SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/15/2006 9:25:40 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
The Stupidest Comparison Ever

Posted by bulldogpundit
Ankle Biting Pundits

I was reading the latest rant by liberal Washington Post columnist David Ignatius in which he used the VP's hunting accident as an example of the Bush Administration's arrogance. This type of pabulum is par for the course from Ignatius but I nearly gagged when I came across the following:

<<< Nobody died at Armstrong Ranch, but this incident reminds me a bit of Sen. Edward Kennedy's delay in informing Massachusetts authorities about his role in the fatal automobile accident at Chappaquiddick in 1969. That story, and dozens of others about the Kennedy family, illustrates how wealthy, powerful people can behave as if they are above the law. For my generation, the fall of Richard Nixon is the ultimate allegory about how power can corrupt and destroy. It begins not with venality but with a sense of God-given mission. >>>


Reminds him "a bit" of Kennedy's Chappaquiddick delay? WTF? Is Ignatius on crack?

Well, to be fair, he did mention that nobody died. But as far as I know Cheney didn't leave the guy there bleeding to death while he went back to his "compound" and called his lawyers. There's been no suspicion that Cheney was drinking (but rest assured, the moonbats will be spouting that theory soon) and alone with someone not his wife. There's no allegation that Whittington was denied medical attention he needed while Cheney got his story straight. Cheney has not appeared on TV with a neck brace (much as liberals want him to emote to the public).

Ignatius also makes this ridiculous statement:


<<< But let us assume the obvious: It was an attempt to delay and perhaps suppress embarrassing news. We will never know whether the vice president's office would have announced the incident at all if the host of the hunting party, Katharine Armstrong, hadn't made her own decision Sunday morning to inform her local paper. >>>


Does this half-wit think for a second that news of the VP accidentally shooting someone could have been "suppressed" or hidden from view? And how in God's name is that "obvious". Ignatius is apparently still operating under the theory that people's only outlet for news is the MSM and that we're still living in a time where things like FDR's polio or JFK's Ho Trains could be kept quiet. Hey David - here's a helpful hint for you - there's this thing out there called the blogosphere and something even bigger called the internet where people can bypass media outlets like yours. And it pretty much prevents people from keeping innocuous secrets - let alone something like the VP shooting someone.

anklebitingpundits.com

washingtonpost.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/15/2006 10:23:05 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
AMAZING

Jonah Goldberg
The Corner

Warrantless searches, Katrina fingerpointing, $7.8 trillion budget, Abramoff spin: these were the stories buffetting the White House last week.

This week, it's Dick Cheney's hunting accident.

Regardless of the merits of any of these issues and the criticisms they raise, one would think the Democrats would understand that it will be difficult to return to many of these themes once we finally "get to the bottom" of the Cheney story (quotation marks are necessary because I think we hit bottom awhile ago but the media has brought out their earth-boring equipment and will keep digging for a while).

After a few days, the press will take a "been there done that" attitude to the wiretap story and, barring some new revelation, will not want to bother re-educating the public about it. This is not a partisan point, but mere media analysis.

Does no one remember how effectively the Clinton's used the refrain "that's old news" to beat down stories? That worked, because even whispering something is old news in the current media culture is enough to get reporters to "move on." Indeed, that's pretty much where MoveOn.org got its name -- from the widespread liberal effort to move on from a story liberals didn't want to talk about anymore.
Cindy Sheehan's rage at the elements was well placed during hurricanes Rita and Katrina because she understood that once the media starts ignoring you, it's unlikely to come back again, never mind pick up where it left off.

I agree with the editors that Cheney should come clean and all that in an interview, indeed I wrote it first here in the Corner. But I still think there's room for a lot of political upside for Cheney, so long as the usual pattern of media over-reaction and Democratic over-reach plays itself out. And so far, that's certainly the way to bet.

corner.nationalreview.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/15/2006 10:42:24 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Smearing Dick Cheney

By Mark
Decision '08

Lawrence O’Donnell, taking a break from his usual crowing that he broke the Karl Rove connection to the disappointing Fitzmas saga, makes a remarkable smear on the reputation of Dick Cheney with not even an approximation of a shred of evidence:

<<< The L.A. Times is edging closer to the most likely reason for the 18 hour delay in reporting that the Vice President of the United States shot someone:

“This was a hunting accident,” said Gilbert San Miguel, chief deputy of the Kenedy County Sheriff’s Office. “There was no alcohol or misconduct.”

How do we know there was no alcohol? Cheney refused to talk to local authorities until the next day. No point in giving him a breathalyzer then. Every lawyer I’ve talked to assumes Cheney was too drunk to talk to the cops after the shooting. The next question for the White House should be: Was Cheney drunk?

I have never gone hunting with ultra-rich Republicans on a Saturday afternoon, but I have seen them tailgating at Ivy League football games, so it’s hard for me to believe that any of their Saturday lunches are alcohol free. >>>


Yes, Lawrence, and how do we know there was no heroin involved? After all, we weren’t there…

The word smear is often misused and applied to stories that have a large basis in fact, such as the allegation that Harry Reid was cozy with Jack Abramoff’s team. This accusation, my friends, is a smear. Were I to say that O’Donnell is a shameless hack and a foul excuse for a human being, however, that would be no smear, as the proof is indisputable…

decision08.net

huffingtonpost.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/15/2006 11:13:50 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
The MSM Campaign Against Cheney

by Hugh Hewitt
February 15, 2006

Headlines:

Los Angeles Times: Hunter Suffers Setback as Criticism of Cheney Grows

The Washington Post: Cheney's Response A Concern In GOP

The New York Times: Handling of Mishap Creates Strain in the White House

The Boston Globe: Hunter shot by Cheney has a heart attack

The Globe's story is particularly breathless, saying the "sudden turn" in Harry Whittington's condition left the White House "stunned" and his "prognosis difficult."

Washington Post columnist David Ignatius opines that "arrogance of power is on display with the Bush administration," and astonishingly compares the Veep's hunting accident to Chappaquiddick and Watergate:

<<< Nobody died at Armstrong Ranch, but this incident reminds me a bit of Sen. Edward Kennedy's delay in informing Massachusetts authorities about his role in the fatal automobile accident at Chappaquiddick in 1969. That story, and dozens of others about the Kennedy family, illustrates how wealthy, powerful people can behave as if they are above the law. For my generation, the fall of Richard Nixon is the ultimate allegory about how power can corrupt and destroy. It begins not with venality but with a sense of God-given mission. >>>


The MSM is unhinged, a victim of its Bush hatred, which includes of course hatred of Cheney. The idea that failure to tell the White House press corps of a hunting accident for 14 hours is in anyway similar to leaving a woman to die in a submerged car while fleeing the scene or the cover-up of Watergate is just nuts.

And the American people know it.

What the Beltway gang seems not to understand is that most of America is laughing at them, not frowning at the Veep. There isn't a single fact we haven't been told, and we don't much care if the pampered poobahs of the press got a heads up after four or 14 hours.

There isn't a cover-up, there isn't an issue, there isn't even a controversy.

There is, however, a spectacle, and it is another black eye for the MSM.

This episode doesn't resemble Chappaqquidick. It resembles Rathergate and Eason Jordon's overreach, episodes where legacy media allowed its massive blind spot to lead it into a collision with the public it seems not to understand is fully informed and mostly contemptuous of its preening and screaming.

David Gregory is playing the new Mary Mapes, and Dana Milbank the new Rather, the former obtusely, stubbornly and breathlessly believing he's got a story that's not a story, the latter revealing an animosity towards the White House so deep as to call into question his ability to even pretend to be objective again.

