home

Cheney to Speak About Shooting

Vice President Dick Cheney will give an interview to Fox News at 2:00 pm today. It will air shortly before 6 p.m. ET.

Democrats have been pressing him to come forward. The secrecy of this Administration and Cheney are unbefitting an open government. The White House is not private property.

Democrats seized on the incident as an example of what they said was the administration's refusal to keep the public informed.

``I believe the vice president should hold a press conference to talk about the incident,'' Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid told reporters today after a breakfast meeting of congressional leaders with Bush. ``He hasn't had a press conference in about three and one-half years.''

Reid, of Nevada, said Cheney was at the breakfast but did not say anything. Reid yesterday called the Bush White House ``the most secretive administration in modern history.''

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California, who also attended, said ``open government would demand that the vice president come clean on what happened'' in Texas.

[Graphic created exclusively for TalkLeft by CL.]

< If Whittington Dies, A Grand Jury is Likely | Transcript of Dick Cheney's Interview >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 11:01:40 AM EST
    Cheney, will speak to fox. Gee, that's like hitler gettin' interviewed by goebbels. Horsebrithume really asks the tough questions. "Gee, dick, what's it like to be so wonderful?"

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 11:14:32 AM EST
    Wow,you would think that politicians - independent of party - never spoke to a friendly interviewer instead of a hostile one. Once this one plays out and the left realizes that it's not going anywhere, will we see another round of "oh no, the draft!" posts here? That seems to be the approach whenever a line of attack fails.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 11:28:25 AM EST
    Wow,you would think that politicians - independent of party - never spoke to a friendly interviewer instead of a hostile one. good point. Still, it'll be fun to see what kinds of soft-balls Brit decides to lob Dick's way.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#4)
    by desertswine on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 11:35:52 AM EST
    Men are Moved by two levers only: fear and self interest.
    Napoleon Bonaparte

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 11:42:33 AM EST
    Posted by James Robertson February 15, 2006 12:14 PM Wow,you would think that politicians - independent of party - never spoke to a friendly interviewer instead of a hostile one.
    You make a good point, but let's not be sticking our heads in the sand here, either: If Tricky Dick Cheney really has nothing to hide, then why doesn't he invite ALL of the other news agencies, instead of choosing the uber-partisan Fox News for his forum? That dog don't hunt (there's a pun in that).

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 11:48:43 AM EST
    Gee, I don't know, how'd all the other Vice Presidents who shot somebody in the face and tried to cover it up for a day or two play it?

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#7)
    by rdandrea on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 12:05:21 PM EST
    I'd rather have him talking to Fox than talking to nobody. It's Cheney, for gosh sakes. If he's talking, he's lying. If he's not talking then there's nothing to fact-check.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 12:12:24 PM EST
    It doesn't take a genius to figure that The VPrick was covering up his reckless shootout at the not O.K. Coral! The 86 year old Victim was hit with over 160 buck shot gun pellets. He wasn't 30 Yards away the spread would have been much wider and fewer pellots would have struck him. The power needed to pass through his Vest, shirt skin and flesh clearly indicates he was much closer. According to the Swiftboat Vets for truth he was ten feet away and drunk out of his mind and yelled "Duck" just after he pulled the trigger.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#9)
    by Al on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 12:14:51 PM EST
    Posted by James Robertson February 15, 2006 12:14 PM Wow,you would think that politicians - independent of party - never spoke to a friendly interviewer instead of a hostile one. Once this one plays out and the left realizes that it's not going anywhere, will we see another round of "oh no, the draft!" posts here? That seems to be the approach whenever a line of attack fails.
    Well, I never. Cheney has a supporter?

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 12:36:02 PM EST
    Something to ponder: How did Cheney get a 15-inch pattern on Whittington's body at 30 yards with a 28-guage shooting 7.5s? Here's the report: http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2006-02/21942343.pdf Note how the drawings on the body indicate a tight group around the head, neck and chest. (also note how this deputy (or game warden) can't distinguish his left from his right). Assuming that's a good drawing--combined w/ hospital claim yesterday that put the number of shots in Whittington as between "6 and 200" (!), Consider: http://www.shotgunworld.com/amm.html Here are all the charts you need to figure out what sort of pattern Cheney'd be getting at 30 yards with those shots. Keep in mind, though that there is no such gun as the Perazzi Brescia as described in the report. There is a Perazzi shotgun maker, which makes some guns in Brescia. Many of these are custom-made to the enthusiast hunter/trap shooter's dimensions; the guns cost from $6k to $20k, depending on mods, etc. This is a fine weapon by all accounts, and shoots tight and very regular groupings. OK, from the chart. 28-guage is a ¾-ounce load. That would mean a total of 345x.75 pellets came out of Cheney's gun. Make that 260 little pellets. We don't know what Cheney's choke was, but according to protocol it should have been about .15 to .20--in the "modified" category. Look down the chart and you see that kind of choke will give you a 35-inch spread at 30 yards. Now if he's shooting with no choke at all, that jumps to 45 inches, and a full choke takes it down to 30 inches. So . . . in order to get a pattern like that depicted in this report, Cheney had to have been closer to Whittington than 30 yards away. So how spread was the shot? Whittington is a lanky guy. Let's say, going by the deputy's diagram, that the spread was about 18 inches. I'm being conservative. I think it looks a bit smaller than that. Let's say 20 then, to give the VP the benefit of any doubt. How close would he have to be to get a 20-inch spread on Whittington? Chart says: 15 yards. For a 15-inch spread? 10 yards. 30 feet.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 12:45:52 PM EST
    How close would he have to be to get a 20-inch spread on Whittington? Chart says: 15 yards. For a 15-inch spread? 10 yards. 30 feet.
    Nice detective work. It sounds like more and more like a close quarters discharge of the shotgun, a fact that would tend to make one believe that Cheney should have been able to see Whittington standing there if he was firing at a bird . . . This is a little off the subject, but the whole thing reminds me of a scene from the movie Tombstone where Doc Holiday is preparing to get in a gunfight with Billy Clanton:
    Billy Clanton: Why, it's the drunk piano player. You're so drunk, you can't hit nothin'. In fact, you're probably seeing double. [Billy Clanton draws a knife, and Doc Holliday takes out a second gun] Doc Holliday: I have two guns, one for each of ya.


    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 01:04:43 PM EST
    So, Cheney admits he was drinking "a beer". Who was on here claiming "well gosh, no hunter would ever mix guns and alcohol! NEVER HAPPENS!" To me, it's clear. Cheney drank, shot his friend, then everyone freaked out and covered up the alcohol so he couldn't be charged with a crime. No other explanation covers the refusal to be interviewed for those hours, except the need to sober up.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#13)
    by roy on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 01:07:11 PM EST
    BUGSHOT, Your result are similar to mine, but I see a problem with your method. Your analysis assumes that the spread on Whittington's body is the entire spread of the blast. This seems unlikely; from the drawing and descriptions in the papers, he probably caught only part of the blast. That probablem would lead you to under-estimate the real range. However, your guess at 18- or 20-inch spread on his body is waaaay high. The vertical component of the wound is the biggest, and it's only about 1/6th of the figure. Whittington is not 9 feet tall. This problem would lead you to over estimate the real range. ... My math: Cheney fired 262 pellets. Credible reports say 40 pellets were removed from Whittington, and at least 2 two left in (one for the heart, one for the liver). So at least 42, 15.7% of those fired, hit him. So at least 15.7% of the blast overlapped his body. The area on his body is about 124 square inches, so the area of the blast is 774 square inches, which would be a circle with a 15.7-inch diameter. Using the tables you linked to, that correponds to a range of about ten yards with a modified cyliner, down to too short to list on the table for the other typical quail-hunting chokes. This assumes the pellets were evenly distributed, which is gets wronger as range increases, but I think this leads to over-estimating the range. A lower concentration at the edges means Whittington's body overlapped more of the blast area to catch those pellets. This also assumes the wound drawing is to scale. That'd be difficult to do, especially without disturbing the medics' attempts to treat him.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 01:13:18 PM EST
    The title of the post should read "Cheney to lie about shooting". The only reasons to wait a day to come forward are to cleanse your system of booze or you think the rules don't apply to you. Either way, he needs to face the music this time.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#15)
    by roy on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 01:26:38 PM EST
    Whoops! Math above confuses radius and diameter. Should be a 30-inch diameter blast, which corresponds to a range of 15 to 25 yards on those tables. Close enough to 30 to account for as innocent error. However, there is a bigger gotcha. Now FOX says he was "hit with more than 200 birdshot". Same algebra as before, with 201 / 262 = 76.7% of the pellets, yields a 14.3-inch blast area. This puts us at less than 10 yards for all the quail-hunting chokes listed. The idea of putting 76.7% pellets in such a tight pattern at thirty yards is absurd. I owe Sailor a letter to my governor.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#16)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:18:42 PM EST
    fox news is reporting that Dick Cheney did the "manly thing" in not reporting the incident right away. That is rich. Sh*t man, if I knew that all it took to be manly was to accidentally shoot someone and then chill for 18 hours, I would have done it a long time ago.
    On the February 14 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, nationally syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer said that Vice President Dick Cheney "did the manly thing" in withholding information from the public concerning his accidental shooting of lawyer Harry Whittington during a hunting excursion in Texas on February 11.


