Cheney Shooting Story Actually Worrying Right?

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in News

This from The Corner on National Review:

This story is a very big deal, despite all the mitigating factors — the accident involved a friend, his medical team was right there to help, and all that. Something like this has never happened before, and it is a genuinely disturbing thing to think that the vice president of the United States actually shot somebody last weekend, even for fans of his. It’s disturbing as well that there was a news blackout that lasted nearly a day about this serious incident. It seems beyond question that the vice president is going to have to go before the cameras, explain what happened, and show genuine remorse for his actions, however inadvertent. It’s a difficult challenge for someone as reticent as Dick Cheney. But unless he does so, and makes a good showing of it, he will be damaged goods for the remainder of the Bush presidency.

Damaged goods? Wow, those are pretty strong words for what I think most are chalking up as an accident. Sure, there have been a few jokes bandied about, and there have been some questions (and rightfully so) about why this news was held for 24 hours, but seriously…damaged goods?

Color me puzzled by this talk, although I’m always in favor of more information being shared than less.

This entry was posted on Monday, February 13th, 2006 and is filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

10 Responses to “Cheney Shooting Story Actually Worrying Right?”

  1. rob Says:

    Why was Cheney’s first instinct to cover it up/lie about and then blame the victim?

    When you shoot some directly behind you, it is your fault, period.

    Once again, they lie when they don’t have to. And that creates a problem. Although with the current press corp, I doubt a big one.

  2. Justin Gardner Says:

    Wait rob, how did he lie and blame the victim? Please provide an explanation.

  3. Chris Says:

    What’s not clear is if Cheney talked to the local police immediately. Isn’t that pretty much required in a shooting, even if you’re the VP? The Sherriff said the Secret Service notified him of the incident. I’m not saying there was anything nefarious going on, but does anyone know if this is standard procedure?

  4. Tom Says:

    “Something like this has never happened before”

    What’s “something like this”? The Vice President shooting someone? Doesn’t Aaron Burr ring a bell? :)

    I see someone already updated Wikipedia’s page on Aaron Burr:

    “In 2006, Richard Cheney, while on a hunting trip in Texas, became the second Vice President to shoot a person while in office.”

    Didn’t take long…

  5. Ryan Says:

    Justin, someone is definitely blaming the victim. How many times have I already heard that it’s the victim’s fault because he didn’t announce himself? Whether it’s Cheney himself or someone doing it for him, as tends to be more the status quo for this administration, it’s all about the same.

    As someone who took hunter’s safety and a member of a family of very avid hunters, I will agree, Cheney’s partner probably should have announced himself. However, when you pull the trigger, it’s ALWAYS your responsibility to know what’s in your line of fire and not pull the trigger if you are not absolutely sure that no person is in your line of fire. The #1 rule of hunter’s safety is always know your target and beyond.

  6. Jeff Says:

    I think that this whole incident shows real leadership. If your goal is to hit a target, sometimes you have to just go after it and let the chips (or birdshot) fall where they may. Action is better than inaction, and you don’t always have time to sit around and process all the facts. Quail are sneaky and will get away if you wait around for your friends instead of taking unilateral action. If wait too long for the perfect time to strike, then the first conclusive evidence as to whether it was safe to shoot may be a mushroom cloud.

  7. rob Says:

    What she says below is pure BS

    It is always 100% your fault if you shoot someone while hunting.

    I hunted quite a bit as a teenager with my uncle. You never even point your gun anywhere except right in front of you.

    No one except a complete nimcompoop (sp) would whirl around 180 deg. and fire a gun.

    I have no idea what she is talking about with announcing yourself. I’ve never heard of anything like that.

    later in the NYT piece, she says the victim (forgot name) was doing just fine and cracking jokes. —But he is still in ICU for the 2nd day. I don’t know what your ICU’s are like but here, you’ve got to be pretty bad off to hang around in ICU.

    I can’t find the where I read it, but there are quotes about DC doing “nothing wrong” just bad luck, etc.

    The whole thing doesn;t pass the smell test to me. Why the 18 hr lag (maybe to clear BAL)? Why did the Secret service block the sheriff from talking to Cheney? How did this really happen, is Dick really that clueless with a gun? or did he fall and have the safety off? I know it was an accident, it just seems their first inclination is to stonewall.

    I don’t have high hopes for the blockquoting below, but here goes.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/12/AR2006021200524.html

    Whittington “came up from behind the vice president and the other hunter and didn’t signal them or indicate to them or announce himself,” Armstrong said, according to the Associated Press.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/13/politics/13cheney.html?ei=5094&en=ef5d2efe3efde24c&hp=&ex=1139893200&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1139871849-KjccbOFTy41spwKSVOhrQw

    “This all happened pretty quickly,” Ms. Armstrong said in a telephone interview from her ranch. Mr. Whittington, she said, “did not announce â€â€? which would be protocol â€â€? ‘Hey, it’s me, I’m coming up,’ ” she said.

    “He didn’t do what he was supposed to do,” she added, referring to Mr. Whittington. “So when a bird flushed and the vice president swung in to shoot it, Harry was where the bird was.”

  8. Leonidas Says:

    You’re all complete idiots if you don’t see the many ways in which this story helps the White House. One, it brings up the gun issue, which has always been a winner for conservatives, two, it makes Cheney look like that much more of a tough guy. You think that Senate will still want to investigate him. Bring it on.

  9. Justin Gardner Says:

    You’re all complete idiots if you don’t see the many ways in which this story helps the White House. One, it brings up the gun issue, which has always been a winner for conservatives, two, it makes Cheney look like that much more of a tough guy. You think that Senate will still want to investigate him. Bring it on.

    Ha, funny joke. I love this type of subtle humor.

    But looking at your blog, I think you may actually be serious. Please convince me that you’re not.

    Pretty please!

  10. Joshua Says:

    But unless he does so, and makes a good showing of it, he will be damaged goods for the remainder of the Bush presidency.

    You mean he wasn’t “damaged goods” already, what with the Halliburton stuff and all? Even before any of this happened, it was a foregone conclusion that he would have next to zero chance of winning the Presidency in 2008 even if he intended to run. Next to all the baggage Cheney was already carrying, this looks like a bag full of feathers, and a pretty small one at that.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: