liberals who call the press "Conservative"? So what do you care? Have they suddenly become credible to you?
This set of posts only shows that liberals are ready to politicize every breath this administration takes and frankly I believe I am witnessing the liberals last modicum of credibility going down the tubes. *shrug* It's your movement, run it how you like.

Posted by: Lurker42 on February 16, 2006 at 8:11 AM | PERMALINK

Hey Americans! I'd be checking this lawyer's rolodex because Cheney will probably pay him off with OUR credit card. Watch for some clever inserts in the next tax/budget bills. Cheney the Drunk probably just cost us several hundred million dollars.

Posted by: Firebreathing American on February 16, 2006 at 8:22 AM | PERMALINK

How many of these "hunting trips" has the VP taken? It seems like with a war going on that costs a billion a week he and bushie spend an awful lot of taxpayer money and spend way too much time out of commission away from the cameras and in seclusion. They seem to be having a grand time while soldiers are dying every day. They don't even have time to attend a funeral.

And while there may be no evidence that Cheney was drunk or the lady companion is his mistress, there seems to be a lot of effort to hide evidence and evade these questions.

If it were Clinton or Gore the press would be demanding to know the blood alcohol of Cheney's victim, how many times these trips have occurred, who was paying for them and who the female companions are and how often they've been with them.

Posted by: Chrissy on February 16, 2006 at 8:36 AM | PERMALINK

Amazing how shrill the Party of Personal Responsibility can get when its the Personal Responsibility of one of their own.

Posted by: Dustbin Of History on February 16, 2006 at 8:38 AM | PERMALINK

my take {before i read all the comments, i didn't get a chance to last night}

1) he never actually apologized. the phrase "i'm sorry it happened" or similar was not aired. (i've not read the transcript, but i think if those words had come out of his mouth they'd've been on air}

2) "we had to wait until his family was notified" bullshit b/c a} that would have taken at most a couple of hours and b} Cheney's staff would not have been responsible for it, the staff at the hospital would be. {i worked as a social worker in a ER making those kinds of notifications long enough to know this}

3) "Harry was down in a gully" only visible from upper torso, and the sun was in Cheney's eyes. that just strikes me as the height of irresponsiblity. so Cheney is shooting at birds no more than 3-4 feet off the ground {yes i realize they're ground birds, but they fly, that's why you flush the covey right to make them fly????}

4} "we had one beer at lunch, but no one was drinking while we were hunting." i'll buy for a dollar that no one was actually imbibing while they were hunting. but the 'one beer at lunch' struck me as the same kind of lame excuse some who'd had a bottle of wine by themselves at dinner and then gets pulled over for DUI gives. 'well officer, I may have had one or two glasses'

in sum, i spend a lot of time interviewing people, and while for my particular profession the absolute truth doesn't matter, i do need to KNOW if people are lying to me. after that interview i'd be writing in my notes "not a reliable informant."

Posted by: e1 on February 16, 2006 at 8:52 AM | PERMALINK

Not to, ya know, be a grown up here, but there is a simple fix: Congress should ask for the Secret Service action report on the incident, and for its chain of authorship -- the field agents' testimony, etc.

Remember, if it had been Whittington who turned and shot Cheney, the Secret Service prides itself on watching so closely that they'd have taken him down -- or, more likely, made certain that Whittington knew where the VP was before he fired, even if that meant ruining the hunt.

So there are eyewitness statements by highly credible, trained witnesses. Let's see 'em -- or know a good reason why not.

And no, that the Secret Service does not comment on how it carries out its assignments is not a good reason.

There is a significant precedent being established here -- could a VP commit an actual murder and coverup, with the Secret Service as accomplices?

Get the testimony and the action report.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 16, 2006 at 9:09 AM | PERMALINK

Congress doesn't want to know anything that might require action.

Throwing rocks at Michael Brown on national TV is easier.

Posted by: Chicago Typewriter on February 16, 2006 at 9:19 AM | PERMALINK

I'm standing by with the new stuff that's absolutely guaranteed to remove those embarrassing 'pet stains' from carpets since it's clear that some of ya'll forgot to wipe your feet on the mat after stepping Jay's steaming piles.

e1: "not a reliable informant" - yeah, but what fun it'd be to depo the guy.

"Brush up your self-serving obsfucation.
Start perjuring yourself now.
Brush up your self-serving obsfucation
and Gonzalez* you will wow..."


http://www.sfgate.com/comics/fiore/
Gonzalez, Watchu and Howe

Posted by: CFShep on February 16, 2006 at 9:22 AM | PERMALINK

You guys are all on the right track. Let's depo the SS, let's continue to interview the witness's and spend a lot of time getting to the bottom of this. At the same time, don't take your eye off of this Domestic spying program because that's huge too along with Valerie Plame, oh my God, you haven't forgotton about one of America's most coveted secret spies have you? While this process is unfolding, let Cindy Sheehan take the lead on the war effort and have Harry reid head up the ethics committee for you. If all of this action points are adhered to, well I think '08 is in the bag. Afterall, according to Bob you can count on the Muslim Vote. Full speed ahead.

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 9:37 AM | PERMALINK

>>Afterall, according to Bob you can count on the Muslim Vote.

This snark coming the camp that has proven so very astute in gauging the Muslim vote--first in Iraq and now in Palestine.