It will be hard for anyone to top Ignatius' comparison of this hunting accident
--which was known to about 20 people within two minutes of its happening, and fully laid out to the public the next day-- with Chappaquiddick, but some will try. This is a gift to the Vice President, as the attempted exploitation of his injuring his friend by an angry, vain and partisan MSM is already transparent and already resented by the public that has long understood the deep bias of the talking heads on the tube and which has another exhibit in the long line of case studies of that bias.

I searched the online sites of the four papers above, btw, for any story of Al Gore's remarks in Saudi Arabia on Sunday in which the once and possibly future candidate for the presidency charged the United States with "terrible abuses" against Arabs in the aftermath of 9/11, and of "indiscriminately round[ing] up" of Arabs who were then held in "unforgivable" conditions.

I could find no articles on the story in the four papers.

The "Cheney cover-up" meme is wholly fabricated while the MSM itself covers for the former vice president's slander on the country made in front of a foreign audience.

Look at these numbers for total viewers from Mediabistro:


6pm: Hume: 1,448,000 / Dobbs: 745,000 / Abrams: 290,000

7pm: Shep: 1,458,000 / Blitzer: 625,000 / Hardball: 534,000 / Showbiz: 123,000

8pm: O'Reilly: 2,244,000 / Zahn: 647,000 / Countdown: 479,000 / Grace: 529,000 / On The Money: 223,000

9pm: H&C: 1,379,000 / King: 751,000 / Rita: 284,000 / Prime News: 346,000 / Mad Money: 182,000

10pm: Greta: 1,088,000 / Cooper: 594,000 / Scarborough: 293,000 / Grace: 272,000 / Deutsch: 121,000

11pm: O'Reilly repeat: 1,000,000 / Cooper: 373,000 / Situation: 169,000 / Showbiz repeat: 149,000 / On The Money repeat: 59,000

Now add to the FNC audience the huge audience for talk radio, recently described in an Arbitron research report this way:


<<< News/Talk/Information has the highest average listener age among the nation's top 15 formats, yet advertisers covet the very high incomes and education levels among those listeners....

News/Talk/Information listeners are very likely to be married, but they're not as likely as listeners to other formats to have children in the house. They are the most likely to own their own home, and about one-third of the base have reached or surpassed the traditional retirement age.

News/Talk/Information listeners represent enthusiastic online users, ”they often visit newspaper, broadcast media and financial information sites. They even listen to radio stations online in large numbers. Listeners to this format are more likely to identify themselves as Republican than any of the nation's other top formats. >>>


Add to the FNC audience and the radio audience the blog audience, and even David Gregory should be able to understand why the public won't buy his hysteria as legit: Too many news consumers have the facts, and don't have to depend upon David and Dana and the other anti-Bushbots of the press room for spin.

The Cheney story will not work out the way the MSM wants it too because there is a huge push-back from non-left wing news sources who have already been playing the audio from the press briefings which embarasses the Gregorys of the world.

Will legacy media ever figure this out?

hughhewitt.com

latimes.com

washingtonpost.com

nytimes.com

boston.com

washingtonpost.com

powerlineblog.com

seattlepi.nwsource.com

mediabistro.com

arbitron.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/15/2006 11:22:37 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
I Guess It Depends On Your Definition of "GOP"

Posted by bulldogpundit
Ankle Biting Pundits

You have to love the writers and editors at the Washington Post. A front-page article written by James VandeHei and Peter Baker is titled "Cheney's Response A Concern In GOP". Now, based on that headline, and the following statement in the article you would think that the RNC and Congressional leaders would be going on the record about their concerns. Quote:

<<< Vice President Cheney's slow and unapologetic public response to the accidental shooting of a 78-year-old Texas lawyer is turning the quail-hunting mishap into a political liability for the Bush administration and is prompting senior White House officials to press Cheney to publicly address the issue as early as today, several prominent Republicans said yesterday.

The Republicans said Cheney should have immediately disclosed the shooting Saturday night to avoid even the suggestion of a coverup and should have offered a public apology for his role in accidentally shooting Harry Whittington, a GOP lawyer from Austin.

Top White House aides are pressuring Cheney to discuss the incident as early as today, according to people familiar with the matter. >>>


So who are these "senior White House officials" and "prominent Republicans"? Well, on the issue of "senior White House officials", we don't know. There's not even an "unnamed source" quote, but rather an assertion from "people familiar with the matter".

And who are these "prominent Republicans"? Perhaps a member of the Congressional leadership, or even an RNC official. Well, not exactly. The only people quoted as being "concerned" are Vin Weber, who is a former member of Congress not known to 99% of the American people
(but described as "close to the White House", but they don't say how. What, does he owns a house at 1558 Pennsylvania Avenue?), and Marlin Fitzwater, a former Bush 41 press secretary, who is no longer involved in politics.

Somehow I don't think those 2 guys are on any reporters speed dial when it comes to commenting on any other story in the news. I wonder how many people who actually are in Congress, or active in the national party turned VandeHei and Baker down before they turned to Weber and Fitzwater?

anklebitingpundits.com

washingtonpost.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/15/2006 11:39:32 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Hunting Cheney

Posted by B. Preston
JunkYardBlog

Democrats, let’s learn a new word together. That word is “proportionality.” It’s a tough word, so say it a couple of times. “Proportionality.”

In the context of politics, that big word means you should react to stimuli in ways proportional to the stimulus. You should, for instance criticize an opponent’s policies with measured tones and facts. You should not take obvious glee in the real misfortunes of your opponents. And you definitely should not respond to the misfortunes of your opponents in ways that will end up reflecting badly on yourself.

Proportionality.

That in mind, let’s listen in on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s reaction to the hunting accident involving VP Dick Cheney:

<<< Asked at a press conference for her reaction about how the White House has handled the incident, US Senator Hillary Clinton called the Bush administration’s failure to be more forthcoming “troubling.”

“A tendency of this administration — from the top all the way to the bottom — is to withhold information … to refuse to be forthcoming about information that is of significance and relevance to the jobs that all of you do, and the interests of the American people,” Clinton said.

“Putting it all together, going back years now, there’s a pattern and it’s a pattern that should be troubling,” she said at a press conference calling for a more robust federal response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster. >>>


This reaction is, of course, entirely insane. The VP waited about 14 hours to nofify the press, hardly an eternity. And he is under no obligation to ring up Helen Thomas and the rest of the White House press goons. They’re not a part of the government.

But Clinton’s reaction is particularly unwise because she not only puts herself on the side of raving leftwingers looking for a conspiracy in every nook and cranny of the Bush administration including a hunting trip, but because her choice of words reminds us of a few things about her husband’s administration (which was half her own).

“Withholding information,”
for instance, reminds us that it took her husband 8 long months to tell the nation what it already knew about his relationship with “that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”

It reminds us that billing records that might have incriminated Mrs. Clinton went missing for a couple of years and were under subpoena from a special counsel, only to turn up in the White House living quarters without explanation.

That White House withheld, for hours and for years, information surrounding the unfortunate demise of Vince Foster.

14 hours versus two years is no contest in the information withholding game.

It’s been ten years, and we still don’t know what went down in Chinagate, the PRC’s funneling of cash directly into the 1996 Clinton re-election campaign. In fact, her co-presidency marked a time in which it was reasonable to doubt whether you’d get a straight answer if you asked POTUS the time of day.