    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#17)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:26:36 PM EST
    Brit Hume looked quite sober today.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#18)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:38:22 PM EST
    roy, bugshot, here's my go at the numbers, let's try simple, common-sense numbers and calculations with no bias toward the outcome (not that I think either of you were biased). Assume 30" spread at 30 yds. You can mess around with that if you like, but, since TL's a defense site, let's give the defendant, Cheney, the benefit of the doubt; ~1" spread/yard traveled. The spread is generally in the shape of a circle, the circle is 30" in diameter, and, to not get too anal about it, assume the shot are evenly spread w/in the circle. So we've got 3.14 x 15" x 15" ~ 700 sq. inches w/in the circle, and 260 pellets/700 sq.in. is ~0.4 pellets/sq. in. I just measured me. Center of chest to neck and armpit, assume it's a square-ish shape, ~9" x 8" ~ 72 sq. in. Neck, let's call it ~4" x 6" = 24 sq. in. Face: hairline to chin ~8" (no cracks about hairline) width ~ 5" so ~8 x 5 = ~40 sq. in. 72 + 24 + 40 = 136 sq. in. 136 sq. in. x 0.4 pellets/sq. in. ~ 54 pellets. Whittington cought fewer, only 42 pellets. This suggests he was farther away than 30 yards, not closer. Sure you could argue with my measurement of myself, but all you'd need is 42 pellets/0.4 pellets/sq. in. ~ 105 sq. in. to catch 42 pellets, and Whittington is larger than me, so he'd have more surface area not less. Anyway, the above is a rough estimate but I think accurate enough not to throw up any red flags regarding the 30 yards. Now, if the 200 pellets number turns out to be valid, there's no way he was 30 yards away.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:40:28 PM EST
    Time for Cheney's docs to tell us what he is on. Any assessment of medication/alcohol interactions require knolwedge of the patient's meds. As ReddHead at fdl points out, Whittington's hospital at least claims the poor man has waived his federal privacy rights under the HIPAA law.* OK, Cheney and Bush ask us to trust their great leadership in the GWOT they tell us must be all-consuming (at least while a shred of the Constitution remains). The Veep has a documented history of severe consequences of alcohol abuse and/or dependence (multiple DUI's and license suspension before anyone ever heard of MADD...so Cheney had to be really, really drunk.) One result of many medications is to slow down the body's removal of alcohol - so a given amount of alcohol will stay around and effect the brain for a longer period of time. Other medications can increase the impairment caused by a given amount of alcohol. Some medical conditions which may be associated with cardiac disease may cause the liver to require a greater amount of time to breakdown a given amount of alcohol. Mr. Cheney shot a man in the face with a shotgun a few hours after he had "a beer". The only possible way for the American people to assess whether Mr. Cheney did or did not act recklessly in his choice to use firearms after consuming alcohol is for his physicians to fully disclose his lifetime medical record and his complete medication history. Especially with the current President, Americans are entitled to know if Mr. Cheney does or does not possess the cognitive capacities to discharge his constitutional duties. Mr Cheney has been a vociferous advocate of the Administration's contention that any possible security concerns provide compelling cause for the most intrusive breaches of privacy. Mr. Cheney's passion for personal privacy - his own, at any rate - is legendary. Mr. Cheney swore an oath to defend the Constitution (which he may one day recall) as well as the nation. The nation's security is threatened if the Vice President has medical conditions placing him at risk of impaired judgement arising from cognitive impairment, emotional lability, or medication interactions arising from Mr. Cheney's long-standing history of alcohol use and abuse. Mr. Cheney can authorize his physicians to release all medical history, records, results of MRI/CT/EEG, and all medication history for his lifetime. He can do so by signing a waiver of his HIPPA rights. If he doesn't know where to find the form, Mr. Whittington's hospital can send him one. Kirk James Murphy, M.D. (I'm waiting for the hospital to explain how Mr. Whittington was sufficiently lucid to lawfully exercise this right before the hospital started answering questions about his condition on Sunday. Any valid consent requires the patient have the capacity to comprehend the decision. The hospital is apparently asking us to believe that a 78 year old man with extensive gunshot wounds to the face and neck would - while on narcotics for pain control and immediately after or before surgery for extremely painful wounds - have this capacity. Attorney or no, most people's brains don't work so well in that condition.)