Posted by: chefrad on February 16, 2006 at 9:52 AM | PERMALINK

Awww, widdew Jay needs his mawning bafff ...

*taking Jay by the head, sticking him into the blender set at puree*

Why do we put Jay in a blender feet first?

So we can watch his widdew *expression* :):):)

Posted by: Mummy on February 16, 2006 at 9:56 AM | PERMALINK

so, i just read the WH transcript. no where in there is an actual apology. i'm just sayin'. i think it's an important point. i'll give him credit for taking responsibility {{finally}} for his actions. and people can make various arguments about whether a public apology is warranted. i think, though, that a simple "i'm sorry it happened" wouldn't have hurt him.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: As we saw, if we'd put out a report Saturday night on what we heard then -- one report came in that said, superficial injuries. If we'd gone with a statement at that point, we'd have been wrong. that's the statement they went with on Sun and they were still wrong.

Posted by: e1 on February 16, 2006 at 9:56 AM | PERMALINK

does this mean we can't be freinds mummy?

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 10:03 AM | PERMALINK

expression = expwethion

Posted by: Mummy on February 16, 2006 at 10:04 AM | PERMALINK

*drinking big gulp of creamy JayShake*

MMmmmmmm ... I dunno about "friends," but you're delicious, hunny :)

*placing sliced-off penis on griddle*

Posted by: Mummy on February 16, 2006 at 10:08 AM | PERMALINK

So, you do swallow mummy?

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 10:11 AM | PERMALINK

Oh, not this time I'm afraid, silly me ...

*smoke alarm goes off after Jay's little baby we-we catches fire on the stove*

Ah, well ...

*stabbing charred remains Jay's infant manhood with fork and flicking it in the garbage basket under the sink*

Posted by: Mummy on February 16, 2006 at 10:16 AM | PERMALINK

This whole story begins to make sense when you look at the fact that there were 2 men spending a weekend hunting with 2 women to whom they were not married! That is the crux of the whole thing. They weren't figuring on having to 'splain that!!

Posted by: bigapplegeorgiapeach on February 16, 2006 at 10:23 AM | PERMALINK

"This set of posts only shows that liberals are ready to politicize every breath this administration takes..."

Assuming, arguendo, that with every breath this administration shoots senior citizens in the face. Or, hey, that truth about anything doesn't matter, just the lies that the administration births and that lackwitted trolls repeat.

Send better trolls.

Posted by: solar on February 16, 2006 at 10:27 AM | PERMALINK

bigapplegeorgiapeach:

I dunno ... I think this angle is kinda strained. I mean, Harry's 78. And Cheney's so cardiopathic that if he took a Viagra he'd probably die of internal hemhorraging before they could get him into the ambulance ...

Although that Swiss Ambassador (Ambassadress?) lady's pretty cute for an older Republican barbecue aficionada ...

Drinking -- yes. Or definitely more than the original cover story accounted for.

Womanizing -- highly doubtful, IMHO.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 10:28 AM | PERMALINK

Serious question: Was Hume's interview really so bad? I think he asked most of the questions that other journalists would have asked.

Moreover, the answers he elicited are the substance of what we are now discussing.

How typical of Fox, though, to santitize the transcript. MSNBC did the same thing a day or two earlier, scrubbing the reference to booze.

Guns and blowjobs. These are issues the American people can understand.

"Ask for me to-morrow, and you shall find me a grave man. I am pepper'd, I warrant, for this world."

Posted by: Steve High on February 16, 2006 at 10:39 AM | PERMALINK

Interesting? exchange between M(D)ummy, Jaydumb and others up thread - No wonder one sees fewer comments from skilled posters who formerly were regulars - I trust that they are only taking sabbaticals, for if they do not return, it will surely be our loss.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on February 16, 2006 at 10:55 AM | PERMALINK

This is a serious issue Steve, don't forget that. This will gain traction and combined with Plamegate, domestic spying, the bad economy and abuse of Islamic terrorists this year will see the fall of the GOP. Hey what's Lynn Swann doing in PA?

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 10:55 AM | PERMALINK

I am fascinated by the alleged statements that are reported to be coming from the victim.

Whittington "Wonders what all the fuss is about."
Whittington is sitting up, working.

All this while being in the ICU and off camera, of course.

My guess is that Whittington is asking things like "Where am I? Why am I here?" and Rove spins that into "Why is everyone making such a fuss about the Vice President shooting me in the face?"

You can bet your bottom dollar that if having Whittington on camera would *help* Cheney then by golly he'd be on camera this minute.

He either looks like hell or he is pissed, or maybe both.

Posted by: Tripp on February 16, 2006 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK

3rd Paul:

I think part of it is because there's a fatigue of this topic. Also, Jay's a particularly obnoxious and dedicated troll ...

Tripp:

Yeah, that kind of bugs me, too. Nobody compos mentis would wonder "what all the fuss was about" -- the fuss is that the VPOTUS shot -- not just anybody, but YOU -- in the face. "Wondering what all the fuss was about" is not creditable at all ...

"Working" is just, well, absurd ... if this codger's alert enough to be "working," let's get him on camera, assuring us all that it wasn't his good bud's fault he let himself get shot in the face.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 11:08 AM | PERMALINK

Is that how the liberals treat victims Bob? Parading them in front of the nearest camera to assure the public that they're ok? How insensitive?

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 11:15 AM | PERMALINK

Bob, that's one of the nicest complements ever paid to me. Thank you so much. Now go on and continue to court that Muslim vote.

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 11:17 AM | PERMALINK

Jay:

Who's a victim? Ol' Harry's wondering "what all the fuss is about."

Let's get 'em on camera. His 15 Minutes are a waitin' ...

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 11:17 AM | PERMALINK

Jay:

It's not that Democrats courted the Muslim vote.

It's that Republicans lost the Muslim vote.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 11:19 AM | PERMALINK

Mnemosyne:

Mexican ice :) Bob Posted by: rmck1

Looks like Bob was watching Frontline last night.

I think the DEA retiree claiming that they cleaned up the Qualude biz by shutting down overseas suppliers was nonsense. The stuff wasn't a street drug to begin with, and then went out of fashion.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 11:23 AM | PERMALINK

Did Cheney tell the presidential face what was going on?

This part were we pretend that Bush is in charge is nothing be a joke.

What was it that O'Neil said about Bush - that Bush doesn't pay attention in his own meetings, so it's never been Bush's job to do anything except whatever Karl or Cheney tell Bush to do.

Posted by: Cheryl on February 16, 2006 at 11:27 AM | PERMALINK

You mean they won the Muslim vote by default? I thought it was because of their "Islamic Terrorist are people too" position. The left's call to abandon Iraq because it's too "hard" must warm the hearts of the decent people of the middle east, not too mention the Iraqi immigrants here who fled the previous murderous regime of their country. Well done!

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 11:27 AM | PERMALINK

Stay on your talking points Cheryle, remember Rove is a puppet and Cheney is the Devious warlord in charge.

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 11:30 AM | PERMALINK

Jeff II,

In the great state of MN each of us must purchase our cold meds from the pharmacy counter, signing our name to a register.

This inconvenience has apparently shut down much of the local meth production, which has quickly been replaced by the more powerful imported meth.

On the plus side it seems the imported meth has fewer of the contaminants one might find in the home brew meth.

So my inconvenience is providing our meth users with a purer and more powerful drug supply. It's also increasing our trade deficit.

It's kind of ironic.

Posted by: Tripp on February 16, 2006 at 11:32 AM | PERMALINK

Jeff II:

Nahh, there was a NYT report on it a week or so ago. The demand in the heartland for meth is insatiable despite having made inroads in catching the cookers and regulating the precursors (e.g. pseudoephedrine, which is no longer sold over the counter in much of the Midwest). So they've turned to the much more pure crystal meth "ice," which congeals on the sides of glass pipes and can be smoked for weeks.

Quaaludes definitely *were* a street drug when I was a young'in. It was the original date rape drug. I've seen one guy on it -- it's like he was drunk out of his mind without being nauseous or slurring his words all that much.

Don't know where the 'Ludes came from, whether or not they were pharmeceutical or cooked up somewhere -- but they were definitely a party accessory in the pre-Reagan mists of time ...

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 11:33 AM | PERMALINK

Have to go beat my meat, be back soon.

Posted by: Jay on February 16, 2006 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK

Bob,

I heard the ludes were cooked from over the counter meds but I have no idea if that was true.

Posted by: Tripp on February 16, 2006 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK

Actually, the Republicans have actively courted the Moslem vote in the US (traditional values, etc.), which proved rather embarrassing after 9/11. Some Moslem contributors to the party had their donations returned, when their names turned up as contributors to Islamic charities that were suspected of channelling funds to Al Qaida.

Posted by: Wombat on February 16, 2006 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK

having 2 non-shooting women in the hunting party, whose role seem to be to gush admiration at the manlyness of the killers.

Is that what they're calling it these days? ;)

Posted by: tam1MI on February 16, 2006 at 11:45 AM | PERMALINK

Tripp and Bob re Whittington in the ICU:

my favorite laugh line from yesterday: "Whittington is in the ICU purely for privacy reasons" come again??? any hospital that's big enough to have private ICU rooms is big enough to have private nonICU room. {{at our local hosp the ICU is one long room with just curtain partitians (sp?) to make it easier for the nurses to check on people and we even have rooms that can be MADE private.}} also, ICU staff are a helluva lot more expensive per day than regular MedSurg staff and there are fewer of them. so there's no fucking way that a guy well enough to be sitting up and doing work and generally not in ICU would still be in ICU for his privacy. not if the Hosp Administrator knows addition from subtration.

Posted by: e1 on February 16, 2006 at 11:55 AM | PERMALINK

Wombat:

Oh absolutely. Prior to 9/11, the Muslim vote used to split about evenly. A lot of Muslim immigrants are high tech folks and live in McMansions (I canvassed more than a few of 'em for Corzine last year).

And then, of course, you have the Karen Hughes roadshow attempting to build solidarity through mutual social conservatism: "Hey, we Christian GOP have big families, too! We also think homosexuality is an abomination and distrust women's rights! Why, we have many of the same intolerant instincts and gut-level mistrust of the modern world that you Muslims do!"

Of course, to a great chorus of snickering, but ...

Jay:

Sure, as I mentioned upthread, there's no doubt a hard core of Iraqi-Americans who adore Bush for taking out Hussein and attempting to jump-start democracy. But it would be quite foolish to believe that all Iraqi-Americans share this view, let alone all American Muslims.