So Clinton’s reaction, and the press feeding frenzy, and the leftwing blogs’ conspiracy mongering, are not a proportional response to what is at bottom an accident involving friends, one of whom happens to be the Vice President. Unless Mr. Whittington takes a very serious turn for the worse, the Democrats, the press and the blogs have reacted out of all proportion to the situation.

And if the worst happens, does anyone doubt that the Democrats will have a press release out within seconds? Does anyone doubt that they are in fact already writing that press release, just in case? Of course they are, because they’re ghouls who turn funerals into partisan pep rallies. And they wouldn’t know the concept of proportionality if it flushed out of the political undergrowth like a covey of quail.

junkyardblog.net

breitbart.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/15/2006 12:08:28 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Caller-Times Editor: "We Got the Story First... By Gaining the Trust of Our Sources"

Media Blog
Stephen Spruiell Reporting

Right Wing Dad e-mailed to draw my attention to this column by Corpus Christi Caller-Times Vice President and Editor Libby Averyt (free reg. req.):

<<< Our own Caller-Times reporters were first with the story that Cheney had accidentally shot Austin attorney Harry Whittington during a quail hunt in Kenedy County.

We broke the national story at 1:48 p.m. Sunday with an e-mail alert and a story on our Web site Caller.com, 48 minutes before the Associated Press moved anything on the story and a full hour before CNN issued an e-mail alert.

We got the story the way dedicated journalists have tracked down news for years - through strong, consistent building of sources and good, old-fashioned reporting. [...]

Because of the Armstrong family's long-standing professional relationship with reporter Jaime Powell, Katharine Armstrong called Powell around 8 a.m. Sunday and left voice mail messages to return the call. Powell, who was in Austin, did not immediately receive the messages. [...]

Once in the newsroom, Powell spoke to Armstrong again and said she wanted to talk with the vice president, whom she had met last year at the funeral of Katharine Armstrong's father, Tobin. Cheney came to the phone and briefly spoke with Powell - so far his only public comment on the matter. [...]

"You had a relationship with my father," Armstrong told Powell. "You and I had a relationship and that relationship had grown stronger after my father's death, and my family was comfortable with calling the hometown newspaper."

Maybe it's the pride in my staff talking, but I believe the White House press corps is whining just a bit because this news came first through a local daily newspaper's Web site and not following a mass press briefing thousands of miles away from the accident.

We got the story first by consistently working hard and professionally and gaining the trust of our sources. And because we did, the rest of the world got the story, too.

"We knew we needed to make it public," Armstrong told Powell. "It was a private weekend hosted by a private family, and we were comfortable calling the hometown paper and you. I trust you."
>>>


Averyt is exactly right. Cheney and his friends, the Armstrongs, went through the local press because they did not trust the White House press corps to break the news in a professional and responsible manner.

After all, would you trust this man with such a sensitive story?

exposetheleft.com

How about this guy?

michellemalkin.com

media.nationalreview.com

caller.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/15/2006 5:50:21 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Cheney: 'I'm the Guy Who Pulled the Trigger'

By Jane Roh
Wednesday, February 15, 2006

NEW YORK — Vice President Dick Cheney told FOX News on Wednesday that he alone is responsible for a weekend hunting accident in which he shot Austin attorney Harry Whittington.

"Ultimately I'm the guy who pulled the trigger that fired the round that hit Harry," Cheney said in his first interview since the incident. "I'm the guy who pulled the trigger and shot my friend, and that's something I'll never forget."

Cheney's first public response following the shooting comes more than 72 hours after the accident. His silence has been met with bewilderment and anger by some in Washington, D.C. But on Wednesday, the vice president seemed to express deep remorse.

"The image of him falling is something I will never be able to get out my mind," Cheney said, somberly. "It was one of the worst days of my life."

Whittington, whom Cheney described as an acquaintance whom he's known for more than 30 years, was hit with more than 200 birdshot pellets from an estimated 30 yards away. The accident took place at Armstrong Ranch, a 50,000-acre property in south Texas that is known as one of the best quail-hunting sites in the state. Not aware that his hunting partner had returned from retrieving a bird he had shot, Cheney turned right to shoot a covey of quail and instead sprayed Whittington with pellets from the 28-gauge shotgun.

Earlier this week, the White House and Katharine Armstrong, the owner of the ranch and an eyewitness to the accident, implied that Whittington did not follow hunting protocol because he didn't announce to Cheney and the other hunter that he had returned from retrieving his kill. On Wednesday, the vice president made clear that Whittington wasn't responsible for being hit.

"It was not Harry's fault," Cheney said. "You cannot blame anybody else."

One thing for which Cheney was not apologetic was the way the news of the shooting was delivered to the media. Armstrong, a private citizen, went to a local newspaper about the incident on Sunday. The Corpus Christi Caller-Times published the story near 3 p.m. EST Sunday. The scoop upset many in the White House press corps, who were not with Cheney on the private retreat.

Before Wednesday's interview, the vice president's office issued two brief written statements acknowledging the shooting on Monday and Tuesday. Cheney said he and Armstrong agreed to let her take the lead.

"I thought that made good sense because you can get as accurate a story as possible from somebody who knows and understands hunting," Cheney said. "Then it would immediately go up to the wires and be posted on the Web site, which is the way it went out. I thought that was the right call. I still do."

Whittington suffered a minor heart attack Tuesday morning due to a birdshot pellet that had migrated to his heart. Whittington was in stable condition on Wednesday, hospital officials said. But the 78-year-old was moved back into the intensive care unit because of concerns for his privacy.

"He's doing extremely well," said Peter Banko, administrator of Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial in Corpus Christi, Texas.

Speaking to reporters alongside Dr. David Blanchard, director of emergency services, Banko said that Whittington was tired but able to sit up and eat food. Banko would not comment on how many BBs remained in Whittington's body, but said of the ammunition lodged in Whittington's heart, "We're 100 percent satisfied that where the BB is it will remain."

Blanchard said Whittington was recovering well from the heart attack but would be closely monitored over the next six days and possibly longer. Whittington is "hemodynamically stable," meaning his blood circulation is normal, which is "the best situation you could possibly have."

When asked if their patient would be tuning in to the vice president's first on-air interview about the shooting, Banko said, "There is no television in his room at this point in time."

Cheney, Media Agree: Not Funny

While the story has launched innumerable jokes from comic strips and late-night comedy shows, the narrative took a decidedly more somber tone Tuesday when Whittington's condition turned for the worse.

The timing demonstrated another instance of disconnect between the White House press office and the news of the day. McClellan was not notified about Whittington's heart attack until long after the fact, too late for him to withhold a joke he made during the morning press report about a "hunter's" orange tie he was wearing in anticipation of the University of Texas football team's visit with President Bush.

Despite McClellan's apparent ignorance of Whittington's condition, he should have refrained from laughing about the situation at all, said Jerry Swerling, a public relations expert and director of the USC-Annenberg Strategic Public Relations Center in Los Angeles.

"To be making light of an incident in which somebody's life could have been at stake is an error for a variety of reasons," Sperling said of light-hearted statements coming from the White House.

Journalists who were flabbergasted at the way Cheney's office handled the incident will probably not be satisfied by his explanation.

"Katharine suggested, and I agreed, that she would go make the announcement. ... First of all, she was an eyewitness, she'd seen the whole thing. Secondly, she'd grown up on the ranch, she'd hunted there all of her life. Third, she was the immediate past head of the [Texas Parks and Wildlife Department], the game control commission in the state of Texas," Cheney said.

But Cheney is also a hunting expert and longtime frequenter of the Armstrong Ranch, said media critic Eric Burns. And as the shooter and victim, Cheney and Whittington were the best eyewitnesses to say what happened.

"There isn't one thing, actually, that he said that made sense to me," said Burns, host of "FOX News Watch."

Cheney's decision to go public came one day after Whittington had the heart attack and the chorus began to grow that he should speak publicly about the incident.

"I believe the vice president should hold a press conference to talk about the incident in Texas and the other things," Harry Reid, D-Nev., said after meeting with Cheney, President Bush and other congressional leaders Wednesday morning. The Senate minority leader stressed that Cheney had not given a press conference since 2002.

"I guess I'm kind of old-fashioned. I think he hasn't had a press conference in three-and-a-half years ... it's time to have one. It's not just the hunting incident, it's — I think you folks have a lot of questions you'd like to ask him," Reid said.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration of running a closed government that disrespects the public.

"Open government would demand that the vice president come clean on what happened there. Our hearts and our prayers, every night, go out to the gentleman who was hurt in this incident ... But we have to break this habit of the administration of closed government without the openness that is healthy for a democracy," Pelosi, D-Calif., said.

Asked whether she had brought up her views on the hunting incident with the vice president, Pelosi said she brought up Hurricane Katrina instead "because it is a very big issue for our country, and it's one that needs immediate attention and has an impact on so many lives in the country."

Republicans, too, have been quietly complaining about the vice president's unwillingness to explain publicly what occurred during the weekend hunting trip.

Vin Weber, a former Minnesota Republican representative, told The Washington Post: "I cannot believe he does not look back and say this should have been handled differently."

In only its second public acknowledgment of the incident, the vice president's office issued a statement on Tuesday saying Cheney had called Whittington around 1:30 p.m. EST to check on him.

"The vice president wished Mr. Whittington well and asked if there was anything he needed. The vice president said that he stood ready to assist. Mr. Whittington's spirits were good, but obviously his situation deserves the careful monitoring that his doctors are providing. The vice president said that his thoughts and prayers are with Mr. Whittington and his family," the statement read.

The vice president's only other statement since Saturday concerned his lack of a Texas Parks and Wildlife Department stamp for hunting game birds, which was publicized following the shooting. The statement said Cheney had mailed a $7 check to the department for a stamp, but did not mention Whittington or the shooting.

Carlos Valdez, district attorney of the county in which the shooting occurred, told the Corpus Christi Caller-Times on Wednesday that he did not foresee a criminal investigation. An incident report from the Kenedy County Sheriff's Office is pending.

FOX News' Sharon Liss contributed to this report.

foxnews.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/16/2006 6:37:28 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Democrats Fail to Understand the Concept of "Attacking Delay"

posted by Jason
Generation Why?

Someone might want to clue the vocal minority in that this may not be what the DNC meant when it said, "Make Delay the central focus of the 2006 campaign cycle."

Harry Reid blames the "secretive nature" of the eeeeeeevil Bush administration for the delay in releasing information about Cheney's hunting accident.

<<< The Nevada Democrat and Senate Minority Leader blames the administration's "secretive nature" for the 24-hour delay in releasing information about the shooting incident in Texas over the weekend. >>>


So did the eeeeeevil Bush administration also cause the 3-day delay in the nation's most powerful elected Democrat's office issuing information about the Senator's stroke?

And how about Hillary Clinton? Following up on the "secret society" meme, she says the eeeeeevil Bush adminstration has a "tendency" to not be forthcoming.


<<< US Senator Hillary Clinton called the Bush administration's failure to be more forthcoming "troubling."

"A tendency of this administration -- from the top all the way to the bottom -- is to withhold information ... to refuse to be forthcoming about information that is of significance and relevance to the jobs that all of you do, and the interests of the American people," Clinton said. >>>


But the same Hillary Clinton was "behind the 30-hour delay in releasing late White House counsel Vincent Foster's suicide note to authorities." Was the failure to alert the media about the White House counsel's suicide part of some "tendency" to "refuse to be forthcoming" from the top all the way to the bottom as well?


Others: Matt has more examples of why the Democrats' new found "opposition to secrecy" is so comical.
blogsforbush.com

texasrainmaker.blogspot.com

krnv.com

foxnews.com

news.yahoo.com

cnn.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/16/2006 7:44:28 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Transcript: Cheney on FOX News

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

The following is a transcript of the interview Vice President Dick Cheney gave FOX News regarding the accidental shooting of Austin attorney Harry Whittington:

"SPECIAL REPORT" HOST BRIT HUME: Mr. Vice President, how is Mr. Whittington?

VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY: Well, the good news is he's doing very well today. I talked to him yesterday after they discovered the heart problem, but it appears now to have been pretty well resolved and the reporting today is very good.

HUME: How did you feel when you heard about that?

CHENEY: 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.

HUME: How long have you known him?

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

HUME: Would you describe him as a close friend, friendly acquaintance, what —

CHENEY: No, an acquaintance.

HUME: Tell me what happened?

CHENEY: Well, basically, we were hunting quail late in the day —

HUME: Describe the setting.

CHENEY: It's in south Texas, wide-open spaces, a lot of brush cover, fairly shallow. But it's wild quail. It's some of the best quail hunting anyplace in the country. I've gone there, to the Armstrong ranch, for years. The Armstrongs have been friends for over 30 years. And a group of us had hunted all day on Saturday —

HUME: How many?

CHENEY: Oh, probably 10 people. We weren't all together, but about 10 guests at the ranch. There were three of us who had gotten out of the vehicle and walked up on a covey of quail that had been pointed by the dogs. Covey is flushed, we've shot, and each of us got a bird. Harry couldn't find his, it had gone down in some deep cover, and so he went off to look for it. The other hunter and I then turned and walked about a hundred yards in another direction —

HUME: Away from him?

CHENEY: Away from him — where another covey had been spotted by an outrider. I was on the far right —

HUME: There was just two of you then?

CHENEY: Just two of us at that point. The guide or outrider between us, and of course, there's this entourage behind us, all the cars and so forth that follow me around when I'm out there — but bird flushed and went to my right, off to the west. I turned and shot at the bird, and at that second, saw Harry standing there. Didn't know he was there —

HUME: You had pulled the trigger and you saw him?

CHENEY: Well, I saw him fall, basically. It had happened so fast.

HUME: What was he wearing?

CHENEY: He was dressed in orange, he was dressed properly, but he was also — there was a little bit of a gully there, so he was down a little ways before land level, although I could see the upper part of his body when — I didn't see it at the time I shot, until after I'd fired. And the sun was directly behind him — that affected the vision, too, I'm sure.

But the image of him falling is something I'll never be able to get out of my mind. I fired, and there's Harry falling. And it was, I'd have to say, one of the worst days of my life, at that moment.

HUME: Then what?

CHENEY: Well, we went over to him, obviously, right away —

HUME: How far away from you was he?

CHENEY: I'm guessing about 30 yards, which was a good thing. If he'd been closer, obviously, the damage from the shot would have been greater.

HUME: Now, is it clear that — he had caught part of the shot, is that right?

CHENEY: — part of the shot. He was struck in the right side of his face, his neck and his upper torso on the right side of his body.

HUME: And you — and I take it, you missed the bird.

CHENEY: I have no idea. I mean, you focused on the bird, but as soon as I fired and saw Harry there, everything else went out of my mind. I don't know whether the bird went down, or didn't.

HUME: So did you run over to him or —

CHENEY: Ran over to him and —

HUME: And what did you see? He's lying there —

CHENEY: He was laying there on his back, obviously bleeding. You could see where the shot had struck him. And one of the fortunate things was that I've always got a medical team, in effect, covering me wherever I go. I had a physician's assistant with me that day. Within a minute or two he was on the scene administering first-aid. And —

HUME: And Mr. Whittington was conscious, unconscious, what?

CHENEY: He was conscious —

HUME: What did you say?

CHENEY: Well, I said, "Harry, I had no idea you were there." And —

HUME: What did he say?

CHENEY: He didn't respond. He was — he was breathing, conscious at that point, but he didn't — he was, I'm sure, stunned, obviously, still trying to figure out what had happened to him. The doc was fantastic —

HUME: What did you think when you saw the injuries? How serious did they appear to you to be?

CHENEY: I had no idea how serious it was going to be. I mean, it could have been extraordinarily serious. You just don't know at that moment. You know he's been struck, that there's a lot of shot that had hit him. But you don't know — you think about his eyes. Fortunately, he was wearing hunting glasses, and that protected his eyes. You, you just don't know. And the key thing, as I say, initially, was that the physician's assistant was right there. We also had an ambulance at the ranch, because one always follows me around wherever I go. And they were able to get the ambulance there, and within about 30 minutes we had him on his way to the hospital.

HUME: And what did you do then? Did you get up and did you go with him, or did you go to the hospital?

CHENEY: No, I had — I told my physician's assistant to go with him, but the ambulance is crowded and they didn't need another body in there. And so we loaded up and went back to ranch headquarters, basically. By then, it's about 7:00 p.m. at night. And Harry —

HUME: Did you have a sense then of how he was doing?

CHENEY: Well, we're getting reports, but they were confusing. Early reports are always wrong. The initial reports that came back from the ambulance were that he was doing well, his eyes were open. They got him into the emergency room at Kingsville —

HUME: His eyes were open when you found him, then, right?

CHENEY: Yes. One eye was open. But they got him in the emergency room in the small hospital at Kingsville, checked him out further there, then lifted him by helicopter from there into Corpus Christi, which has a big city hospital and all of the equipment.

HUME: So by now what time is it?

CHENEY: I don't have an exact time line, although he got there sometime that evening, 8:00 p.m., 9:00 p.m.

HUME: So this is several hours after the incident?

CHENEY: Well, I would say he was in Kingsville in the emergency room probably within, oh, less than an hour after they left the ranch.

HUME: Now, you're a seasoned hunter —

CHENEY: I am, well, for the last 12, 15 years.

HUME: Right, and so you know all the procedures and how to maintain the proper line and distance between you and other hunters, and all that. So how, in your judgment, did this happen? Who — what caused this?

What was the responsibility here?

CHENEY: Well, ultimately, I'm the guy who pulled the trigger that fired the round that hit Harry. And you can talk about all of the other conditions that existed at the time, but that's the bottom line. And there's no — it was not Harry's fault. You can't blame anybody else. I'm the guy who pulled the trigger and shot my friend. And I say that is something I'll never forget.

HUME: Now, what about this — it was said you were hunting out of vehicles. Was that because you have to have the vehicles, or was that because that's your — the way you chose to hunt that day?

CHENEY: No, the way — this is a big ranch, about 50,000 acres. You cover a lot of territory on a quail hunt. Birds are oftentimes — you're looking for coveys. And these are wild quail, they're not pen-raised. And you hunt them

— basically, you have people out on horseback, what we call outriders, who are looking for the quail. And when they spot them, they've got radios, you'll go over, and say, get down and flush the quail. So you need —

HUME: So you could be a distance of a miles from where you spot quail until the next place you may find them?

CHENEY: Well, usually you'll be, you know, maybe a few hundred yards. Might be farther than that; could be a quarter of a mile.

HUME: Does that kind of hunting only go forward on foot, or is it mostly —

CHENEY: No, you always — in that part of the country, you always are on vehicles, until you get up to where the covey is. Then you get off — there will be dogs down, put down; the dogs will point to covey. And then you walk up on the covey. And as the covey flushes, that's when you shoot.

HUME: Was anybody drinking in this party?

CHENEY: No. You don't hunt with people who drink. That's not a good idea. We had —

HUME: So he wasn't, and you weren't?

CHENEY: Correct. We'd taken a break at lunch — go down under an old — ancient oak tree there on the place, and have a barbecue. I had a beer at lunch. After lunch we take a break, go back to ranch headquarters. Then we took about an hour-long tour of ranch, with a ranch hand driving the vehicle, looking at game. We didn't go back into the field to hunt quail until about, oh, sometime after 3:00 p.m.

The five of us who were in that party were together all afternoon. Nobody was drinking, nobody was under the influence.

HUME: Now, what thought did you give, then, to how — you must have known that this was — whether it was a matter of state, or not, was news.

What thought did you give that evening to how this news should be transmitted?

CHENEY: Well, my first reaction, Brit, was not to think: I need to call the press. My first reaction is: My friend, Harry, has been shot and we've got to take care of him. That evening there were other considerations. We wanted to make sure his family was taken care of. His wife was on the ranch. She wasn't with us when it happened, but we got her hooked up with the ambulance on the way to the hospital with Harry. He has grown children; we wanted to make sure they were notified, so they didn't hear on television that their father had been shot. And that was important, too.

But we also didn't know what the outcome here was going to be. We didn't know for sure what kind of shape Harry was in. We had preliminary reports, but they wanted to do a CAT scan, for example, to see how — whether or not there was any internal damage, whether or not any vital organ had been penetrated by any of the shot.

We did not know until Sunday morning that we could be confident that everything was probably going to be okay.

HUME: When did the family — when had the family been informed? About what time?

CHENEY: Well, his wife — his wife knew as he was leaving the ranch —

HUME: Right, what about his children?

CHENEY: I didn't make the calls to his children, so I don't know exactly when those contacts were made. One of his daughters had made it to the hospital by the next day when I visited. But one of the things I'd learned over the years was first reports are often wrong and you need to really wait and nail it down. And there was enough variation in the reports we were getting from the hospital, and so forth — a couple of people who had been guests at the ranch went up to the hospital that evening; one of them was a doctor, so he obviously had some professional capabilities in terms of being able to relay messages. But we really didn't know until Sunday morning that Harry was probably going to be okay, that it looked like there hadn't been any serious damage to any vital organ. And that's when we began the process of notifying the press.

HUME: Well, what — you must have recognized, though, with all your experience in Washington, that this was going to be a big story.

CHENEY: Well, true, it was unprecedented. I've been in the business for a long time and never seen a situation like this. We've had experiences where the President has been shot; we've never had a situation where the Vice President shot somebody.

HUME: Not since Aaron Burr.

CHENEY: Not since Aaron Burr —

HUME: Different circumstances.

CHENEY: Different circumstances.

HUME: Well, did it occur to you that sooner was — I mean, the one thing that we've all kind of learned over the last several decades is that if something like this happens, as a rule sooner is better.

CHENEY: Well, if it's accurate. If it's accurate. And this is a complicated story.

HUME: But there were some things you knew. I mean, you knew the man had been shot, you knew he was injured, you knew he was in the hospital, and you knew you'd shot him.

CHENEY: Correct.

HUME: And you knew certainly by sometime that evening that the relevant members of his family had been called. I realize you didn't know the outcome, and you could argue that you don't know the outcome today, really, finally.

CHENEY: 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. And it was also important, I thought, to get the story out as accurately as possible, and this is a complicated story that, frankly, most reporters would never have dealt with before, so —

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

CHENEY: 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.