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#20)
    by Peaches on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:43:52 PM EST
    Sarc, Where did you get 42 pellets from? Roy linked to Fox which reported that he was hit by more than 200 pellets. I am just wondering where you heard that it was 42.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#21)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:49:48 PM EST
    Peaches, I got the number 42 from roy's 2:07 post. Did you read the last sentance of my post?

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#22)
    by Peaches on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:51:00 PM EST
    Yeah, I was just wondering if 42 was a verifiable number, I wasn't trying to bust your chops.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#23)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:51:41 PM EST
    No problem Peaches.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#24)
    by Sailor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:55:44 PM EST
    cheney was admittedly drinking, (anyone else ever take the course that said guns and drinking don't mix, at all, ever?), and the hospital cut short their press conference when a reporter asked if anyone had checked Whit's BAC. Gee, you'd think repubs would be fair and treat this the same way they treated another 'discharge' by a WH inhabitant.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#25)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 02:58:11 PM EST
    Sailor, what's your source for Cheney admittedly drinking?

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#26)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 03:01:39 PM EST
    Never mind, I found it.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#27)
    by desertswine on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 03:06:46 PM EST
    cheney was admittedly drinking...
    And then add to Dick's drinking God knows how many drugs he has to take every day just to keep him alive and you have a guy with a gun in a dangerous haze.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 03:52:09 PM EST
    Yeah, Dick had a Beer. The ol' "I only had one" song and dance. My old man had a huge tumbler the size of three glasses he used to mix vodka martinis in so he could pull the I only had one schtick. So did his old man. So did my kid's old man. Refresh my memory, why'd ya get tossed outta Yale again, Dick? Nice try. That's the oldest trick in the world. Maybe horsebrit hume'll buy it, but you had him at "go cheney yourself."

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:02:33 PM EST
    Posted by Che's Lounge February 15, 2006 03:26 PM
    Brit Hume looked quite sober today.
    Did ya ever notice how that dude is ready for a costume party as Herman Munster at a moments notice? Bolt Neck Brit. The dude abides.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#30)
    by Al on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:03:32 PM EST
    I'm not a hunter, so I have no idea what the protocol is. Maybe someone can tell me under what circumstances can you shoot someone in the general area of the head and chest, accidentally? Aren't you supposed to keep your finger off the trigger, or something? At what point does carelessness become attempted murder? Speculating further, I note that Mr. Whittington was reported by the BBC to be sitting up and eating regularly, and even "preparing some legal work". I look forward to Mr. Whittington's lawsuit against Mr. Cheney.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:06:23 PM EST
    et al - Cheney said he had a beer at lunch. Accident occured at about 5:30. Tell me how he is impaired. You guys are looking funnier and funneir. Anybody got a picture of that second shooter on the grassy knoll? Murphy - So you want the VP's doctors to disclose his med records? Are you really sure that you are a Medical Doctor? I'm starting to have some doubts. I have never heard a doctor want a patient's med records released. Matter of fact, right the opposite. What do you think your request does for the public image of doctors and the relationship between them and their patients.
    Doc: Trust me Mr. Jones. Your medical information is safe with me... That is unless you happen to belong to the wrong political party. But even then you'll be safe unless you do something I think is wrong.


