I wonder how long before the MSM says it's all Bush's fault.

Hmmm.

That's what you get for mocking the Sith man.

Game over man! Game over!

From the article:

The bullet entered behind his right ear, came out his chin and lodged in his left forearm.

Sounds like a magic bullet! There must have been a second shooter on the grassy knoll. My guess is it was the CIA and the Mafia...or Cheney.

Sorry, couldn't resist. ;)

Not really sure what the story in Colorado has to do with Vice President Cheney's actions. Any experienced hunter will tell you that Mr Whittington was not at fault. When hunting birds, it's imperative that a responsible hunter shoots with sky in view - to avoid hitting dogs, humans, etc.
No one thinks that Cheney did this on purpose, but why is he so reticent about just apologizing? And since Mr. Cheney used Air Force 2 to go on his hunting trip (at a cost to taxpayers of $58,000.00 per hour), the public and media have a right to know what happened - in a timely manner.
When you behave in a secretive way, people are going to be suspicious about your motives. What's interesting here is that when Clinton tried to keep White House travel office information secret, the right-wing went crazy with ridiculous accusations, but now these very same people are defending Cheney. Remeber: he flew to Texas on the taxpayer's dime -it's not a personal matter.

It wasn't the travelling that we sniped at but the really lowsy 200 dollar "Mars Attacks" brain-like hair cuts ol "cigar shover" used to get.

Sorry Bobbi, but the Vice President of Quail Unlimited stated that the fault essentially rested on BOTH parties.

Sorry, moseby, but as a registered Republican, I'd still take "cigar shover" over the male cheerleader and "I had other priorities over going to Vietnam" anytime.

Here is a conspiracy theory. Cheney plan this all just to make the MSM look foolish once again. Also so the democrats can put their foot in their mouth. Such as Hillary who husband and herself drug their feet in a number of investigations and press releases. Harry Reid waiting three days to release that he had a heart attack using the excuse that he was waiting to get all the test back. The MSM sure didn't mind back then

"The vice president said he ran over to Whittington, who was bleeding, and Cheney's own medical team -- which always travels with him -- administered first aid."
From CNN 2/15/06

And exactly who pays for "Cheney's own medical team - which always travels with him"?

Wayne - you really think that Harry Reid not telling anyone he had a heart attack for 3 days is the same thing as the VP shooting someone? Ridiculous.

As for all those "investigations" of the Clintons, what did they turn up? Nada, nothing, zilch, zip, zero. Oh yeah, that's right - a bj between 2 consenting adults. Big deal.

Unfortunately, the GOP is suffering from the parameters they set-up when Clinton was president. You can't have it both ways.

Seeing as how Cheney is going on FOX to go public, I'd say that he is sticking it to the MSM.

Did anyone ever ask Whittington whether he wanted to be all over the news?

I bet not.

Bobbi,
If you are a registered republican and you think those things, you are an idiot. Instead of using DNC talking points to lecture real republicans just go change your party affiliation already.

More than likely you are just a techno fan.

bobbi, don't get your point on the taxpayer paying angle. It's not like his job is 9-5. EVERY POTUS and VPOTUS has EVERYTHING they do paid for. It's a strawman.

As for Clinton investigations I suppose being impeached, convicted of perjury and having your law license yanked is nothing. I agree a bj from an intern was harmless but those investigations did turn up a number of other convictions of many of the Clintons' staff.

As for Cheney, the sheriff was on site within 20 minutes. It's been ruled an accident. Period. Done. End of action. The only thing Cheney didn't do was hold a press conference which somehow the press, mistakenly thinking they are the fourth brance of government feels is some sort of requirement.

PR wise he probably should have done something a little sooner, but that's about all that could be said. Now, if the gentlemen injured in the accident dies, then there will be a grand jury to determine if there was neglience--and there should be such a grand jury. It's the law.

And if Cheney were to lie to the grand jury and commit perjury I suppose you would think it was nothing?....after all, just going by the parameters set up by the Democrats while they were in office...

I smell the workings of Karl Rove.