HUME: Not until Sunday morning? Was that the first conversation you'd had with anybody in the — at the White House?

CHENEY: Yes.

HUME: And did you discuss this with Karl Rove at any time, as has been reported?

CHENEY: 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 —

HUME: Say that again?

CHENEY: I said Karl has hunted at the Armstrong, as well, and we're both good friends of the Armstrongs and of Katherine Armstrong. And Katherine suggested, and I agreed, that she would go make the announcement, that is that she'd put the story out. And I thought that made good sense for several reasons. First of all, she was an eye-witness. She'd seen the whole thing. Secondly, she'd grown up on the ranch, she'd hunted there all of her life. Third, she was the immediate past head of the Texas Wildlife and Parks Department, the game control commission in the state of Texas, an acknowledged expert in all of this.

And she wanted to go to the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, which is the local newspaper, covers that area, to reporters she knew. And I thought that made good sense because you can get as accurate a story as possible from somebody who knew and understood hunting. And then it would immediately go up to the wires and be posted on the website, which is the way it went out. And I thought that was the right call.

HUME: What do you think now?

CHENEY: Well, I still do. I still think that the accuracy was enormously important. I had no press person with me, I didn't have any press people with me. I was there on a private weekend with friends on a private ranch. In terms of who I would contact to have somebody who would understand what we're even talking about, the first person that we talked with at one point, when Katherine first called the desk to get hold of a reporter didn't know the difference between a bullet and a shotgun — a rifle bullet and a shotgun. And there are a lot of basic important parts of the story that required some degree of understanding. And so we were confident that Katherine was the right one, especially because she was an eye-witness and she could speak authoritatively on it. She probably knew better than I did what had happened since I'd only seen one piece of it.

HUME: By the next morning, had you spoken again to Mr. Whittington?

CHENEY: The next morning I talked to his wife. And then I went to the hospital in Corpus Christi and visited with him.

HUME: When was that?

CHENEY: Oh, it was shortly after noon on Sunday.

HUME: Now, by that time had the word gone out to the newspaper?

CHENEY: I believe it had. I can't remember what time Katherine actually talked to the reporter. She had trouble that morning actually finding a reporter. But they finally got connected with the reporter, and that's when the story then went out.

HUME: Now, it strikes me that you must have known that this was going to be a national story —

CHENEY: Oh, sure.

HUME: — and it does raise the question of whether you couldn't have headed off this beltway firestorm if you had put out the word to the national media, as well as to the local newspaper so that it could post it on its website. I mean, in retrospect, wouldn't that have been the wise course —

CHENEY: Well, who is going to do that? Are they going to take my word for what happened? There is obviously —

HUME: Well, obviously, you could have put the statement out in the name of whoever you wanted. You could put it out in the name of Mrs. Armstrong, if you wanted to. Obviously, that's — she's the one who made the statement.

CHENEY: Exactly. That's what we did. We went with Mrs. Armstrong. We had — she's the one who put out the statement. And she was the most credible one to do it because she was a witness. It wasn't me in terms of saying, here's what happened, it was —

HUME: Right, understood. Now, the suspicion grows in some quarters that you — that this was an attempt to minimize it, by having it first appear in a little paper and appear like a little hunting incident down in a remote corner of Texas.

CHENEY: There wasn't any way this was going to be minimized, Brit; but it was important that it be accurate. I do think what I've experienced over the years here in Washington is as the media outlets have proliferated, speed has become sort of a driving force, lots of time at the expense of accuracy. And I wanted to make sure we got it as accurate as possible, and I think Katherine was an excellent choice. I don't know who you could get better as the basic source for the story than the witness who saw the whole thing.

HUME: When did you first speak to — if you spoke to Andy Card at, what, mid-day, you said, on Sunday?

CHENEY: Sometime Sunday morning.

HUME: And what about — when did you first — when, if ever, have you discussed it with the President?

CHENEY: I talked to him about it yesterday, or Monday — first on Monday, and then on Tuesday, too.

HUME: There is reporting to the effect that some in the White House feel you kind of — well, look at what Scott McClellan went through the last couple days. There's some sense — and perhaps not unfairly so — that you kind of hung him out to dry. How do you feel about that?

CHENEY: Well, Scott does a great job and it's a tough job. It's especially a tough job under these conditions and circumstances. I had a bit of the feeling that the press corps was upset because, to some extent, it was about them — they didn't like the idea that we called the Corpus Christi Caller-Times instead of The New York Times. But it strikes me that the Corpus Christi Caller-Times is just as valid a news outlet as The New York Times is, especially for covering a major story in south Texas.

HUME: Well, perhaps so, but isn't there an institution here present at the White House that has long-established itself as the vehicle through which White House news gets out, and that's the pool?

CHENEY: I had no press person with me, no coverage with me, no White House reporters with me. I'm comfortable with the way we did it, obviously. You can disagree with that, and some of the White House press corps clearly do. But, no, I've got nothing but good things to say about Scott McClellan and Dan Bartlett. They've got a tough job to do and they do it well. They urged us to get the story out. The decision about how it got out, basically, was my responsibility.

HUME: That was your call.

CHENEY: That was my call.

HUME: All the way.

CHENEY: All the way. It was recommended to me — Katherine Armstrong wanted to do it, as she said, and I concurred in that; I thought it made good sense.

HUME: Now, you're talking to me today — this is, what, Wednesday?

CHENEY: Wednesday.

HUME: What about just coming out yourself Monday/Tuesday — how come?

CHENEY: Well, part of it obviously has to do with the status of Harry Whittington. And it's a difficult subject to talk about, frankly, Brit. But most especially I've been very concerned about him and focused on him and feel more comfortable coming out today because of the fact that his circumstances have improved, he's gotten by what was a potential crisis yesterday, with respect to the developments concerning his heart. I think this decision we made, that this was the right way to do it.

HUME: Describe if you can your conversations with him, what you've said to him and the attitude he's shown toward you in the aftermath of this.

CHENEY: He's been fantastic. He's a gentleman in every respect. He oftentimes expressed more concern about me than about himself. He's been in good spirits, unfailingly cheerful —

HUME: What did he say about that? You said, "expressed concern" about you — what did he say?

CHENEY: Well, when I first saw him in the hospital, for example, he said, look, he said, I don't want this to create problems for you. He literally was more concerned about me and the impact on me than he was on the fact that he'd been shot. He's a — I guess I'd describe him as a true Texas gentleman, a very successful attorney, successful businessman in Austin; a gentleman in every respect of the word. And he's been superb.

HUME: For you, personally, how would you — you said this was one of the worst days of your life. How so?

CHENEY: What happened to my friend as a result of my actions, it's part of this sudden, you know, in less than a second, less time than it takes to tell, going from what is a very happy, pleasant day with great friends in a beautiful part of the country, doing something I love — to, my gosh, I've shot my friend. I've never experienced anything quite like that before.

HUME: Will it affect your attitude toward this pastime you so love in the future?

CHENEY: I can't say that. You know, we canceled the Sunday hunt. I said, look I'm not — we were scheduled to go out again on Sunday and I said I'm not going to go on Sunday, I want to focus on Harry. I'll have to think about it.

HUME: Some organizations have said they hoped you would find a less violent pastime.

CHENEY: Well, it's brought me great pleasure over the years. I love the people that I've hunted with and do hunt with; love the outdoors, it's part of my heritage, growing up in Wyoming. It's part of who I am. But as I say, the season is ending, I'm going to let some time pass over it and think about the future.