One thing that Muslims *loathe* about the GOP is its tendency to lump them together with terrorists -- which is of course directly on your mind when you try to mock Democrats for picking up the "Muslim vote." You can just about hear the word "terrorist" in your words.

I mean -- can you imagine how many law-abiding American Muslims are on the terrorist watch list, or have been interviewed by the FBI -- or have family members who have been? How about the thousand or so Muslim males picked up immediately after 9/11 and held in detention centers for two weeks without anything resembling a charge? Maybe that was a necessary precaution at the time -- but how do you imagine Muslims feel about it?

No question -- despite the mutual social conservatism, the GOP has pretty much lost the majority of that vote. The Muslim consensus is that America isn't trying to instill democracy in Iraq so much as a US-friendly government that will sell oil on the West's terms.

So a chunk of Iraqi-Americans aside -- the GOP hasn't exactly won hearts and minds here ...

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 12:00 PM | PERMALINK

badJim, it's not as good as it could be, I know, but at least he makes a major issue of trashing the constitution and of the fact that wiretapping requires congressionsal supervision. That's a big part of the problem.

Posted by: JS on February 16, 2006 at 12:00 PM | PERMALINK

Jay is sorta useless (he's not even that good at the talking points), but out of a sense of craft, to clarify:

The reason to ask for the Secret Service report is to establish, as a matter of principle, that they are not a Praetorian Guard who can witness crimes by the executives they are assigned to protect.

In any case like this, a shooting involving ANYBODY that close to a President, a Vice President, whomever, there will be a fair amount of 'where were you and what did you see' for the Secret Service to review.

That information should be promptly made public, as a matter of principle. There is no good reason it should not. Arguing that making it public will serve one side or another in a partisan way is precisely why it should be public.

Moreover, eventually it WILL be made public, if only as history -- and if, as it happened, it turns out that Cheney made false statements, it would be a bad thing that it was covered up now.

On the other hand, if the eyewitness Secret Service accounts entirely support the Vice President, it would be better to do that now, also.

I'm not saying, I'm not even speculating, that Cheney committed a crime. (For all I know, hunting with a belly full of beer gets you a tax break in Texas. Hell, LBJ used to drive 100 mph on his ranch with a 6 pack of Pearl, tossing the empties in the back.)

But I AM saying that it's bad for democracy, it's bad for AMERICA, that the best and most objective witnesses for what actually happened are not part of the public record.

And, no: I don't think Hume did a particularly good job, especially when you consider what we still don't know about the matter.

No sensible hunter would have done what Cheney did -- whirling to fire DOWN and behind the line is, well, from Isabel Colegate's novel, The Shooting Party:

"... [the host] did not want to speak with Gilbert [who fired the shot after a bird that blinded a man]. Particularly he did not want to speak to him in front of other people. At the same time he was very angry; not only did all transgressions against the rules of safety in shooting make him angry, but one glance at the wound had told him that the shot which made it had been fired from far too close to have been anything but the shot of a fool or a madman. Since he knew that Gilbert was not the first he must believe to have been however temporarily the second..."

A few pages later, she adds the observation by one character of another, who refers to the blinding as 'expensive', that he "wondered that he had never been offended by her lack of taste before. This was the sort of thing that showed people up."

It sure does -- Jay being a pretty fair example.

This isn't a partisan thing. The Secret Service works for us, and their writ to protect and serve doesn't cover hiding their report on this incident.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 16, 2006 at 12:02 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, I got the ending wrong: the poor guy dies in the novel.

I pray Whittington doesn't.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 16, 2006 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

From a story at CBSnews.com

Cheney is in a "state of meltdown" over shooting his friend and the political fallout it has caused, a source close to the Cheney has told CBS News...........Cheney described when he shot 78-year-old Harry Whittington as "one of the worst days of my life."........."The image of him falling is something I'll never ever be able to get out of my mind,"

Normally, I would have a lot more sympathy for someone who has just been witness to a violent accident, and the disturbing feelings and images that must fill his mind now. However, in Cheney's case, a man who seems so easily willing to put other people in violent circumstances to advance his causes, I have little sympathy.

Posted by: patrick on February 16, 2006 at 12:05 PM | PERMALINK

e1,

"Whittington is in the ICU purely for privacy reasons"

It makes you wonder who is footing that bill, eh?

While the rest of us working stiffs with kids must lock the bathroom door for privacy the rich retire to the ICU.

Posted by: Tripp on February 16, 2006 at 12:06 PM | PERMALINK

Don't know where the 'Ludes came from, whether or not they were pharmeceutical or cooked up somewhere -- but they were definitely a party accessory in the pre-Reagan mists of time ... Bob Posted by: rmck1

Being a "party accessory" does not a stree drug make.

'Ludes were a leftover from the disco era, going hand-in-hand with coke. Street drugs are the kind of shit that rolling-in-the-gutter-sleeping-in-your-own-filth-purse-snatching-selling-your-body-to-get-your-stuff junkies used. "Back in the day" that would be snorting coke vs. free-basing, the former being "socially acceptable" vs. folks on the down and out. Quaaludes fit into the former category. Heroin has always strattled the fence. Meth, crack, and free base not so.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 12:10 PM | PERMALINK

patrick,

If Cheney were a vet maybe he could qualify for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder treatment.

Well, except that he has never served and he would cut the funding for it as being unnecessary.

So, ummm, why do I feel sorry for him again?