Bobbi,
If you are a registered republican and you think those things, you are an idiot. Instead of using DNC talking points to lecture real republicans just go change your party affiliation already.
More than likely you are just a techno fan.
Posted by: susan at February 15, 2006 04:19 P

Susan:

Sorry, I'm not in lock-step with the Bush White House. It's pretty sad that because I disagree with the current administration, you think I should change party affiliations. I'm glad I question what my president does, instead of blindly supporting him - somthing you obviously do. I'm a Republican for the party's tradition of fiscal responsibilty, not the phoniness of moral authority of the current administratio, and certainly not for the multitude of lies put upon us by George Bush. I'm afraid it's you who is the "idiot" my dear.

"As for Clinton investigations I suppose being impeached, convicted of perjury and having your law license yanked is nothing. I agree a bj from an intern was harmless but those investigations did turn up a number of other convictions of many of the Clintons' staff."
Posted by Faith+1

Faith+1:

Bill Clinton was not "convicted of perjury" and I'll remind you that his impeachment failed to have him removed from office. The impeachment occured during a Republican majority in the House/Senate. If he'd really done something, he would have been ousted from office in a heartbeat. Regarding "other convictions of many Clinton staff", that's guilt by association. If Lewis Libby is found guilty of leaking classified information, does this make George Bush guilty of the crime?

I feel very sad for all of you who refuse to question the White House - everyone should analyze every administration no matter who they support. The Bush administration is lying to us about so many things that truly matter for our country, but many Republicans seem to put party loyalty before loyalty to your country.

bobbi,
I don't question your party affiliation because you are not in "lock step" with the current adminisration. I question it because I have never heard a republican who thinks that Clinton was a good president and that the investigations yielded nothing on him. This administration is at least as forthcoming as the Clintons were.
I just can't buy a Bush bashing, Clinton supporting republican. Call me an idiot all you want.

Jesus, the trolls are running out of names for their sock puppets, this is just sad.

Clearly, boobie lives in a state where it is good political strategy to regsiter for the opposite party simply so you can have the most influence during primary season. I mean, Michael Moore could do the same but that wouldn't make him a Republican either.

Bobbie
You need to read the statements more carefully and keep up with the story instead of shooting from the hip. The MSM and Democrats have given up on the shooting part. Their main gripe is the supposing slow 24-hour response. To compare the timing of republican administration response to a situation to that of a democrat administration and leaders response to a situation and how the MSM reacted to each would seem to be fair.

Also sexual affairs by politicians and high-ranking officials are important. Many foreign intelligence agencies initiate and use such instances to gather intelligence through blackmail. If one of them could have acquired film or pictures of Clinton in such a position, they may have been able to use them to influence Clinton or one of his associates' decisions. After all, it has been proven that Clinton committed at least one crime to cover it up. There has been no proof that Cheney tried to cover up the accidental shooting.

bobbi,
I've taken and passed hunter safety, and never heard that "it's imperative that a responsible hunter shoots with sky in view - to avoid hitting dogs, humans, etc." In fact the most common rule in shooting is to have a solid backstop behind your target so that you know where the projectiles end up, rather than somewhere over the horizon.

So, going back to the original article, does anyone know if the girlfriend is a Republican?

And are they still together?

If they get married, will this make it a "shotgun wedding?"

And if this link to WaPo works, it's been acclaimed as the single best article on the shooting:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021302163_pf.html

...it's Rove.

The guy fakes his death, Rove is convicted of involuntary manslaughter, resigns, and Bush appoints Condi as the VP.

Game on for 2008.

Heh.

Leelu, I think you meant Cheney gets convicted, not Rove.

This birdshot story is over.... by the way, can someone tell me long Hillary waited before we found out about Vince Foster? 3 days??

the biggest deal is the cops not interviewing him right away. forget all the other crap.

i'm sure cheney is on prescription meds for heart problems, so ANY alcohol will affect him much more than a normal person. that's the coverup everyone should be questioning.

does anyone have a link for the police report? i'd love to see that to see if the cops searched the vehicle and the persons at the scene for any alcohol and what questioning was done at that time. it's the initial 14-hr delay to meet with cops is a SERIOUS problem. how anyone can deny that is in denial.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0213061cheney1.html

here's the report. no mention of any search of the persons or vehicle. there is also no mention of what time the police arrived at the scene, only the time of the accident. so there is no way to ascertain how much time passed between the accident and police arriving.

also, sunset in texas now is approximately 615. so 530 is pretty close to dusk, not necessarily sunny as in the report if you ask me.

again, if these circumstances aren't suspicious to you, consider yourself in the "cult of Bush" as Glenn Greenwald has branded you all.