    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:10:01 PM EST
    Posted by James Robertson February 15, 2006 12:14 PM Wow,you would think that politicians - independent of party - never spoke to a friendly interviewer instead of a hostile one. Once this one plays out and the left realizes that it's not going anywhere, will we see another round of "oh no, the draft!" posts here? That seems to be the approach whenever a line of attack fails.
    Really? Shrub's at 39 percent. Cheney's at 19 percent. He finished behind the child molester Judge Cashman got the treatment/sentence headlines for. Of course, that was before he shot the guy in the face.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:17:54 PM EST
    Cheney said he had a beer at lunch, eh? Well, gee, then it must be true. Just like we'll be greeted as liberators, they've got weapons of mass destruction and a connection to 9/11. You'd be better off using charlie manson as a reference on your resume.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#34)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:40:12 PM EST
    PPJ: Cheney said he had a beer at lunch. That's what he said after three days to consult his lawyers. Too bad a deputy was not permitted to make that call independently. Why do you suppose that was? Also, remember, this is Dick Cheney who told us he "...know[s] where [the WMD] are..." The guy who said the 200+ shot in the victim were delivered at a distance where a couple of dozen were far more likely, given the weapon and the load? His reputation for telling the truth is not exactly unquestioned. Accident occured at about 5:30. Some fifteen hours before he had to appear to be sober. Is it good police work to let a shooter avoid an appearance long enough to sober up if he had been drunk, or combining alcohol with any of the medications he takes for his heart condition? Tell me how he is impaired. You mean in addition to being a lying, secretive man who refuses to answer to any of the people who ask questions in the name of the citizens who pay him? If he admits to a single beer, I would be very surprised if there were not more and closer in time to the shooting. Add to that the fact that he takes lots of meds, and even a single beer could have impaired him. Tell me why we shouldn't suspect that the time delay was in order to sober up, straighten out the story, and see whether the victim was going to die from a "peppering" that has had him in the ICU for four days.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#35)
    by Slado on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:52:47 PM EST
    Are you guys serious? Last time I checked Cheney travels with a medical staff and the secret service. So your theory is both his doctors and the secret service agents let the vice president hunt drunk? Look the facts of the incident are know. Cheney shot his hunting partner by accident. That's it. Valid criticism can be made about the handling of the news etc... but you guys should stick to something real. Or don't.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#36)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:54:22 PM EST
    In addition, the proprietress of the ranch says Dick was at the sauce after the shooting as well. Nothing illegal about that, but I'm having a little trouble understanding his reaction to having shot a man in the head.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:02:46 PM EST
    That's how the Captain of the Exxon Valdez played it. Run it aground. Get hammered. Then how can they tell if ya got smashed before or after or after the fact. Sound legal strategy. That's why they pay them the big bucks and if ya don't cast a reflection or have a soul like most republicans, it's like falling off a log. WWDD

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:17:49 PM EST
    So your theory is both his doctors and the secret service agents let the vice president hunt drunk? Let him? It's hard to imagine how they would go about stopping him.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:19:20 PM EST
    Gee, Slado. I don't know what happened. It's the damnedest thing. I don't know why but somehow I didn't get the memo that you get to call balls and strikes as to what constitutes valid criticism around here.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:22:20 PM EST
    charliedontsurf1 writes:
    Really? Shrub's at 39 percent. Cheney's at 19 percent.
    Really? Guess what. They are still Pres and VP. Aint that a hoot? RePack - We've had this conversation befofe. You don't believe him. Okay.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#41)
    by Sailor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:36:13 PM EST
    So your theory is both his doctors and the secret service agents let the vice president hunt drunk?
    Well ... yes! He is their boss, and are bound by law not to reveal his 'medical' problems.
    et al - Cheney said he had a beer at lunch.
    He also swore that:
    Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.
    Dick Cheney August 26, 2002
    Hey, if you want I can find at least 10 more of his lies.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#42)
    by Sailor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:44:49 PM EST
    charliedontsurf1, you're just being baited, they have no facts so they attack you.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:46:16 PM EST
    Yeah, I know and I'm fresh outta deep woods off. Bummer. I hate it when that happens. I've gotta remember what Seinfeld said. It's more of a challenge to work without profanity. What I'm trying to say is that it's harder to keep myself from getting tossed from here than it is to make mince meat of one pathetically, pompous jerk or his like. It makes it more interesting for me. God are they dim, eh?

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#44)
    by Sailor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 08:09:26 PM EST
    charliedontsurf1, it's easy to hit at the low hanging fruit, but we can aim higher. Where is the honor in having a battle of the wits with an unarmed opponent?

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 08:31:34 PM EST
    Since a Breathalizer test wasn't taken immediately after the accident, there is nothing to prove or disprove the VPs assertion, which must therefore be taken with a grain of salt.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 10:10:13 PM EST
    Posted by Sailor February 15, 2006 09:09 PM
    charliedontsurf1, it's easy to hit at the low hanging fruit, but we can aim higher. Where is the honor in having a battle of the wits with an unarmed opponent?
    I got a registered letter today from focus on the family. They said to go ahead and throw 'em out already. That pretty much says it all.

    Re: Cheney to Speak About Shooting (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 16, 2006 at 02:17:52 PM EST
    The Office of the Vice President: Speeches & News Releases is also featuring the transcript of the FOX interview with Brit Hume and texts of the earlier statements.