HUME: On another subject, court filings have indicated that Scooter Libby has suggested that is superiors — unidentified — authorized the release of some classified information. What do you know about that?

CHENEY: It's nothing I can talk about, Brit.
This is an issue that's been under investigation for a couple of years. I've cooperated fully, including being interviewed, as well, by a special prosecutor. All of it is now going to trial. Scooter is entitled to the presumption of innocence. He's a great guy. I've worked with him for a long time, have enormous regard for him. I may well be called as a witness at some point in the case and it's, therefore, inappropriate for me to comment on any facet of the case.

HUME: Let me ask you another question. Is it your view that a vice president has the authority to declassify information?

CHENEY: There is an executive order to that effect.

HUME: There is.

CHENEY: Yes.

HUME: Have you done it?

CHENEY: Well, I've certainly advocated declassification and participated in declassification decisions. The executive order —

HUME: You ever done it unilaterally?

CHENEY: I don't want to get into that. There is an executive order that specifies who has classification authority, and obviously focuses first and foremost on the president, but also includes the vice president.

HUME: There have been two leaks, one that pertained to possible facilities in Europe; and another that pertained to this NSA matter. There are officials who have had various characterizations of the degree of damage done by those. How would you characterize the damage done by those two reports?

CHENEY: There clearly has been damage done.

HUME: Which has been the more harmful, in your view?

CHENEY: I don't want to get into just sort of ranking them, then you get into why is one more damaging than the other. One of the problems we have as a government is our inability to keep secrets. And it costs us, in terms of our relationship with other governments, in terms of the willingness of other intelligence services to work with us, in terms of revealing sources and methods. And all of those elements enter into some of these leaks.

HUME: Mr. Vice President, thank you very much for doing this.

CHENEY: Thank you, Brit.

foxnews.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/16/2006 8:55:02 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Sheriff: Dick Cheney Won't Face Charges

SARITA, Texas (AP) - The sheriff's department closed its investigation Thursday into Dick Cheney's accidental shooting of a hunting partner and said no charges will be filed.

The Kenedy County Sheriff's Department issued a report that largely supports the vice president's account of the weekend accident that wounded 78-year-old lawyer Harry Whittington.

Whittington, interviewed in the hospital, assured investigators no one was drinking when the accident occurred and everyone was wearing bright orange safety gear, according to the report.

Sheriff's dispatcher Diana Mata, speaking for the department, said the case is closed and no charges will be filed. She said Sheriff Ramon Salinas would have no comment on the report.

Whittington was peppered with bird shot in the face and chest Saturday while hunting quail with Cheney on a ranch in South Texas. He is in a Corpus Christi hospital in stable condition after suffering a mild heart attack caused by a pellet that traveled to his heart.

Gilberto San Miguel Jr., an investigator with the Sheriff's Department, interviewed Cheney at the ranch a day after the shooting. San Miguel reported that Cheney shook his hand and "told me he was there to cooperate in any way with the interview."

The vice president said the sun was setting when Whittington fired at some quail and went to find his downed birds, according to the report.

Cheney said he walked about 100 yards and met up with the hunting guide. He said a bird flew behind him, and he followed it in a counterclockwise direction, not realizing Whittington had walked up behind him to rejoin the group. He said Whittington was about 30 yards away, on lower ground, when he fired his shotgun.

"Mr. Cheney told me if Mr. Whittington was on the same ground level the injuries might have been lower on Mr. Whittington's body," the investigator reported.

The investigator, accompanied by another officer, briefly interviewed Whittington at his hospital room on Monday.

"I asked Mr. Whittington if we could record our conversation and Mr. Whittington requested not to be recorded due to his voice being raspy," San Miguel wrote.

The investigator asked for an affidavit, and Whittington said he would provide one when he returned home to his office in Austin. Doctors have said Whittington will probably remain hospitalized until next week.

Before a nurse asked the officers to "hurry up so Mr. Whittington could rest," Whittington "explained foremost there was no alcohol during the hunt and everyone was wearing the proper hunting attire of blaze orange," San Miguel reported.

Whittington said the shooting "was just an accident," and he was concerned all the media attention would give hunting in Texas a bad image, the report said.

apnews.myway.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/20/2006 9:43:18 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
A Hunter’s Take on Cheney’s Mistake

by Doug Giles
townhall.com
Feb 18, 2006

The desperate liberal media is hanging on to this Cheney story like Bill Clinton clinchin’ Border’s last copy of the Sports Illustrated Swim Suit issue. What a hissy fit NBC’s chief screaming correspondent, the pink shirted, David Gregory threw. This guy made Ron Burgundy come across like a Tibetan monk high on Thai stick. I was waiting for him to start screaming, “I’m David Gregory . . . I’m David Gregory . . . and David Gregory is a very important person! People know me, and I have many leather bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany!”

Yeah, if you look closely on the video from last Monday you can see a spring blow out from the side of Dave’s premature gray scalp. Dial down, Davey. Back off the espresso. Take a deep breath . . . relax . . . walk it off . . . put on some Kenny G and do some T'ai Chi or something . . . ‘cause you’re scaring the children.

Is the Cheney story the story we should be obsessing on right now? Well, in a word: No. Granted, he is the Veep, and he did shoot someone; but come on, this is not the most important news item in the US this week. Britney Spears’ mysterious trip to a Malibu clinic is what should have our focus. Jeez, people . . . get with it! Britney could be ill.

Hey hysterical media chum suckers, if you want to obsess about a gun (or guns) in South Texas, why don’t you travel a little further southwest from Corpus Christi to Laredo where U.S. authorities just snatched ready-to-detonate IEDs, materials for making 33 more, military style grenades, 26 grenade triggers, large quantities of AK-47 and AR-15 assault rifles, 1280 rounds of ammo, silencers, machine gun assembly kits, 300 primers, bullet proof vests, police scanners, sniper scopes, narcotics and cash from Mexican dope dealers? Now, Dave, there’s an all-beef patty for you and all the other reporters suffering from mad cow disease to sink your teeth into.

Look, Bush and Cheney will be hated and vilified by the spurned and pouty, short-fused, laughable left ‘til Jesus comes back to clean house. If the President or Vice President wore white after Labor Day, had white wine with beef, swam without waiting the full 30 minutes after they had eaten lunch or drank milk after the expiration date there would be a Moses-like media hailstorm over these faux pas. And I guarantee that if Cheney had not accidentally shot Mr. Harry Whittington, they still would have made a huge deal out of him purposefully slaying Mr. Bob White and his feathered la familia.

I can tell you, as a hunter, that the only true story in this bad chain of Cheney events is the VP forgetting one of the basic commandments of safe gun handling, namely: Thou Shalt Know Thy Target and What is Beyond It. It is scary that a guy who’s been hunting as long as Mr. Cheney blew past this non-negotiable. Hopefully, the Vice President’s SNAFU will cause us hunters to think it through a little bit more before we wail on our prey.

There is no excuse for what Cheney did, and thank God, he offered none. If the culprit had been Ted Kennedy or Ray Nagin, we would have seen Olympic grade obfuscation and blame shifting not seen since OJ’s trial. And you know that the hypocritical, wedged-up-the-left’s-backside reporters would have bought Ted and Ray’s take on this situation gone awry. Somehow Bush and Cheney would have been blamed for purposefully not offering a government funded gun safety course for these confused and ignorant, yet well-meaning, hunters. And the wheels of the bus would go ‘round and ‘round, ‘round and ‘round, ‘round and ‘round, the wheels of the bus go ‘round and ‘round all the liberal day.

Giles’ new book, The Bulldog Attitude: Get It or Get Left Behind, has just been released! It is guaranteed to take the poo out of poodles and give them the Bulldog Attitude. It is a great read for young and old, families, churches and corporations who wish to excel. Logon to clashradio.com and check out Doug's latest interview with best selling author, Frank Schaeffer as they discuss The Church’s Addiction to Mediocrity in the Arts.

Doug Giles is the creator and host of "The Clash" radio shows and a contributing columnist on Townhall.com.

Copyright © 2006 2005 Doug Giles

townhall.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/23/2006 11:51:36 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Why go to the F-word network??

by Larry Elder
Townhall.com
Feb 23, 2006

Let's agree that the White House might have handled the accidental shooting by Dick Cheney in a different fashion. They could have put out a press release, even with sketchy details, with more information to follow.

The vice president, of course, followed a different course. After the accidental shooting of his friend of 30 years, Harry Whittington, Cheney allowed the ranch owner -- a witness to the incident -- to give an interview to a local newspaper, the Corpus Christi Caller-Times.

This incident became a perfect storm for all that the mainstream media dislikes about the Bush administration -- tax cuts, the war, his alleged secrecy, tax cuts, Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, the Katrina response, tax cuts, Justices Alito and Roberts, his home state of Texas (where they have the death penalty), tax cuts, his walk, his pronunciation of the word "nuclear," and tax cuts.

When Cheney broke his silence, he elected to do so on Fox News, with former ABC White House correspondent Brit Hume conducting the interview. Hume, as usual, competently interviewed Vice President Cheney, asking him all the questions any fair-minded -- pardon the expression -- person might want to know.

Uh-oh. CNN's Jack Cafferty said,


<<< "It didn't exactly represent a profile in courage for the vice president to wander over there to the 'f-word' network for a sit down with Brit Hume. I mean that's a little like Bonnie interviewing Clyde, ain't it? I mean, where was the news conference? Where was the access to all of the members of the media? Whatever.

. . . I mean, you talk about facing a safe haven. He's not going to get any high hard ones from anybody at the 'f-word' network, I think we know that." >>>

Yes, the same Cafferty, who, during Katrina, said,

<<< "Despite the many angles of this tragedy, and Lord knows there've been a lot of 'em in New Orleans, there is a great big elephant in the living room that the media seems content to ignore -- that would be, until now. . . . [W]e in the media are ignoring the fact that almost all of the victims in New Orleans are black and poor." >>>

His colleague at CNN, Wolf Blitzer, chimed in,

<<< "You simply get chills every time you see these poor individuals, as Jack Cafferty just pointed out, so tragically, so many of these people, almost all of them that we see, are so poor, and they are so black." >>>

What about CNN's Kyra Phillips, who covered the Coretta Scott King "funeral." Listening to speaker after speaker after speaker BMW (-----, moan and whine), Phillips apparently inhaled the fumes of the victicrat psyche, and said,

<<< "[I]t's true, we do have a long way to go . . . with regard to dealing with the nation's poor and dealing with economic issues . . . " >>>

By "we," do you think she means individuals, or, by "we," does she mean further government programs? In other words, the cold-hearted, insensitive, uncaring Bush administration needs to expand government social programs to "solve" poverty.

What about NBC? Why not sit down with the folks from the "Today" show? Maybe the White House resented the "Today" show co-anchor referring to now-justice Sam Alito as an "ultra-conservative."

CBS' Bob Schieffer, who anchors both Sunday's "Face the Nation" as well the nightly "CBS Evening News," recently pronounced Bush's second term "a nightmare." And Schieffer, on a recent edition of "Face the Nation," repeatedly referred to the former head of FEMA, Michael Brown, as "Old Brownie" or "Brownie":


<<< "There was Old Brownie, the former FEMA chief who became the face of government ineptitude. . . . They blistered Old Brownie when the levees broke. . . . But now Old Brownie is blaming higher-ups. . . . I was beginning to think one of the Democrats might hug Old Brownie last Friday. . . . Old Brownie may or may not be, well, limited. . . . FEMA, the disaster relief agency that Brownie ran, should be removed from Homeland Security. . . . I'll have a final word on Old Brownie and the problems with managing disaster on 'Face the Nation.'" >>>


What about Time magazine? A Time online writer recently mused, if Whittington dies, could Cheney not be prosecuted for "negligent homicide"?!?!?

For a window into the mindset of the mainstream media, consider the "press conference" endured by press secretary Scott McClellan. The questions included, "Is it proper for the vice president to offer his resignation or has he offered his resignation?" and "Would this be much more serious if the man had died?"

What about the Los Angeles Times editorial that said George W. Bush became president only as a result of an "accident of birth and corruption of democracy"? New York Times' John Tierney, at the Democratic National Convention in 2004, estimated that D.C. reporters covering the convention preferred Kerry over Bush by a 12-to-1 margin. According to a '96 study by the Roper Center for the Freedom Forum, 89 percent of Washington, D.C., journalists voted for Bill Clinton in 1992, while 7 percent of D.C. journalists voted for George Bush.

So, when you get down to it, that pretty much leaves . . . Fox.

Larry Elder is an accomplished attorney, radio personality, syndicated columnist, best-selling author and host of daytime television's The Larry Elder Show

Copyright © 2006 Townhall.com

townhall.com



To: Sully- who wrote (17893)2/23/2006 3:53:46 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
And On Review, There Is No Story

By Captain Ed on Current Affairs
Captain's Quarters

NBC has breaking news on Quailgate, and it won't please the members of the Fourth Estate. It turns out that all of the witnesses to the shooting have a consistent story -- and it matches what Dick Cheney said all along about the accidental shooting of Harry Whittington:

<<< NBC News has obtained new documents regarding the shooting accident involving Vice President Dick Cheney.

NBC News filed an Open Records Act request with the sheriff's office in Kenedy County, Texas, which investigated the shooting. Late Wednesday, NBC received two dozen pages of documents, including hand-written affidavits on the shooting never before made public. ...

In this case, all the accounts are similar and consistent with how Vice President Cheney has already described the incident. The statements say Cheney and his friend were about 30 yards apart when the vice president shot, aiming for a single bird. The statements all agree this was an accident, and no one places blame on Whittington.

Several of the statements say that no one was drinking alcohol during the late-afternoon hunt — again, consistent with the vice president's account. One member of the hunting party does volunteer that she had a glass of wine at lunch, four hours before the accident. >>>


All of the witnesses tell the same essential story: no one was drunk, the Veep aimed at a bird, and swung around to shoot it and hit his friend by mistake instead. The ellipsis in the above quotation eliminated one paragraph, however:


<<< There are six new affidavits from members of the shooting party. Most are dated Feb. 15, four days after the shooting. One is dated Feb. 17, almost a week after the vice president accidentally shot his friend, Harry Whittington. Some law enforcement experts say that's an unusually long period of time, after a shooting, to gather written statements from witnesses. Ideally, they say, investigators like to get such affidavits when memories are still fresh, and can't be influenced by other witness accounts. >>>

So on one hand, NBC wants to impress everyone by telling them that they've scooped the rest of the media by getting a hold of the affidavits first. Then, before they even report what the documents say, they undermine them with a thinly-veiled accusation of witness tampering. Besides, the police only worry about timing of statements when they investigate crimes, not incidents where everyone involved insists that the shooting was accidental, including the victim.

Now can we get the media kids to agree that this was never a story?

captainsquartersblog.com

msnbc.msn.com