Posted by: Tripp on February 16, 2006 at 12:11 PM | PERMALINK

Jay: Stay on your talking points Cheryle, remember Rove is a puppet and Cheney is the Devious warlord in charge.

No, Bush is the puppet, Rove is the puppetmaster, and Cheney is rogue.

Since you can't even keep the most visibile liberal memes straight, it pretty much shows just how ignorant, inattentive, or just plain mendacious you truly are, willing to spew forth rabid anti-liberal nonsense no matter how false that nonsense is.

Posted by: Advocate for God on February 16, 2006 at 12:14 PM | PERMALINK

If Cheney were a vet maybe he could qualify for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder treatment.

It seems like the Army knew what it was doing when it gave Cheney those five deferments. If this guy had ever gotten an M-16 in his hands he'd have cut down half his squad.

Posted by: Stefan on February 16, 2006 at 12:14 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II,

Street drugs are the kind of shit that rolling-in-the-gutter-sleeping-in-your-own-filth-purse-snatching-selling-your-body-to-get-your-stuff junkies used.

Oh, I get it. "Street drugs" are code words for "low-life drugs," which are code words for "ghetto drugs," which are code words for "poor people drugs," which are code words for negro and white trash drugs.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Posted by: Tripp on February 16, 2006 at 12:16 PM | PERMALINK

Jay:

Sure, as I mentioned upthread, there's no doubt a hard core of Iraqi-Americans who adore Bush for taking out Hussein and attempting to jump-start democracy. Posted by: rmck1

It will be interesting to see how many choose to return to their beloved homeland in a couple years. It's also interesting that you don't hear about the 20- and 30-year olds clamouring to get into the military to be stationed in Iraq to help rebuild their homeland. My guess is that the latter hasn't happen at all, and that few will ever return knowing full well that democracy let alone civil society has about as much chance of flourishing in the desert there as does iceberg lettuce.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 12:19 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II:

Well, I understand the dichotomy you're attempting to draw -- but I'm going to disagree with you the same. A street drug is a drug used recreationally, period.

Yes, there are class barriers in the drug subculture, as exemplified by the ridiculous disparity between prison terms for powered coke and prison terms for crack.

But to say that heroin "straddles that fence" clearly demonstrates the inadequacy of trying to draw hard-and-fast boundaries. There are heroin junkies on the street. And there's Kate Moss and Keith Richards. Heroin is still heroin in both cases.

Freebasing also straddles the line, such as a line can be said to exist. It's something you'd do if you *had the leisure time* and the *extra coke* to make it more potent and smokable. Crack's only a particularly efficient and stable form of freebasing.

Marijuana is another drug that defies this kind of categorization scheme. It is both the lowliest of street drugs and a conniesseur item found among the toniest stashes (differing greatly, of course, by quality -- but not by type of drug).

So if 'Ludes were indeed non-pharmaceutical (and I never got much into the drug scene in my wayward yoot), then it's perfectly fair to call them a street drug. Just as you would Valium out of the prescription bottle you'd snag for later when you came off a coke binge.

Subculture is the defining quality here, not the particular type of drug in question -- even though purity and quality are obviously reflected in the particular subculture's access to cash.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 12:26 PM | PERMALINK

Tripp-

it kinda makes me wonder about who's footing the bill. it more makes me wonder that do they still after these years think that the public in general is so dumb and so unthinking that we'd just but "Whittington in ICU for privacy" without a second thought??

but, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, and that applies to people who don't question as well as to people who habitually lie.

Posted by: e1 on February 16, 2006 at 12:32 PM | PERMALINK

Al Franken hit it on the head on Scarborough Country last night. Any decent person, and Scarborough agreed, would have been so worried sick after shooting their friend accidentally they'd be at the hospital lobby or bedside praying and awaiting information. NOT fixing drinks back at home dodging the police.

Posted by: Jimm on February 16, 2006 at 12:34 PM | PERMALINK

Jimm:

That's a big 10-4, good buddy.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 12:37 PM | PERMALINK

So if 'Ludes were indeed non-pharmaceutical (and I never got much into the drug scene in my wayward yoot), then it's perfectly fair to call them a street drug. Just as you would Valium out of the prescription bottle you'd snag for later when you came off a coke binge.

I believe 'Ludes began life as an animal tranquilizer, not that there is anything wrong with that. But they were always a pharm product - you can grow pot anywhere, but 'Ludes require sophisticated manufacturing.

Subculture is the defining quality here, not the particular type of drug in question -- even though purity and quality are obviously reflected in the particular subculture's access to cash.
Posted by: rmck1

True. But I beg to differ with your feeling that freebasing and smoking crack cross class lines in the same manner as pot or even heroin. Smokable derivatives of cocaine have always been seen as "down scale," and their users, be they the late Richard Pryor, Marion Berry (what were his parents thinking?) or Pete Dougherty, as losers with "real" drug problems.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 12:44 PM | PERMALINK

Jimm --

but, but dontcha see, he WAS worried. he called off the Sunday shoot and Everything!!!!!!

Posted by: e1 on February 16, 2006 at 12:44 PM | PERMALINK

which are code words for "poor people drugs," which are code words for negro and white trash drugs.

Thanks for clearing that up.
Posted by: Tripp

Pretty much the case. Powdered coke and "good" heroin are too expensive for the masses. In the drug trade there are the Wal-Mart dealers selling, mostly, smokable product, and then you have the Harry Winstons that sell snortable or injectable products.