There's only one word to sum that story up; KARMA.

(my favorite topic)

bobbi, your statement was that the investigations turned up zip, nadda, nothing. Being disbarred and impeached is not zip nada nothing.

Having more feleony convictions of your staff during self-same investigations is also not a "zip, nada, ziltch" result just becuae you wish it so.

I don't buy the Republican lines. I'm more Libertarian. I certainly buy the Democrat line even less as they don't really have any position other than to oppose anything Republican.

The facts are the Democrats are really trying to blow this up far beyond what it is because they simply have nothing else to offer.

Clearly, boobie lives in a state where it is good political strategy to regsiter for the opposite party simply so you can have the most influence during primary season. I mean, Michael Moore could do the same but that wouldn't make him a Republican either.
Posted by: mcg at February 15, 2006 05:53 PM

mcg:

Unfortunately, you're the perfect example of what I said above. Lock-step with the GOP instead of thinking on your own. You remind me of all those photos of idiotic Germans saluting Hitler as he rode by. You're being used by the Bush administration, and you're too ignorant to realize it.

...and lastly...dismissing the impeachment conviction because the Republicans were in the majority is also a strawman. One could just as easily say he wasn't impeached because the Democrats abandoned the rules in order to vote along political lines to prevent the 2/3rds majority required for the impeachment.

bobbi,
I don't question your party affiliation because you are not in "lock step" with the current adminisration. I question it because I have never heard a republican who thinks that Clinton was a good president and that the investigations yielded nothing on him. This administration is at least as forthcoming as the Clintons were.
I just can't buy a Bush bashing, Clinton supporting republican. Call me an idiot all you want.
Posted by: susan at February 15, 2006 05:11 PM

Susan:

I just can't buy a Republican who can't think for themselves. If you'll remember, George Bush promised that he would bring "honesty and integrity" back to the White House. It's been 6 years, and we're still waiting. I expect any candidate to keep a promise like that. Otherwise, it's nothing more than a lie.

To say that this administration is "at least" as forthcoming as the Clinton administration is using a double standard. If this is acceptable to you now, then you're hardly in a postion to be critical of any other administration - Democratic or Republican, past or present. Why is it that people on both the extreme right and extreme left cannot handle any kind of criticism of their party? It's really scary, and yes, idiotic.

...and lastly...dismissing the impeachment conviction because the Republicans were in the majority is also a strawman. One could just as easily say he wasn't impeached because the Democrats abandoned the rules in order to vote along political lines to prevent the 2/3rds majority required for the impeachment.
Posted by: Faith+1 at February 16, 2006 09:17 AM

Faith:

You're statement doesn't even make sense. Impeachment is by majority vote. Even if the Democrats abandoned the rules, if Repulicans (who were the majority) knew of specific laws being broken by Clinton, he would have been thrown out of office. In retrospect, Ken Star's $72 million investigation was nothing more than a gigantic waste of taxpayer money.

Regarding Democrats blowing this up, if true, it's too bad the VP played right into their hands by not being open and forward right from the start. He's a very bizarre man.

Bobbi: The reason we're ragging on you is simple: You're a troll, T-R-O-L-L. That bit about leftists like youpretending to be a devout Republican and then ragging on conservatives? Guess what: it's been done before. We've seen thousands try that trick. We can spot it a mile away. It's not original.

And I really liked how you managed to slip in the "conservatives==Nazis" bit. Yeah, that's some real, original, creative, out-of-the-box thinking. We've never, ever heard that one before!

In short: Having demonstrated your single-digit IQ, you can go away now. Begone, before I get the flyswatter.