What we need is a return to the good old(e) days when you could find opium dens in most of the Chinatowns in the large cities.

You can climb off your high horse (horse high?) now, Tripp. Oh, I get it! You're just tripping on me, man. Get over yourself.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

Al Franken hit it on the head on Scarborough Country last night. Any decent person, and Scarborough agreed, would have been so worried sick after shooting their friend accidentally they'd be at the hospital lobby or bedside praying and awaiting information. NOT fixing drinks back at home dodging the police.

Why don't you guys admit that if he stayed at home you'd want him impeached, if he slept in the hospital you'd want him impeached, and if he found the cure for cancer you'd want him impeached. And Al Franken agrees with you.

Posted by: sportsfan079 on February 16, 2006 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

Why don't you guys admit that if he stayed at home you'd want him impeached, if he slept in the hospital you'd want him impeached, and if he found the cure for cancer you'd want him impeached...

Well, personally I think he should simply resign; impeachments are messy and expensive.

However, there's really no chance of finding out if you're right, since these guys never miss a chance to do the wrong thing, do they? Guitars and cakes and stiff cocktails while Rome burns.

Posted by: shortstop on February 16, 2006 at 1:18 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II:

No, you're thinking of PCP, the infamous horse tranquilizer that became "angel dust" and terrified the straight populace because it allegedly gave bad guys "superhuman strength" (check out the evilist psychobadguy in Death Wish II).

Quaalude is obviously a trade name, and it definitely had some kind of medical use for humans, though it was quickly obsoleted by other, less blunderbuss pharmaceuticals.

As far as it being manufactured -- again, I have no idea either way. But David Foster Wallace's encyclopaedic novel about the drug culture, "Infinite Jest," has a chemist changing one small aspect of the molecule to make a homemade Quaalude, which earned him the nickname "Quo Vadis."

As for 'basing, well, prior to crack, what people heard about it was that it was *freakin' dangerous*. Only true coke-freaks would take such a risk with their stashes (not to mention their hair and clothing). So to the extent that you had to be a coke obsessive to do it, I suppose that sort of fits your template. But it didn't become a Wal-Mart retail smoking drug until somebody figured out you could 'base with baking soda and crack was born.

Your general typology, though, is not something any addiction counselor would endorse. Drugs are drugs -- an alcoholic isn't any less an alcoholic for downing Chivas rather than Boone's Farm. You can't really call form of the same drug "socially acceptible" and therefore "not really a drug problem" just because it's more upscale. Rocks and powder are both cocaine.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 1:24 PM | PERMALINK

call form = call a form

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 1:28 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, you guys are taking Jeff II's posts on this topic way too literally. He's not seriously arguing that some addicts "have a problem" while others don't, depending on the price of the drug. Nor is he personally endorsing the social acceptability of some substances over others. He's reporting on widespread perceptions of the same, and getting in a few ironic observations about the status games users play with themselves.

Posted by: shortstop on February 16, 2006 at 1:30 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop:

Well, to the extent that perception =/= reality, it needs to be underlined, is all.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 1:35 PM | PERMALINK

eff II:

No, you're thinking of PCP, the infamous horse tranquilizer that became "angel dust" and terrified the straight populace because it allegedly gave bad guys "superhuman strength" (check out the evilist psychobadguy in Death Wish II).

That's right!

As for 'basing, well, prior to crack, what people heard about it was that it was *freakin' dangerous*.

I forgot Ricky Nelson, too.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

If you say so, Bob. Jeff II, please banner your next subtly sardonic post with the words "IRONY ALERT" in 48-point type. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

Posted by: shortstop on February 16, 2006 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

I am not sure what the libs are talking about? Cheney is obviously distraught over the incidence. His generosity and kindness to the victim is commendable. Even the victim himself are worried about him, rather his own health. And his integrity and honesty is admirable, he lets it out to the press (Last i heard, Foxnews is a press organization) for all to see.

The only one who has credibility problem that i see here are the press. I mean now that Cheney has talked, you want even more??! The man has more pressing problems in his hand, such as governing the nation, preparing for war with Iran, killing all terrorists etc. Good to see you back in power Cheney, now let's roll with war.


Posted by: Mini Al on February 16, 2006 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop:

Are you and Jeff II talking on the telephone as you post? Or is it more a psionic/telepathic kinda connection?

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop:

I'm sorry, but the "wry observation" that you believe Jeff II is subtly engaging in has led to a massive discrepancy in sentencing for dealers of crack and dealers of powered cocaine.

And this is vastly unjust. It is also racist and classist.

So forgive me for undermining the subtle humor for the purpose of making a serious point.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on February 16, 2006 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

Are you and Jeff II talking on the telephone as you post? Or is it more a psionic/telepathic kinda connection? Bob Posted by: rmck1

Actually, Bob, she's sitting on my lap. We weren't going to bring this up, but you pretty much guessed it.

I'm sorry, but the "wry observation" that you believe Jeff II is subtly engaging in has led to a massive discrepancy in sentencing for dealers of crack and dealers of powered cocaine.

And this is vastly unjust. It is also racist and classist. Posted by: rmck1

I couldn't agree with you more. I favor a sharp decriminalization for many drug related crimes and activity, and wish that all the billions we've wasted over the last couple of decades in the "war on drugs," particularly the money pissed away in Latin America, had been used for rehab and education.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 3:09 PM | PERMALINK

Bob. Be light.

My disagreement with your literalist reading of Jeff II's posts was not cause for you to become so immediately defensive. If I've misread Jeff, he's free to tell me so.

It's not wry observations that have led to the sentencing discrepancy, which is, as you say, absolutely racist and classist. (The same goes for addiction treatment and counseling access, for that matter.) Making sarcastic observations about status-related prejudices is one way of illuminating or acknowledging the situation. It's not an endorsement of it, whether or not you think it's an effective way of communicating.

Posted by: shortstop on February 16, 2006 at 3:18 PM | PERMALINK

Er, I took a phone call in the middle of writing that post, and failed to see Jeff's contribution. But since he's outed us, I might as well say: nice lap, Drug Unczar.

Posted by: shortstop on February 16, 2006 at 3:21 PM | PERMALINK

Check out the latest Political Comics from H.L.

Dick Cheney Explains it All.

See it at.
The Hollywood Liberal

Posted by: jackrocker999 on February 16, 2006 at 3:26 PM | PERMALINK

"Cheney's Got A Gun"

Bob Rivers

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 4:47 PM | PERMALINK

sportsfan, "Why don't you guys admit that if he stayed at home you'd want him impeached, if he slept in the hospital you'd want him impeached, and if he found the cure for cancer you'd want him impeached. And Al Franken agrees with you."


All those things are absolutely true and I have no problem admitting them. But he did stay at home and down a few stiff ones while he tried to figure out how to pin it on someone else.

I want to set up a pool on how long it takes the dog-handler eyewitness to get sent out to Iraq, or meet with some kind of accident.


(as to quaaludes, I have a vague memory that they started out as a sleeping pill, but were illegalized when the pompous turd movement discovered doctors were 'overprescribing' them.)

Posted by: cld on February 16, 2006 at 5:16 PM | PERMALINK

(as to quaaludes, I have a vague memory that they started out as a sleeping pill, but were illegalized when the pompous turd movement discovered doctors were 'overprescribing' them.) Posted by: cld

Of course you have a "vague memory" about them.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 5:32 PM | PERMALINK

A.P.: Bush told reporters that he thought Cheney delivered a ''powerful explanation'' of the episode during a T-V interview yesterday.


''powerful explanation''?

so does bush say that to...

a. upset bush haters...

b. see just how gullible dead enders are

c. all of the above

Posted by: thisspaceavailable on February 16, 2006 at 5:32 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II,

I have a vague memory about that whole decade, it wasn't just the quaaludes. It was a time, nay, more than a time, an era, where I read halfway through the Complete Works of Aphra Behn and forgot about it completely until last month when I found all six books in an box in the closet.

Posted by: cld on February 16, 2006 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK

Why don't you guys admit that if he stayed at home you'd want him impeached, if he slept in the hospital you'd want him impeached, and if he found the cure for cancer you'd want him impeached. And Al Franken agrees with you.

Actually, I don't want Cheney or Bush impeached, but instead appreciate the drag these two albatrosses have on the GOP. The GOP obviously needs a dose of humility in 2006, so this country can get back on track. I'd be more optimistic with one house of Congress in the hands of the GOP, and one in the Democrats, though personally still see the need for IRV to move beyond this paralytic 2-party system.

Posted by: Jimm on February 16, 2006 at 6:52 PM | PERMALINK

IRV to move beyond this paralytic 2-party system.
Posted by: Jimm

Who's Irv?

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 7:14 PM | PERMALINK
I'd be more optimistic with one house of Congress in the hands of the GOP, and one in the Democrats, though personally still see the need for IRV to move beyond this paralytic 2-party system.

Instant Runoff Voting does very little (though not nothing) to deal with the fundamental basis of the duopoly; if you want to get beyond a paralytic two-party system you need multimember districts with proportional representation within the districts.

Posted by: cmdicely on February 16, 2006 at 7:26 PM | PERMALINK

Instant Runoff Voting does very little (though not nothing) to deal with the fundamental basis of the duopoly; if you want to get beyond a paralytic two-party system you need multimember districts with proportional representation within the districts.
Posted by: cmdicely

Oh! That IRV. Stinks on ice. You end up with no more "variety" in representation than you do with an osentsibly two-party system. Unless you have a nation with a healthy multi-party system, which has really never existed in history, you still end up with one of the two, sometimes three, largest parties always dominating government. The flip side is that you occassionly end up with coalition governments that are much worse than kissing your sister (unless she's Angelina Jolie). See Japan, the UK and Israel for various examples.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 16, 2006 at 7:45 PM | PERMALINK

I just spoke with a friend back in Wisconsin -- this is a BIG deer hunting -- and fowl hunting region.

He said Wisconsin Public Radio had a call-in show on the late-night humor angle of Cheney's shooting.

But the topic was immediately diverted by angry hunters calling in to complain (I understate) about Cheney.

This was the hook-and-bullet crowd, self-identified Bush voters, who saw Cheney's actions as reckless and irresponsible -- and as a reflection on them.

And they did not like that at all.

They instantly saw through the story about Whittington being out of position, about who was to blame, about where Whittington was standing, about what the response was -- and about whether there was drinking.

They never did get to talk about late-night humor.

Posted by: SombreroFallout on February 17, 2006 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK

Actually, I don't want Cheney or Bush impeached, but instead appreciate the drag these two albatrosses have on the GOP

2000 2002 2004

GOP Senate 50 51 55
GOP House 221 229 232


Good point Jimm. You nailed it.

Allow me to show you what DRAG means outside the reality based community.


Clinton/Gore
1992 1994 1996

DEM Senate 57 48 45
DEM House 258 204 207


This is hard so I'll explain. A President/VP are a drag when they LOSE Congressional seats.

If there are 57 Senators in your party when you are elected and in the next election there are only 48 and then in the next election there are only 45 that's a bad thing. That means you are a drag on the party.

Now if you consider GWB it goes from 50 to 51 to 55. That's a good thing. That means GWB is an ASSET. He HELPS the ticket.

I hope that helps you understand. I don't speak liberal very well so maybe one of your fellow moonbats can help.

Posted by: rdw on February 17, 2006 at 10:42 AM | PERMALINK

Whittington should just be glad he isn't Paul Hackett.

Who got rape and mugged by Chuck Schumer and then shot in the head by Harry Reid.

Reid even questioned his military service.

Of course, it will be hard to find anything about it here.

Posted by: Patton on February 17, 2006 at 11:53 AM | PERMALINK

Jay - you are the bomb - I think I love you. Continue on my friend.

Posted by: Karen M on February 17, 2006 at 12:16 PM | PERMALINK

Look who's running for President!

On the Bush side of the rally, the Senate voted 53-47 this week in favor of extending the presidents investor tax cuts on dividends and capital gains. Joining in this breakthrough vote was John McCain, the senator who voted against these tax cuts when they were introduced in 2003. This is an important shift for the GOP presidential frontrunner and another big win for pro-growth fiscal policy.

Big John will trounce Hillary. His only test will be the GOP primaries. He obviously understands this.

Posted by: rdw on February 17, 2006 at 12:18 PM | PERMALINK

Now if you consider GWB it goes from 50 to 51 to 55. That's a good thing. That means GWB is an ASSET. He HELPS the ticket. Posted by: rdw

We will see a shift back to a Democratic majority in both houses after 2008, in part because we've always had these swings, but, most important, the GOP will be in shit so deep that most voters, very few of whom are really Rep or Dem, will be avoiding anyone with an R after their names.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 17, 2006 at 12:19 PM | PERMALINK

the GOP will be in shit so deep that most voters, very few of whom are really Rep or Dem, will be avoiding anyone with an R after their names.

Dream on. The ticket in 08 will be McCain vs Clinton and John wins big. Liberal support is concentrated in the cities. You have 3M votes you don't need in CA and NY. The rest of the country is Red.

GWB picked up 5 Senate seats in a weak economy, after the worst attack in our history and fighting an unpopular war taking a steady stream of casualties.

Today we're in the strongest period of economic growth since the '80s with low and falling unemplyment, low inflation, low interest rates, high rates of home ownership and high asset values.

Furthermore global growth in incredibly well balanced and strong and we are increasingly exposed to the fastest growing parts.

The 2008 elections will be held in the midst of the strongest economy in MORE than 20 years.

At the same time progress in Iraq has been significant and will be a minor issue in 2008. The kurdish North is already booming and as soon as a political settlement is reached the rest will boom as well. Iraq has Oil and Water. They will prosper.

Also on the table in 08 is brilliant strategy in OH, PA, MD and MO. The GOP has 4 very capable black state-wide candidates in each state. I'm from PA and more than impressed with Lynn Swann. I assumed he was being groomed for 2010. This race against Rendell was designed to introduce him and then replace Eddie when he's term limited. Nope. Lynn is the real deal. He is very good. I'm still predicting Rendell wins but we have a very popular and well known head of the state GOP to campaign with McCain in 2008.

Kerry carried PA by 2% after Gore won by 4%. It was a signifciant problem for Kerry that he had to spend much time and money here. Hillary must do the same. She cannot possibly win without PA. She cannot possibly win PA without 93% of the black vote. Lynn is very, very popular in Pitsburg and all of Western PA.

Blackwell could also be the popular governor of OH. Same math there!

Big John could pull 55% of the vote easily. You would not pick up a single house or Senate seat.

Posted by: rdw on February 17, 2006 at 1:03 PM | PERMALINK

I'm from PA and more than impressed with Lynn Swann. Posted by: rdw

That pretty much says it all.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 17, 2006 at 1:39 PM | PERMALINK

This says a lot as well.


January 19, 2006--Our latest poll of the race for Pennsylvania governor shows Republican Lynn Swann, the former receiver for the Pittsburgh Steelers, narrowly leading Democratic Governor Ed Rendell 45% to 43%.

Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters view Swann favorably; 47% view Rendell favorably.

Posted by: rdw on February 17, 2006 at 2:26 PM | PERMALINK

The story will die down, and nothing will happen except: 1) the wingers will be more defensive than ever, 2) Cheney will have what amounts to a License to Kill, and 3) a couple more independents will peel off. Nonetheless the story will remain as a revelation of character.


Now tell me a story and tickle me quick;
how good of a shot is old Deadeye Dick?
Why, he's safer than houses!
He's straight as a die!
Just stand right behind him and see if I lie.

Posted by: paradoctor on February 17, 2006 at 5:55 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly