Ok, ONE MORE TIME FOR THE REALLY FUCKING DENSE PEOPLE

[Beetwasher]

THE VP SHOT A GUY IN THE FACE W/ A SHOTGUN AND TRIED TO COVER IT UP (and was probably shitfaced).And this wasn't just being grazed. He shot him full on in the face, neck and chest and he might die.

What the fuck is so hard to understand about that being a major fucking story? Yeesh. Say it again, to yourself, with objectivity: THE VP SHOT A GUY IN THE FACE W/ A SHOTGUN AND TRIED TO COVER IT UP (and was probably fucking shitfaced to boot). In the immortal words of South Park "This is some fucked up shit right here". We're in crazy, fucking bizarre, twighlight zone territory.

Big story. Period. People who don't "get it", don't want to "get it", ...Or are full of shit. I mean it's got all the sublety and nuance of, well, a shotgun blast to the face. I mean, seriously, WTF is there to be confused about? What is there that's not to get? :shrug:

[oldtime dfl_er]

1. Agree

It IS a big story, and as usual, the coverup is worse than the crime.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/936290

[orleans]

135. or...

GUNS DON'T ACCIDENTALLY SHOOT A GUY IN THE FACE
AN IDIOT WITH A GUN "ACCIDENTALLY" SHOOTS A GUY IN THE FACE

[Road Scholar]

268. The "Swiss Miss" is the reason for a lot of confusion. imho nt

[thebigidea]

2. but but but its a distraction from stories i'm not posting about anyway!

and we all know that if DU stops talking about it, why, the liberal media will too!

[txindy]

9. LOL! Oh, my, that sounds all too familiar.

Although, to be fair, I think a number of minds were changed about that here after we learned that Harry W. had birdshot in his heart. They bought into the "superficial wounds" story before. No more! I hope.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

44. Oooh ooh one more question! How did he manage to get to the guy's

HEART with a BB gun? That's what I've been scratching my head about all day!

[txindy]

57. He didn't want to shoot his eye out?

But he got lost along the way. :evilgrin:

Face it, it was one BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG honkin' 'BB' gun! Rapid fire, too, poppin' out 300 BBs one right after the other. :rofl:

[Laurab]

117. Lol - saw one like that yesterday

such a distraction...nothing to see here, move on. Sides, shouldn't the viceresident be able to shoot a pal in private and then not report it like normal American's do? I mean, it just shows he's a regular guy and stuff.

I don't know about you but I can multi-task pretty well, I can read about this AND other stuff, too! If they found this important enough to cover up, something is really fucked up about it. Of course, it could just be they're so used to covering EVERYTHING up that they just don't know how to act "normally" anymore, but me, I think there's something fishy going on here.

[leeroysphitz]

291. Yeah, he IS a "regular guy"...

Why, I wouldn't mind having a beer with him. Just so long as the fire arms have been properly secured...

[Catherine Vincent]

3. Word!

It's like a bunch of Alan Simpsons posting here.

[Mnemosyne]

272. Alan Simpson? Or Homer and Jessica? n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Right wit' ya, Beet.

[salvorhardin]

5. I agree with you

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department report is here: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0213061cheney1.html

It was a Perazzi 28 gauge shotgun, not a pellet gun as some people (notably Sean Hannity) have been claiming.

[DemBones DemBones]

21. And as someone said in another thread,

that's a show-off gun, part of the "my toys are better than your toys" mindset.

[rocktivity]

67. This report contains NO EYEWITNESSES

And the theory that Whit and Dick were 30 yards apart. What's their source of their information if they have no eyewitnesses???

:headbang:
rocknation

[leeroysphitz]

292. Their SOURCE? Why the VP himself is the source and

why would he LIE? What would he have to gain? :sarcasm:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

295. are you kidding? That ass said that?

Here, the guy might die, can never have an MRI in the future, and insanitty is making with the jokes?

[NEDem]

6. " it's got all the sublety of, well, a shotgun blast to the face."

love it!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

Yep.

An all-timer.

[LincolnMcGrath]

7. TESTIFY MY BROTHER!

[stepnw1f]

8. You Got It..

This may have even been attempted homicide. Ya thunk this man isn't capable of losing it and pulling a trigger to make a point?! He started a fucking WAR!

[Zangal]

10. and it leads to a Dem win in texas!

Donna Howard, Austin, TX-48 just won concession from her opponent (R)

[Viva_La_Revolution]

96. Zangal!

to DU!

[libhill]

262. Yee Haww -

A Repuke running for office bites the dust -

[mikeytherat]

271. Welcome, Zangal!

Glad you came on in - the water's fine!

mikey_the_rat

[txindy]

313. Against a nasty repub opponent in a gerrymandered repub district, no less.

A great win for a Dem! :toast:

Welcome to Du, Zangal. :patriot:

[MnFats]

11. OK, but how do you really feel?

just being snotty.
this may yet be compared to the June 23, 1972 Nixon tape that ultimately the thing that finished him off.
it IS a big deal; they don't realize it yet because they're accustomed to skating away from everything, even the bodies of 2,400 Americans in Iraq and untold numbers of civilians.

by they way, with apologies to the cast of "Glen Garry etc."
someone should say to Cheney:
"Wbo TOLD you you were FIT to HUNT among MEN?"

[MadMaddie]

I have been saying this all day...

Thanks for saying it again...

It' the cover up people.....

Is it going to have to be on film footage for people to understand the seriousness of the situation.

:shrug:

[beam me up scottie]

12. but but but

it was just a bb gun and a few stray pellets...

[Beetwasher]

26. Oh Shit! That Smiley!!

LOL!

[beam me up scottie]

38. on second thought,

the dweeb downthread deserves it more than I do.

[CrazyOrangeCat]

13. Yep, the Veep ventilated some old guy and he doesn't give a shit . . .

. . . seems big to me. Damn near hugh.

[hexola]

14. What a fucking great post - you are a fucking genius!!!

[liberalhistorian]

15. Even now, a lot of conservatives

can't figure out what the fuss is, it's "not even news", it's "no big deal", and, the worst of all, "it was just scratches, he wasn't even hurt at all." Yeah, sure. It doesn't take much imagination to know what they'd be saying and doing if this were a Dem.

And the fact that Cheney refused to talk to the local authorities until the next day should REALLY piss people off, especially since there's no way to know, because of that delay, whether or not he'd been drinking. Not to mention his usual arrogant I'm-above-the-law-and-accountable-to-no-one attitude.

[LiberalVoice]

16. Nominated

You hit the fucking nail on that one!

[hexola]

20. Fuck Yeah!

[malaise]

266. True it is a very big story

but there are other even bigger stories which are now not being covered because of this. It does make you wonder if the coverup was not deliberate.

[Katherine Brengle]

17. it seemed like a non-story two days ago--now, not so much.

My personal apologies for the No More Cheney Hunting Stories post I made--I am actually in the middle of writing a column about it now, because things have deifnitely heated up.

BTW, Mike Malloy is really getting on this right now--check it out. Air America

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

101. It NEVER seemed like a non-story to me. VP shoots dude. Seriously.

[Katherine Brengle]

168. ok, not a "non-story" then, but it didn't seem as big as it is. it was an

"accident" and didn't seem like a truly big deal (in the political sense anyway). Of course, over time, as more information came up, it certainly has become a huuuuuugh deal.

:shrug:

[Laura PourMeADrink]

18. Hear, Hear, Beetwasher. You get my last heart for that post !

[Beetwasher]

23. Awww!

Thanks darlin'! Happy v-day to you too! :loveya:

[zulchzulu]

19. I talked with John Nichols today and he said...

...Cheney is a gift that just keeps on giving. Too funny!

You have to read his book "Dick".



Did you read about how Repug marketing master Marlin Fitzwater is shocked at the treatment of the story:
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001996613

Excerpt:
""The responsibility for handling this, of course, was Cheney's," Fitzwater, who served as presidential press secretary for George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, told E&P in a phone interview from his Maryland home. "What he should have done was call his press secretary and tell her what happened and she then would have gotten a hold of the doctor and asked him what happened. Then interview Katharine Armstrong to get her side of events and then put out a statement to inform the public. "

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

30. Is that the same author as the Milagro Beanfield War,

or is it just a similar name?

[zulchzulu]

70. Same guy

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author-exact=John%20Nichols&rank=-relevance%2C%2Bavailability%2C-daterank/002-7089368-7364044

He writes for The Nation and lives in Madison...

[Clara T]

22. Um yeah and who were all the members in the hunting party?

Who are all these people and why do they all want to kill small birds in a controlled setting?

Further details are emerging about Cheney's hunting trip. Hunting with Cheney and Whittington at the south Texas ranch of former Republican White House adviser and ambassador to Britain Anne Armstrong, was Pamela Pitzer Willeford, the U.S. ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, Texas GOP activist, and longtime  member of various boards and committees in Texas, including the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, State Preservation Board, Texas Book Fair Committee, and Laura Bush Foundation for America's Libraries Advisory Committee.

Rec'd

[meisje]

24. OHHHhhh! ...I thought he was just peppering him with freedom

[mzmolly]

315. LOL

:rofl:

[driver8]

25. But it was just a little "peppering"... harmless gun play between

two friends. Besides, it was bird shot -- not like it was a real bullet or anything.

Why all the fuss? Can't the Vice President of the United States shoot a guy in the face once in awhile if he feels like it??

:shrug:

[saltpoint]

27. Yeah, ok, but if the Vice President does it, it's not illegal.

--to paraphrase Richard M. Nixon.

[niallmac]

28. Well said and hear felt. You get a heart.

I am waiting for the NOVA special that is going to explain to me just how in the hell he managed to shoot that guy. They did such a terrif job explaining
the single bullet theory:sarcasm:

[Mark5]

29. here comes the un-popular flip side

If you claim "cover-up" you BETTER prove it, if not you are just gonna get clowned and labeled a crazed a tinfoil wearing dem.

Prove the cover up and I am right ther with you bro, until then I think caution and letting them drown in their own BS is the best approach.

[bpilgrim]

31. prove the 22 hour cover-up

i think that fact has already been established

peace

[Mark5]

33. no as much I want this to blow up in their face (no pun lol)

I think that just points as to why we feel there is a cover up not the actual proof of one...

[Beetwasher]

35. Uhh, Bullshit, That Delay Is a DEFACTO Cover Up

Period. It's not in question. The only question is WHAT is being covered up.

The lying about the seriousness of his wounds=cover up. End of story.

[Harper_is_Bush]

41. Who lied about the seriousness of the wounds? n/t

[Beetwasher]

42. Oh Brother

Read the initial reports.

[stop the bleeding]

49. LOL - thanks for the OP Beetwasher it kicks ass -

[Harper_is_Bush]

52. I've read reports, thanks. You're the one making accusations

of cover-ups.

Cover-up of the shooting, which you believe is "self-evident".

And now cover-up of the seriousness of the wounds in the form of lying....which you can't even explain.

Now a mistake = lying in your world? Or can you prove that doctors making initial examinations were lying? Don't pretend that this pellet migrating to the heart was evident at the beginning, because you don't know that.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Harper_is_Bush]

88. No, it's not self-evident

Why is it self-evident? Because there was a delay?

Let's define here:
I only consider something to be a "cover up" if something illegal or unethical is being covered up. Perhaps that's too narrow a definition.
When you are using the term here, are you saying it's self evident that something illegal or unethical was covered up? And if so, what?

[Beetwasher]

90. Umm, THE VP SHOT A GUY IN THE FACE W/ A SHOTGUN

Nahh, nothing possibly illegal or unethical going on there. Why should the delay be anything other than what it appears? :rofl:

Sorry, the WH must have left you off the "official cover up notice" list. Terrible oversight.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

103. Wow this thread is just like honey!

[Harper_is_Bush]

108. If it was an accident, then no...it's not illegal or unethical. I repeat:

From my last post:
I only consider something to be a "cover up" if something illegal or unethical is being covered up. Perhaps that's too narrow a definition.
When you are using the term here, are you saying it's self evident that something illegal or unethical was covered up? And if so, what?

Now, do not misrepresent me please. I have never said it's not POSSIBLE something illegal or unethical happened. I am saying there is no proof at this time.

Your only point is that there was a delay in notifying the press, and that a delay - by definition - is a cover up. If that is it, then I think you can turn the caps off. There's nothing for you to get excited about. Yes...it's a big story. Anytime a VP shoots someone in the face it is a big story.
Deeeeep breaths. :)

[Beetwasher]

118. The Delay Is Unethical

It's really irrelevant what YOU consider a cover up. A cover up is meant, by definition, to cover up something, not necessarily illegal or unethical. Maybe something embarrassing, or impolitic or whatever. Illegal or unethical is irrelevant to the COVER UP. The cover up is what it is, and it is self evident. We don't KNOW WHAT is being covered up because IT'S BEING COVERED UP. :eyes:

Letting the land owner notify the press=cover up. The SS stopping the Sherrif from talking to Cheney immediatley=Cover up (and unethical at the very least). Lying or misrepresenting his condition=cover up. The delay of a whole day before the story broke=cover up.

Now, all the information above is readily available to you. I will not go and do your legwork on go on some wild goosechase providing links when honeslty, I don't think you care. If you don't believe me about the above facts, I really don't care either. Believe what you want, but there is an obvious cover up in progress and it doesn't take a jeenyus to see it.

Now if you persist, I will merely go back to mocking you.

[Harper_is_Bush]

126. Thanks for the first honest response you've given me in this thread

appreciate it.

This portion you need to think about more though:
We don't KNOW WHAT is being covered up because IT'S BEING COVERED UP.
If it was an accident and he wasn't drunk, then you DO know what was covered up...an embarrassing accidental shooting.

Oh, and this part:
Lying or misrepresenting his condition=cover up.
There's no support for that. Sorry.

[Beetwasher]

128. "Lying or misrepresenting his condition=cover up."

Umm, yes there is, read the initial reports and don't ask me to prove it to you because again, I will not go on your wild goose chase. It's there, they totally called it a flesh wound and said it was minor bruising and no big deal. Go look.

[Harper_is_Bush]

133. I saw those reports, but there's no evidence that at the time

the wounds didn't appear to be just flesh wounds/no big deal.

The pellet that migrated and affected the heart was not evident at that time.

So, your accusation of "lying or misrepresenting his condition" is not supported.

There's no point to me retrieving the initial reports to research your claim. I KNOW what the initial reports were. In and of themselves they do not provide evidence for your claim that his condition was lied about or misrepresented.

[Beetwasher]

137. LOL!

Right. Whatever you say. Seriously, do you really believe that bullshit? :eyes:

[Harper_is_Bush]

145. So again, it's just all based on what you believe.

No evidence.

I'm not really interested in what you personally believe when you're making factual claims.

For factual claims about "lying" and "misrepresentations" there's a little more required than simply your own belief.

There's no evidence that his condition was lied about or misrepresented, and you've as much as admitted it by indicating it's based only on your belief.

[Name removed]

288. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[crikkett]

301. show me how

a pellet migrates to damage a heart, which is just bizarre unless the "migration" has something to do with the force behind the bullet as it impacted and entered Wittington's body.

Seriously, the body doesn't push foreign objects into the skin, but out of it. Think 'splinters' (another type of flesh wound).

[WinkyDink]

176. "illegal or unethical"? How about: OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE,

by preventing the cops from coming onto the grounds?
How about after-the-fact getting a LICENSE?
How about misleading the public about the type of PROJECTILE?
How about BLAMING THE VICTIM??

[Harper_is_Bush]

179. "preventing the cops from coming onto the grounds"

Do you have a link to that? I can't find anything that supports that.

Thanks.

[beam me up scottie]

182. Right, the cops were making it up, obviously.

And NOBODY would have seen them at the gate, considering they were sitting on a potentially lethal scandal and the vice president was at the ranch, I'm sure NOBODY would have been watching at all.

Yep, those SS guys are real slackers.

[Harper_is_Bush]

186. I honestly said I have not seen that and asked the poster for a link.

So, all of your sarcasm is interesting, but misplaced.

[Name removed]

188. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

193. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

318. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nashville_brook]

312. what part of 'not telling anyone for 24 hours' don't you get? :)

ipso facto -- coverup.

don't mean that to sound mean -- but, the 'cover-up' angle is well-established.

[Beetwasher]

32. Heh? WTF Are You Talking About?

The cover up is already self evident. Or haven't you been paying attention?

The cover up is not in question. The only thing in question is WHAT'S being covered up. The delay=cover up. The initial minimization of his wounds=cover up. Only an idiot would suggest otherwise. It's self evident, it's not even up for discussion.

[Mark5]

43. IMHO its a mistake to think like that

we have a hard time convincing CWB is a peice of shit president to peolpe outside of DU. I appreciate your conviction, but a delay hardly equates to proof of a cover up for those outside of DU.

You dont have to convince me. I know they are full of it. Cheney was drunk off his ass thus the delay,and lies about the injuries, but again I also didnt buy the Weapons of Mass ditraction BS, but lots of people did.

thats why I am so hesitant to claim "cover up" nutil there is undesputable evidence of one, not just a delay...

[Beetwasher]

46. Heh

Obviously you have different standards for indisputable. I could care less about "those outside of DU" whoever "those" people may be.

I guarantee you the cover up is self evident to most people already, except you, of course. :eyes:

[havocmom]

110. Who is "CWB"?

:shrug:

[Misunderestimator]

311. I they haven't explained WHY there was a delay, then they are COVERING UP.

Pretty damn obvious.

[Harper_is_Bush]

47. Sorry, there is no "self-evident" cover up.

The delay does not equal a cover-up.

The delay was explained.....respect for the ranch owner I believe was one of the explanations...allow her to announce it. Whether you or I or anyone else thinks that explanation is legit is irrelavent, it is an explanation which you can't disprove and which negates your claims of a cover-up.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Harper_is_Bush]

62. All you can do is insult and resort to cheap sarcasm.

Your whole thing boils down to only this:

delay = cover up

Perhaps I can nail you down on something:
Just because an announcement was delayed does not mean something illegal or unethical was being covered up.
Agree or disagree?

[Beetwasher]

65. Delay IS ILLEGAL AND UNETHICAL

End of story. Any delay is already unethical and IS a cover up. Not speaking to the Sherrif until the next day is unethical and is a cover up.

I find it amusing that you pretend not to understand that very simple concept.

[Harper_is_Bush]

69. Oh, so now the delay itself is illegal and unethical.

I assume by that answer that you agree that just because there's a delay it doesn't mean something illegal or unethical is being covered up.

Now...you claim that the delay ITSELF is illegal and unethical.

You are apparently talking about the delay in talking to the Sherrif. As a matter of fact, the incident was reported that night about an hour after it happened, and the Sherrif scheduled an interview for the next day.

I find it amusing that you don't even know the facts here. Given your passion over the subject, I would have thought you'd know everything there is to know.

[Beetwasher]

76. LOL!

Umm, Chester, you're the one making posts about not being aware of crucial information regarding the story, like they left it to the ranch owner to release the story.

Delaying talking to the Sherrif is UNETHICAL and IS a cover up. It's really fucking simple.

[Harper_is_Bush]

80. HAHAHA!

I have no idea what you're talking about regarding me "making posts about not being aware of crucial information regarding the story". That doesn't even make sense.

There is no evidence that there was a delay in talking to the Sherrif. So, it's not "really fucking simple" in that regard.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Harper_is_Bush]

85. Put asside your schoolyard antics for one moment then...

and respond to it yourself then.

Have you seen any information that supports the accusation that the landowner (Armstrong) told authorities that it was up to her to report the news?

Should I expect an answer?

[Beetwasher]

87. "I have not seen that information. n/t"

:rofl:

Umm, in the offical WH response in the initial press conference they claimed they left it up to the landowner to notify the press. I suggest you read it, it was a big deal.

[Harper_is_Bush]

99. sigh. Let's try this one more time.

The other poster - Johnny - said:
" I should tell the authorities it is up to me to report it when I am damn good and ready? Is that my right as a land owner?"

To which I said "I have not seen that information."

Which you think is sooo funny. Yet your response to me (which finally came, thankyou) which is supposedly explaining why you think it's so funny is as follows:
"in the offical WH response in the initial press conference they claimed they left it up to the landowner to notify the press"

That is not information which supports Johnny's claim that the landowner told the authorities that it's up to her to report it when she's ready.

So, you can keep posting the quote "I have not seen that information. n/t" accompanied by your smilie, or you can realize sooner than later how silly you're looking and give a reasoned response that attempts to address what I've said in good faith. Up to you.

[Beetwasher]

102. It's Funny As Hell How You Keep Trying To Claim There's No Cover Up

Man, that's some funny shit!

"I have not seen that information. n/t"

[Harper_is_Bush]

111. well, I guess it's hopeless

You will not debate in good faith.

When your mistakes are pointed out, you revert to the schoolyard. That's some funny shit!

[Beetwasher]

121. Yes, You May In Fact Be Hopeless

If you really do not see evidence of a cover up.

[Harper_is_Bush]

129. No..if we define a delay as a cover up then I see it...

It's like if I choose not to tell someone some bad news until I see them in person because it's better that way...I'm engaging in a "cover up". Same thing, in the sense that you're using it.

In that analogy I delayed the news, therefore it was a cover up.

[Beetwasher]

134. Umm, No, This Is Not The Same Thing

That is a very flawed analogy and if you don't see it that's your lack.

A guy was shot in the face w/ a shotgun.

[Harper_is_Bush]

147. The analogy works fine. You did not explain how it's flawed.

If the shooting was accidental then the delay is only that, a delay. No different than me delaying some bad news from someone for whatever reason.

[Beetwasher]

290. Bwaahahahaha!!!

Yeah, and the 18 minute gap in the Nixon tapes was a clerical error. :eyes:

So pathetic.

[The Wielding Truth]

322. Dear Harper, wake up! THESE GUYS WORK FOR US . THEY OWE

US FULL DISCLOSURE. REMEMBER THE POOR GUY WHO HAD nOT REALLY SEX WHILE IN OFFICE? He didn't come close to killing her.YOU WANT TWISTED LOGIC LET YOUR MIND HEAD THAT WAY.Really they have passed the point of 75/25 their way.Listen then weigh the scale. It has tipped against them long ago.

[greyl]

199. You are sounding like a woo woo. nt

[Beetwasher]

310. Heh?

Because it's so inconceivably impossible that these guys would cover up something about the VP shooting a guy in the face? And because the "innocent" explanations for all the inconsistencies make so much sense? Uhh, yeah, whatever :eyes:

[greyl]

316. No, Chester.

Because of your attitude.
Unfortunately for me, this was one of the first threads about the shooting that I read.
Halfway through it, I was seriously in doubt if you had any evidence to back up your blustering.
You used many classic woo woo comebacks and non-arguments, and it was fucking frustrating as hell.
You weren't exactly presenting a sober and reasoned argument, you were just attacking everyone who didn't have your magical insight.
So, as I'm reading your thread, your insults were applying to me, and I wanted to clue you in that your attitude was detrimental to your cause.

[Beetwasher]

319. LOL!

Uh huh.

Yup, I have an attitude. So what? Clueless idiots who claim there is no cover up, or there is no evidence of a cover up deserve mockery. Do your own homework. If you come away thinking there's no cover up, that's your problem. I won't spoon feed or coddle trolls and lazy ignoramuses.

[dweller]

95. methinks they are approaching the

'depends on your definition of delay' moment.

dp

[whopis01]

281. WTF does that have to do with anything?

You really should try to stick to the topic here. I am sure that everyone agrees that Tom Delay is illegal and unethical, but that does not mean that he has anything to do with the cover up here!

[WinkyDink]

185. Tell me: Do you think Vince Foster was murdered?

Just curious.

But here's one about this case:
Why do YOU think there was a delay in both telling the public AND ALSO IN TELLING BUSH??
Why do YOU think the Amb. to Switzerland was there, instead of in Switzerland?
Why do YOU think Lynne was NOT there?
Why do YOU think no official statement from the Executive Branch has made clear what happened, with what device, what the time-line was, who contacted whom---including medical personnel---about the event, and who was in attendance?

[johnnie]

60. So if someone is shot on my property

I should tell the authorities it is up to me to report it when I am damn good and ready? Is that my right as a land owner?

[Harper_is_Bush]

66. I have not seen that information. n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

36. What's there to prove?

Why the delay? Why contact ONLY a local newspaper and not the WH press office? What possible other reason besides cover up can there be?

[beam me up scottie]

45. Contacting one newspaper

is just like when they informed only a few senators about the unwarranted spying.

They did it so that they can claim they weren't trying to cover anything up.

"See? We didn't hide anything! We told somebody!"

[LibDemAlways]

73. They probably figured that the local

newspaper might not even print the story out of deference to Cheney, but they had to tell somebody or face charges of a cover-up if it ever came to light.

This pitiful attempt at damage control and spin is beyond transparent. Cheney has finally taken his own advice and royally fucked himself.

[beam me up scottie]

77. Exactly-just like they contacted the sheriff but were unavailable

to be interviewed until the following morning.

I hope that this finally gets through to the sheep.

[CrazyOrangeCat]

37. Welcome to DU!

[johnnie]

51. Fact - dick shot someone

Fact - He shot him at 5:30 P.M. victim admitted to the hospital at 8 something P.M.
Fact - Tiny birdshot "peppered" through hunting jacket, through chest and lodged in heart causing a heart attack
Fact - No police report of shooting until 2-13-06, two days later.
Fact - bush knew on Sat. but we were told he didn't.

Need I go on?

The friggin' vice president of the United States fucking shot someone! Ask yourself this, if someone you knew was shot, would you want this to be handled the way it is?

[Harper_is_Bush]

116. Actually, the Sherrif was phoned less than 1.5 hours after the shooting.

fact!

[johnnie]

267. I have not seen that information.

Still, 1 and a half hour?

[whopis01]

285. Get your facts straight

The shooting happened at 6:30, not 5:30 and an ambulance took him to the hospital at 7:20.

I'm not disagreeing with your point, merely pointing out that arguments should be made without distorting facts. And as far as your question goes, I would really only be concerned with making sure they got the proper medical treatment. Telling the press isn't going to effect the victim's medical condition one way or another. Taking care of the victim is the most important thing to do.

[endarkenment]

277. Why do we have to prove it?

What is it with us that we still don't get it? We are in a street fight, down and dirty, no rules. Well at least the other side is in a street fight, down and dirty, no rules. We keep thinking that there are rules of proper conduct. They keep kicking us in the balls and we keep trying to box them by the rules.

Do the swiftboaters have any proof? Did Dan get Rathered by solid evidence? Did Al Gore claim to have invented the internet?

We should be raising every reasonable theory to explain the 22 hour delay - and make them prove they aren't true. Make them prove that Cheney wasn't drunk.

We should be pointing out ad nauseum that Cheny and his victim were two rich old farts on a weekend binge with a couple of much younger women not their wives at every opportunity. Fuck proving it. Kick them in the balls.

Corrupt incompetent arrogant assholes who think they can get away with murder. Kind of resonates, doesn't it?

[Harper_is_Bush]

34. He didn't try to "cover it up". He witheld the information for a day

that's not a coverup. Stupid move, not a coverup. A coverup would be an attempt to hide the fact completely and permanently.

Yes, he shot someone. Yes, it's a big story.

I think what might be starting to grate on people here is the sheer number of threads on the subject, and the sheer number of unsubstantiated speculation like "he tried to cover it up" and "was probably drunk" and other such tripe.

[Beetwasher]

39. Delay=Cover Up, Lying About Injuries=Cover Up

End of story. Who said the were trying to cover up the shooting itself? They are covering up the actual circumstances, that's obvious.

[Hissyspit]

48. Holding investigation for enough time to sober up ?

Cover up the fact that he was drunk, maybe? Sounds like a cover-up to me.

[Harper_is_Bush]

58. It's possible, but there's no proof. A delay does not equal cover up. nt

[Mark5]

61. Exactly, and wild claims and speculations only helps

to make the accusor, (without the evidence to back up the claim), like a lunatic.

[thebigidea]

74. nobody has to claim anything. Cheney has questions to answer.

He shot a man in the face and handled it very poorly. He should be on the defensive, not us.

"Make the son of a bitch deny it."
- LBJ

[Beetwasher]

63. "He didn't try to "cover it up". He witheld the information for a day"

:rofl:

Do you realize how stupid that is?

[Harper_is_Bush]

72. No, how stupid is it?

You're the perfect person to judge, certainly.

You must have a nice stock of tin foil hats. Tell me, what's your take on 9/11? US Government plot, ya think?

[Beetwasher]

78. I Think You're Not Very Convincing

n/t

[Harper_is_Bush]

83. Well, that's Ok. I can at least sleep well knowing

I made some logical points.

All you did was scream "COVER UP!!! HEY ALL YOU FUCKING IDIOTS...WHY CAN'T YOU SEE IT WAS A COVER UP!!"

Anytime anyone chooses to delay any announcement of any kind for any reason, that's a cover up..in your view. So, who cares?
It's only interesting if there was something illegal or unethical being covered up, and you don't have a scrap in that regard.

[Beetwasher]

84. Illegal or Unethical, You Mean Like Shooting A Guy In The Face W/ A

Shotgun? :rofl:

[Mark5]

89. thats called an accident

[Beetwasher]

93. Really?

How do you know? Because the WH told you? Yes, I understand how thoroughly it was investigated. :eyes:

[Mark5]

113. wait, so then

this is not my usual line of arguing, but let me try to get this straight, are you then implying that the VP actually shot this guy on purpose?

[Beetwasher]

123. I Have No Fucking Clue What Happened. Do You? Were You There?

Are you psychic?

[Mark5]

127. Thank you!!!

so dont go making wild acusations based on specualtion.

and next time I(or anyone) asks you a question like that try not to fall for it, you just proved my point.

get off the cover thing, you sound like a loon.

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mark5]

136. look relax

We are democrats here, but if you go to repubs or an independent with crazy shit like that you'll get burned...like you did here.

you admit you dont know what happened then claim cover up, cmon, that just...mindnumbming

[Beetwasher]

141. You Would Know About Mindnumbing

That's for sure. "We are democrats here..." Uh huh, sure "we" are. :eyes:

Dude, do you know how fucking idiotic you look claiming there's no cover up?

[Mark5]

146. Another point to debating

is paying attention..


"Dude, do you know how fucking idiotic you look claiming there's no cover up?"

well look at what I wrote here....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=423637&mesg_id=423899


geez

[Beetwasher]

289. LOL! Chester, You Need to Brush Up On Your Infilatration Skills

You're not fooling anyone.

[beam me up scottie]

132. Sorry, junior, but the vast majority aren't the ones who sound like loons.

[Mark5]

149. you are mis interpreting my posts...

[beam me up scottie]

155. No, I don't think I am.

Since the freepers think there was a cover up as well.

What is your intention, exactly?

[Mark5]

184. If I tell that you are infact

mis interpreting my posts and point out why/how, and you refuse to believe me, then I am sorry there is nothing further to discuss.You are just here to pcik a fight, that no fun.

[Name removed]

190. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beam me up scottie]

203. "pcik a fight, that no fun"

Can you try to post something a little more coherent?

[Harper_is_Bush]

114. So you think it wasn't an accident?

:tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat:

[Beetwasher]

122. How The Fuck Should I Know What Happened?

Are YOU saying you know what happened? Maybe I should call you Sylvia Brown. :eyes:

[beam me up scottie]

130. Doctor claims: "more than 5 but "probably less than 150 to 200" pellets"

Dr. David Blanchard, the emergency room chief, estimated that Mr. Whittington had more than 5 but "probably less than 150 to 200" pellets lodged in his body.

Quite a spread there.

No, he's not trying to hide anything, is he?:eyes:

[Harper_is_Bush]

162. Well then don't say it's illegal/unethical for him to have shot that guy!

Because doing so explicitly implies it was done on purpose!!

And as you say, how the fuck do you know what happened??

[beam me up scottie]

167. Shooting a guy in the face IS legal and ethical?

Damn, spanky.
That's a little harsh, even for freepers.

[Harper_is_Bush]

173. Yes of course, if it's an accident.

And do be careful with your vieled accusations. I realize you're "SEARCH BOY!"..defender of the castle and all that, but do keep yourself within boundaries lad.

[beam me up scottie]

177. Are you fucking SERIOUS? Shooting someone in the face is ethical?

Keep digging~

[Harper_is_Bush]

183. Yes, quite serious.

There's no need for you to get excited and play your smilie games.

It is not unethical to ACCIDENTALLY (you left that out, strangely) shoot someone.

What makes you say an accidental shooting would be unethical?

[beam me up scottie]

187. I consider using a deadly weapon carelessly to be extremely unethical.

But, hey, that's just me.


YMMV

[Harper_is_Bush]

191. I don't believe carelessness = unethical.

But hey, that's just the dictionary.

Think about the word "ethics". It is related to "morals".
If someone is careless, it's not a matter of ethics.

The underlying implication by many speculating is that Cheney had been drinking. Obviously that would be unethical and illegal.
If he was not drinking and it was an honest accident then that's not "unethical" or "illegal".

[kestrel91316]

201. Carelessness with a gun most certainly displays a basic lack of

concern for the welfare of one's fellow hunters, and if that isn't unethical then I don't know what the hell is.

Cheney doesn't care about anyone other than himself. How very Republican of him.

[beam me up scottie]

202. I'm fucking glad neither you or Cheney will be handling firearms

anywhere near me.

When I was in the suck, it was my moral duty NOT to fucking ignore the rules and shoot my mates.

I would be prosecuted for it, as a matter of fact.

Just because you don't believe Cheney had a moral obligation to keep his friends safe doesn't mean the rest of us feel that way.

[Beetwasher]

296. Only To You Does It Imply That

And only in woo woo land is shooting someone in the face ethical, intentional or not. For all you know, he DID do it on purpose. We'll probably never know.

[beam me up scottie]

105. Thread envy.

That's what this is about.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=422576&mesg_id=423348

How sad.

[Name removed]

115. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beam me up scottie]

119. Oooo, struck a nerve there, didn't I?

Good thing I wasn't using a SHOTGUN

[Harper_is_Bush]

139. Oh yeah. You really cut me to the bone!

:eyes:

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mark5]

138. yeah seriously

I am out....

[beam me up scottie]

144. Aw, stick around and call us more names!

We love it!

[Mark5]

148. PLEASE READ

what I am saying I am not calling you guys names!for fuks sake I am democrat...lol..I have never had to try to convince anyone of that...

I am saying that if Beet goes outside of DU with that line of thinking he will be ridiculed as a loon.

[beam me up scottie]

151. Right. Like the freepers I work with who agree with us loons?

Funny how they could grasp the concept that continues to elude you.

[thebigidea]

153. then why is every other post filled with these desperate claims...

... of being a Democrat? I mean, why would you even feel the need to defend that? You're on DU, the presumption is that you're a progressive of some stripe. Nobody else has to keep mentioning that they are Democrats.

"I am saying that if Beet goes outside of DU with that line of thinking he will be ridiculed as a loon."

Bullshit. Everybody is laughing hysterically about Dick Cheney.

[Mark5]

157. yes...

so dont do anything to take the attetion away from that...let keep everyone laughing at him.

and I keep claiming that I am infact a democrat because I cannot understand why you are on my ass like I am the enemy.lol

[beam me up scottie]

159. We tend to ride people who insist we're loons.

We're funny that way.

[thebigidea]

166. "im foolhearted democrat....IHMO...."

and lets face it, its damn fun. Its just, how shall I put it...
"independet non fanitically driven common sense...."

[beam me up scottie]

171. Home home on the range!

Where the loons and fanitically independet play...

[Mark5]

189. one other thing :)

My stance/point is that making wild accusations of "cover ups" with out factual evidence will brand, anyone ,me, you ANYONE a loon.

If you got no way of defending your stance other than point out typos, then all I can say is your argument is easily refuted with the spell checker :p

[thebigidea]

195. we're not the story here. Cheney is. THEY are on the defensive.

And we have to keep them there, not have some bullshit Shrumian soul-searching about it hurting us somehow. You don't have to make "wild accusations," you just have to demand an elected official account for himself. Where is he? What is he hiding? Was he drinking? Why didn't he talk to the police ASAP? Why the delay?

Those are questions, not wild accusations. And since we pay his salary (or at least the portion of it that Halliburton doesn't) he should have some answers for them.

[beam me up scottie]

196. FYI, insults are more effective when you use spell check.

And your use of the word "loon" is what got you in trouble to begin with.

Once you insult someone, you have no right to insist we pay attention to your argument.

Your denigration of the op proved you had none.

[Mark5]

207. Seriously you either missed previous posts

or you are willingly avoiding. You wanna hold on to this argument that I called all DU "loons" go ahead but I am one link away from posting a link that will prove you wrong.

So get off that already. if disagree with what I am saying thats cool, its great in fact, maybe I can learn something but mis-interpreting my posts and ridiculing my typos does nothing for your argument.

[beam me up scottie]

209. You used the word "loon". How am I misinterpreting that?

And use spell check, for christs sake, it only takes a second.

This is an internet forum, people speed read here, typos are disruptive and aggravating.

Not to mention how silly they look when you're trying to get a good snark on.

[Mark5]

214. spell check loads too slow in this machine

for some reason...

and anyways get off that shit lol you guys got the point...

let me get the link ..hold up

edit here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=423637&mesg_id=424038

maybe next time dont speed read so fast, then my typos wont be so aggravating and you wouldn't miss out on important info regarding the thread...

[beam me up scottie]

217. Nice.More spelling and grammatical errors. And you used the word "lunatic"

I read that post earlier and you had no argument then, just as you have no argument now.

[Mark5]

219. ok this is snarking.....

whatever floats your boat...lol

If I wanted silly snarking or whatever I would have gone to a gaming forum...

so yeah.....umm that was lame guy...

go rent a movie or someshait next time :)

[beam me up scottie]

221. No, I quite enjoy this, maybe you shouldn't take it so seriously.

After all, you argued from ignorance, what did you expect?

[Mark5]

223. lol , taking it seriously?

hmmmm....(projection) excuse me but I was no the one getting my post deleted by mods. I think in your attempt to have some fun you lost your cool...I would be careful with that.. :p

no hard feelings bro/girl...

[beam me up scottie]

225. Nope, I never posted anything like this:

geez already....

Edited on Tue Feb-14-06 10:50 PM by Mark5
get off my ass with this shait ..eveyone is posting about and replying about it...some including me think its taking away attention from much more important issue, not only here , but mainly in the media...I made one post about it and a joke

dont take this personally, I aint the enemy my opinion just happens to differ from yours.

so please just get off my nuts :p

******************

Look at what you are doing...

Edited on Tue Feb-14-06 11:12 PM by Mark5
what the fuck are you trying to prove?

That i posted alot of "replies" in the one thread I started. I am sorrynext time I'll make sure to ask for permission from you to reply questions addressed to me. LOL

yes I am fully aware of the "search" feature...."gee whiz this new internet thing is really cool" cmon...

I mean...lol seriously... if I start a thread about something else will that make your day? Actually "Mr.Search feature guy" I am not here that often I was here a week ago or so and I discussed the sheehan thing, amongst other issues....seriously this is absurd.

border line childish...

************************

OH MY GAWD

you really dont READ...I FUCKING AGREE WITH HIM. I AGREED LONG AGO they are covering shit up.

but to make empty accusation based on speculation is foolhearted at best!

lol

****************

whatever man/woman

whatever i dont really care, you aint even arguing the issue you are arguing about me and my motives....get real..

****************
PLEASE READ

what I am saying I am not calling you guys names!for fuks sake I am democrat...lol..I have never had to try to convince anyone of that...

I am saying that if Beet goes outside of DU with that line of thinking he will be ridiculed as a loon

**********

yes...

so dont do anything to take the attetion away from that...let keep everyone laughing at him.

and I keep claiming that I am infact a democrat because I cannot understand why you are on my ass like I am the enemy.lol

**********

wow

************

its hardly talent, its just

independet non fanitically driven common sense....

oh well I amreally outta here now....

harper for what its worth is nice to see other free thinking Democrats.

latez

************

not to me, but the democratic movement....

Edited on Tue Feb-14-06 10:58 PM by Mark5
"and what the fuck does a message board have to do with that?" well since you brought up my ONE post about it, I figured I should re-state it had to do with both this msg board and the media.

Every other post here today seems to be about this, yet you come down on me for posting about it and complaining how there are more pressing issues we should be pushing forth ,again (not just here but in the media-from my original 1 post you brought up)....I am sorry I am not sure what I ever did to you but this "mark5 witchhunt" you seem to be on is quite absurd.

You are barking up the wrong tree bud.

**************

[Mark5]

230. LMAO !!!!!

I just got the mental picture of you going through all that truoble gathering my posts, copying and pasting them back and forth...ROTFL


sitting there late at night, frantically ctrl-cing ctrl-ving..haha

oh man thanx

[thebigidea]

233. not nearly as hilarious as the mental picture of who typed them.

Its a lot easier to hit control-C and control-V a few times than to somehow come up with the above stream of gibberish.

[beam me up scottie]

235. I'm no fun, you know.

I'm crushed.

[Mark5]

246. well if it makes you feel better

now you are :)

[Mark5]

236. LOL u guys the same acc?

LOL, or just as un-original?

its cool...relax guys

LMAO!

[beam me up scottie]

238. You keep saying relax like you think we're upset.

Are cats upset when they're amusing themselves with their soon-to-be dinner?

[Mark5]

241. uuuhhhh....

"have you for dinner" ok this is called the intraweb togh guy act...seen it before ....its funny too...

[thebigidea]

240. I'm you as well, actually. I'm having a conversation with myself.

[Mark5]

244. hmmmm...

old, played out...

[thebigidea]

252. didn't you say good night like 3 or 4 times?

[Mark5]

256. oh what you want me to go now?

I thought you wanted to play?

LOL! cmon you guys can and have fun but I cant....hmmm weak, weak...

[beam me up scottie]

247. Wasn't he worried about this being a distraction?

Why would someone spend hours kicking a thread that they thought would make us look like loons?

It makes no sense.

[Mark5]

251. well now you were the one who admited to "snarking"

not I, and if you havent noticed I havent even mentioned anything about that....so we are not talking about that...

that was a good change of pace, but however pretty irrelevant and lacking in humor, besides, you are reaching for content, which can also be bad...

[beam me up scottie]

254. Nope, I was rereading your original objections and opining on the

wisdom of spending an entire evening telling people that this thread is a distraction.

[beam me up scottie]

234. I use Opera, it's no trouble at all.

The spell check, dictionary and thesaurus are awesome too.

[Mark5]

239. damn these are some of the weakest bags

I should probably let you kow I played hockey for real for a few yrs.... the shait talking on the ice makes one pretty immune to shait talking, specially when its this bad, and on the "intraweb"...

but keep it up their weakness makes them funny, its like amateur night up in here....

[beam me up scottie]

242. You seem to lose coherence when you get agitated.

Maybe you should take some deep breaths and get some perspective.

[Mark5]

243. so this is it...

now you must prove I was /I am upset and therefore lose coherence?

what happend to the jokes? werent working? told ya they were lame as hell...

but honestly I was lauging, maybe not at them but laughing non the less...

[beam me up scottie]

245. See? You're doing it again: "I was lauging" "what happend" "non the less"

I know another guy on here who does the same thing.

He usually takes his medication before it gets too bad, though.

[Mark5]

249. dude thats old

jokes have a time and place....

just lay off insults I wouldwant you to get another post deleted in frustration.

hehe.....

[beam me up scottie]

250. I'm simply reposting your words.

It's not a joke.

I only use my English Language badge when someone's trying to insult me.

[Mark5]

253. ok see now you are taking seriously ,again.

clearly evident by you explaining yourself to me.

[beam me up scottie]

255. It's tragic that I should have to explain anything to you.

Like how odd it is that you're still here after claiming you were leaving several times.

[Mark5]

257. uuhhh more pseudo personal attacks

..the problem with that tactic is that you fail to notice that you are ALSO here, and have infact pseudo insulted yourself...thats pretty lame..

but seriously no more bad jokes?

[beam me up scottie]

258. I never claimed this was a distraction or inferred the op was a lunatic.

You did.

Why are you here?

[Mark5]

259. dude you already tried that "loon" angle

why are you here?

[beam me up scottie]

261. I'm basking in the afterglow and admiring the view from the greatest page.

It's nice in here.

Way to go, Beet!

[Mark5]

263. fair enough...

I am here waiting for an animation to render.

and having a little fun with you, no hard feelings, eh?

but man some of those bags were to good to pass up...

[beam me up scottie]

264. No sweat. I've got a report to finish

before I head off to work.

The freepers will be blabbering about this all day again, it should be fun.

Especially since I don't even have to be the one to bring it up, the redneck dj's are doing a number on old Darth Cheney for a change.

[Mark5]

265. well good luck with that

btw whats a "freeper"

[Flubadubya]

270. Oh for pity's sake...

Someone please educate this "innocent" about freepers. :rofl:

[Beetwasher]

294. Hey, Jeenyus

"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. Whittington was hospitalized Saturday night in Corpus Christi, Tex., and was moved back into the intensive-care unit after suffering an abnormal heart rhythm yesterday morning."

--snip--

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/14/AR2006021402137.html

Now, why would anyone ever get the idea that there was a cover up. That's just whacky! :rofl:

[Beetwasher]

303. LOL!

I knew my back would be covered when I went to bed!

Love ya BMUS!!

[Beetwasher]

299. Hey Jeenyus!

"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. Whittington was hospitalized Saturday night in Corpus Christi, Tex., and was moved back into the intensive-care unit after suffering an abnormal heart rhythm yesterday morning."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/14/AR2006021402137.html

Now, why would anyone except a loon think there might be a cover up? :rofl:

P A T H E T I C.

[Harper_is_Bush]

154. Your talents are wasted here. Go now, take your search skills

outside. The world needs you!

[beam me up scottie]

158. Listen! Your long lost sunken thread is crying out for its mommy!

Awwwwwwwwwww, we're too late

[Mark5]

160. wow

[beam me up scottie]

163. Oh, that's nothing.

You should see me when I'm angry.

[Harper_is_Bush]

170. Don't worry yourself, I'll post it again!

:toast:

You have put a perma-smile on my face with your funny little investigation!

It's good to see youngsters being politically active.

[beam me up scottie]

172. Oh, please do.

Just don't try to sabotage such a popular thread next time nobody reads it.

That didn't work very well, did it?

[Mark5]

164. its hardly talent, its just

independet non fanitically driven common sense....

oh well I amreally outta here now....

harper for what its worth is nice to see other free thinking Democrats.

latez

[beam me up scottie]

174. "independet non fanitically driven common sense.."

Wut duz thaat meen?

us not freee thinquing Democratts need helpe undrstanding ewe

[Mark5]

194. I ll say the same thing to you I said to "beam me up"

It seems that I have defeated your argument into such nothingness, that the only thing you have left is ridiculing my typos. You cannot refute my stance or argue the issue. All you have left are typos. Thats like un-writting no-no of intraweb, yes intraweb debating.

Thats sad cause following that logic, then the simple use of a spell checker will defeat your arguments.:(

g'night, and plase dont stray from the DU.Its safe here. ;)

[thebigidea]

197. the problem is, YOU don't have an argument. Just typos.

Whenever somehow presents an argument to you that you can't answer, you go off on some insane tangent riddled with typos.

plase? I mean, how can you even click "post message" on such crap? There's a big, comfortable spellcheck button right next to it. If you can't communicate properly, use it. Why do you want people to nitpick your mistakes? Don't give them the ammo, use English. A message from the Council for Better Bitching.

[Mark5]

205. fair enough, I didnt know typos bothered you so much :p

I will give you the benefit of the doubt, maybe due to my typos you could not comprehend it, so this is it.

breet WILL get chewed up making gross accusations of cover-ups based on his speculation(mind you like I ve stated before speculation I agree with), and will be portrayed/ridiculed as a loon. Somehitng he can avoid.

thats all I've said.

no hard feelings no ill intent, dont be so quick to flame next time.

[beam me up scottie]

206. I am 'beam me up', genius.

Is this your first internet forum?

[Mark5]

211. no just the first one with this format

so its not only typos but also uncorrectly hit mouse clicks....ok

and really you need to calm down with the pseudo insults...

I am starting to think you are just trolling/baiting as its known in other forums.

[beam me up scottie]

212. No, I'm giving you pointers on how to snark successfully.

You should be glad I'm not charging you.

[Mark5]

213. whats snarking?

The art of arguing non-point, losing your cool and getting your posts deleted due to insults?

ok that was low, whats snarking?

[beam me up scottie]

215. Hmm, I believe you were the one who cried "OH MY GAWD"

You were in shock that people were offended by your portrayal of us as "loons", I'm sure.

You have no argument, you never did.

You were informed that even the Freepers were talking about the cover up, yet you still tried to malign the op and others who think this is a big deal.

[Mark5]

216. there is only 1 right answer

You are snarking whatever the hell that is lol....

or you just cant read, cause damn man I ve been spell checking my shait...:P

In other forums its calling trolling, and this ain't knock a you but a troll should never lose their cool and get their trolls edited by mods....and btw before you get all insulted Troll is not a insult, it comes from trolling for fish

[beam me up scottie]

218. Sorry, accusing others of trolling is against the rules.

I guess you didn't read them.

[Mark5]

220. oh my bad...

but seriously I hear there are these really cool dating/chat sites you ought to check them out...

[beam me up scottie]

222. Ah! You frequent dating and chat sites.

That explains a lot, those kinds of places don't expect you to post whole sentences or spell correctly.

It's a little different here, in case you haven't noticed.

[Mark5]

224. weak!

when you try to bag on someone try to use diffrent subject line, for instance if I make fun of your mom, you ought to try making fun of my car..its like an un written rule

comebacks based on the subject lack originality and punch...

maybe if you had said
you:"damn does your mom know?"
me: "know what?"
you: "that you cant type"

now that, would have been funny...

anyways...

[beam me up scottie]

226. No really, your posts do seem to be of the type found on such sites.

Poor spelling, lack of punctuation, no complete sentences, grammatical errors...all indicative of someone who is not used to posting in forums.

Except for freeperville, I should add.
Their posts are nothing like the ones found on DU either.

[mtnsnake]

283. I couldn't agree more

haha, good stuff, Mark. Welcome!

:toast:

[havocmom]

124. Sticking one's fingers in one's ears, chanting LA LA LA LA

then saying one heard nothing is NOT making logical points. It's more like chasing one's own tail and saying "I got him, I got him!"

Prick Cheney shot a guy, probably up closer than they are saying, then delayed getting him to a hospital, then had his SS detail turn away law enforcement officers until it was more convenient for the trigger man...

THEN all the BS about 'peppered' and trying to blow off the injuries as insignificant.

Looks like cover up to these old eyes. Lord knows I have seen enough of them... oddly, most of them when the GOP is in power

[rocktivity]

97. It's called a "Lizzie Lam," Hissyspit

After heiress/publicist Lizzie Grubman, who hit 15 people with her car at a nightclub, and was found at an ex-boyfriend's house (along with her lawyer) two hours later--too late for a breath test. She was convicted only of assault and leaving the scene of an accident, and served only 37 days.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Hissyspit]

180. Yes, I remember. "Cover Up" or not, technically, is really just semantics

Something stinks to HIGH heaven here!

(I only just now found your response to my post buried in all this other stuff! :7 )

[tyedyeto]

92. Not allowing the local law enforcement to interview the...

'suspect' and 'witnesses' is a cover-up.

The local sherrif's department was not allowed to speak with anyone involved in this incident. To me, that smells.

[Harper_is_Bush]

178. I have read several reports and seen several timelines. Can you

give me something that supports what you've said?

Thanks!

[tyedyeto]

298. Here is your link

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-cheney14feb14,1,4997143.story?page=2&ctrack=1&cset=true

After being stabilized at a hospital in Kingsville, Whittington was evacuated by helicopter to a larger facility in Corpus Christi — where he was placed in the intensive care unit. The Secret Service reported the shooting to the Kenedy County Sheriff's Office; no one from that agency interviewed Cheney until Sunday morning.

The Secret Service said it had turned away one sheriff's deputy at the ranch the night of the accident because arrangements had been made for Cheney to be interviewed the following morning, Associated Press said.

Interviewing someone the next day after any sort of shooting that involves injury or death smells like a cover-up. When has any regular citizen been allowed to tell the cops, "We'll talk tomorrow" after a shooting incident?

[Skip Intro]

40. Meanwhile, the investigation into the NSA wiretaps begins to lose support

in the Senate. In LBN.

I evidently allow for more possibilities than you, and maybe our "big pictures" are of different sizes (I'll bet we're both wrong) - but that's no reason to be insulting to those of us don't quite take things at face value, as presented by corp media and their bosses in the WH.

Its THE story. Period. Just as news of treason surfaces.

Maybe it was just an accident?

[XOKCowboy]

50. That's the real tragedy...

We're letting ourselves get distracted.

[Mark5]

55. yup...

[thebigidea]

75. yeah, because 2 days of not posting about Cheney here will save the world

distracted from what? What's stopping you from posting about all that other stuff?

[Mark5]

86. geez already....

get off my ass with this shait ..eveyone is posting about and replying about it...some including me think its taking away attention from much more important issue, not only here , but mainly in the media...I made one post about it and a joke

dont take this personally, I aint the enemy my opinion just happens to differ from yours.

so please just get off my nuts :p

[thebigidea]

91. so why aren't you posting about anything important?

"I made one post about it and a joke"

No, no you didn't. Dozens upon dozens of posts from you all about this, absolutely nothing about these so-called important issues that are so mindbogglingly important to you, you can't name a single one.

"but mainly in the media..."

and what the fuck does a message board have to do with that? They don't take our cues from us. Go complain to MSNBC, CNN, and FOX. Then take Letterman to task for making jokes about it when he could be making jokes about important things, like uh... like... like...

Why don't you show us how its done? Go start a thread about something important.

[Mark5]

107. not to me, but the democratic movement....

"and what the fuck does a message board have to do with that?" well since you brought up my ONE post about it, I figured I should re-state it had to do with both this msg board and the media.

Every other post here today seems to be about this, yet you come down on me for posting about it and complaining how there are more pressing issues we should be pushing forth ,again (not just here but in the media-from my original 1 post you brought up)....I am sorry I am not sure what I ever did to you but this "mark5 witchhunt" you seem to be on is quite absurd.

You are barking up the wrong tree bud.

[thebigidea]

112. yeah, i'm on a witchhunt. You're a regular martyr.

"well since you brought up my ONE post about it"

any one with a star and search capability can see that every single one of your dozens of posts concern this Cheney thing. Do you think we're idiots?

"complaining how there are more pressing issues we should be pushing forth ,again"

So what do you want to talk about instead? C'mon, one important issue. I'm sure you're just aching to get into serious political discussions, right?

Start a thead about it. Then maybe we'll all be inspired by your strong example and you can bask in the pride of showing us the error of our ways.

Until then, you're pretty one note.

[Mark5]

125. Look at what you are doing...

what the fuck are you trying to prove?

That i posted alot of "replies" in the one thread I started. I am sorrynext time I'll make sure to ask for permission from you to reply questions addressed to me. LOL

yes I am fully aware of the "search" feature...."gee whiz this new internet thing is really cool" cmon...

I mean...lol seriously... if I start a thread about something else will that make your day? Actually "Mr.Search feature guy" I am not here that often I was here a week ago or so and I discussed the sheehan thing, amongst other issues....seriously this is absurd.

border line childish...

[beam me up scottie]

140. You just told the op he sounds like a loon.

Completely ignoring the fact that almost everyone else agrees with him.

Have you always had trouble with reality, or are you being intentionally obtuse?

[Mark5]

150. OH MY GAWD

you really dont READ...I FUCKING AGREE WITH HIM. I AGREED LONG AGO they are covering shit up.

but to make empty accusation based on speculation is foolhearted at best!

lol

[beam me up scottie]

161. Goodness! Such dramatics...tsk tsk tsk

Look at how many recommendations this thread has.

Choose your targets a little more carefully next time.

[kestrel91316]

204. "foolhearted" - we have a clever new word here???

Or perhaps you mean "foolhardy"?

Just wondering............

More evidence that reading (and the vocabulary one picks up by doing it) has become a lost art.

[beam me up scottie]

227. It's HUGH !!!111

I'm SERIES!11

[Beetwasher]

307. Does Schizophrenia Run In Your Family?

Or is it drug induced?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/14/AR2006021402137.html

"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. Whittington was hospitalized Saturday night in Corpus Christi, Tex., and was moved back into the intensive-care unit after suffering an abnormal heart rhythm yesterday morning."

--snip--

Empty accusations based on speculation???? :rofl:

[thebigidea]

142. Absurd is definitely the word for it.

" if I start a thread about something else will that make your day?"

I'd be surprised that you'd even bother, considering that all you want to talk about is how we shouldn't be talking about CHENEY SHOOTING AN OLD MAN IN THE FACE. It might give a little bit more credibility to your "there are other important issues to talk about!" argument if you, oh, I dunno - had an important issue to talk about.

"yes I am fully aware of the "search" feature...."

You may be aware, but you can't use it. Others can, and will realize that you're being disingenuous about only posting once re: CHENEY SHOOTING A MAN IN THE FACE.

"I am sorrynext time I'll make sure to ask for permission from you to reply questions addressed to me."

Next time you might try telling the truth, but not so much for my sake - I certainly won't be reading your incoherent, poorly written drivel. Here endeth my witch hunt.

[Mark5]

152. whatever man/woman

whatever i dont really care, you aint even arguing the issue you are arguing about me and my motives....get real..

[thebigidea]

156. "you aint even arguing the issue"

Boy, how can I respond to a devastating comeback like that?

ps. CHENEY SHOT AN OLD MAN IN THE FACE.

Bwhahahah. It still cracks me up. What a bunch of idiots.

[DearAbby]

109. Cheney asks a lawyer...a millionare at that...Could you take one for the

Team please? The press about the Plame Case they're eating me alive. I need to have a distraction. Would you mind terribly if I SHOOT YOU IN THE FACE? I need a big story to distract people, get em off the trail


dontcha know

[DearAbby]

54. OH FOR SURE....In the real world I keep telling myself.

I actually think we are in TWILIGHT ZONE. They just over the news this hour on radio, mentioned MONICA with this scandal...MEDIA MENTIONS THE (M) word!!!

I am in absolute :wow: Here. This is a showdown. This is what is going to wake up even some freeps...<< REALLY.

:popcorn:

[missouri dem 2]

104. I don't think that Hanity is going to be able to sell the

bb gun line to gun owners. They know the difference and that a shotgun is a killing weapon and should be treated with respect at all times. It is a let them eat cake moment. Average guy shoots someone they go to the hospital and stay the them to see how they are doing. They don't blame the victim , they don't hide frome the police and they don't hightail it out of town.
Cheyney was a chicken shit during Vietnam and he is a chicken shit now.

[Cocoa]

56. he just peppered him

happens all the time.

:rofl:

[johnnie]

64. Yup

I've been peppered 100s of times. I still have 30 pounds of pellets in my body..and we laugh and laugh and laugh....

[beam me up scottie]

71. Yes, they're making such a big deal out of a little boo boo...

[NightOwwl]

68. "He might die."

You are absolutely correct.

I believe he is much worse off than we are being told. And if he does survive, he'll have those pellets in his body the rest of his life. That has got to be a hellish experience. And Cheney meanwhile, major asshole that he is, hasn't even deemed it necessary to visit his victim in the hospital.

Yup...this is the story that will get through to the ignorant and uninformed. And I don't think they will like what they see.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

79. Great post AND you flushed a couple of "quail."

I mean it's got all the sublety and nuance of, well, a shotgun blast to the face.- B'washer

[txindy]

278. Tenacious quail.

This whole thread is fascinating. Pull up a chair.

[beam me up scottie]

82. Check your pms!

[Swamp Rat]

94. LOL!

Great rant! :thumbsup:

[understandinglife]

98. Got it. And, please do all you can to encourage Maj Hackett to run ...

... for office in the 110th US Congress.

Thank you and Recommended.


Peace.

[Nothing Without Hope]

100. Yeah, that's about it. No eyewitnesses, no face-to-face with law

enforcement until way past a breathalyzer would have given evidence, and so many blatant contradictions that even the tamest corporate media whores are having a difficult time keeping them straight and smoothing them over.

Check out the THREAD COMPILATION on this incident and its aftermath at the links in my sig line.

[stevedeshazer]

106. Best rant of the day!

Thanks. :)

[beam me up scottie]

120. Why, yes it is. Much better than this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=422576&mesg_id=423348

[BeHereNow]

165. Amen Brother Beet!

The delay in releasing the story was to give
Dastardly Dick time to sober up since they
couldn't cover up.
No doubt in my mind.
BHN

[WinkyDink]

169. Accident! Got lots of 'em in Texas! Accident!

[Mr_Spock]

175. I'm with ya

I wanted to start a post like this earlier - needs to be repeated over and over and over again.

Cheney tried to blow a guys head of with a shotgun!

He's lucky the man didn't die.

[henslee]

181. Yup.... And MSNBC aids coverup by scrubbing Armstrong's "Beer"

remarks from their website's story on the incident.

[Stephanie]

192. k&r

:)

[WinkyDink]

198. FOR YOU, HARPER:

At least one deputy showed up at the ranch‘s front gate Saturday evening and asked to speak to Cheney but was turned away by the Secret Service, Zahren said. There was some miscommunication that arrangements already had been made to interview Cheney the next morning, he said.

Source: http://www.newsone.ca/piercelandherald/stories/index.php?action=fullnews&id=142498

[Harper_is_Bush]

208. Thankyou! And there is also this story put out in regards to that:

AP:
At some point, sheriff's deputies who heard reports of the ambulance responding to an accident at the ranch stop at the front gate to see if anyone needs help, but are told no one needs assistance. The Secret Service earlier had said the deputies were seeking to interview Cheney, but on Tuesday they said that was not the case.
http://www.forbes.com/business/manufacturing/feeds/ap/2006/02/14/ap2526738.html

Before anyone (ahembeam me up scottiecough) starts with the sarcasm on me, I'm not saying I believe one way or the other. I'm just saying this is the evidence available. If the SS and the Sherrif both say that nobody was refused entry (and I'm not sure what the Sherrif says) then nobody can say it happened. The first time the SS was quoted they COULD have got it wrong.

[Beetwasher]

293. Seriously, I Have No Idea Why Anyone

Would persist in giving the impression of being completely ignornant. But there you are.

"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. Whittington was hospitalized Saturday night in Corpus Christi, Tex., and was moved back into the intensive-care unit after suffering an abnormal heart rhythm yesterday morning."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/14/AR2006021402137.html

Now why would anyone think there's a cover up? There's just no evidence to support that whacky theory. :rofl:

[Mark5]

200. Hey mods, Thanks

for being fair and letting me express my opinion at least to those willing to listen or fairly/honestly argue against it.

I really should get to bed :)

g'night all

[shanti]

210. gotcha, K&R

;)

[Kablooie]

228. Now just WHAT did Cheney do again? I don't think I quite get it.

[leftofthedial]

229. I've always said that the top criminals in the bush gang could

commit murder on prime-time TV and their sheeplike followers would find som eway to spin it into a positive, courageous act.

We are very close to finding out just how true that is. Already, there has been a flood of Cheney apologists in the media who would have us believe that Cheney's act was courageous or no big deal or reflective of strong basic Murkan values.

he should be in jail, or at least out on bond for assault with a deadly weapon.

[beam me up scottie]

232. They blamed it on the victim.

He obviously threw himself in front of Cheney's gun.

Poor Dickie, I'm sure he's devastated.

The bushbots were told to pray for Dick at the Presidential Prayer website.

They didn't even mention the guy who's in the ICU right now.

[leftofthedial]

248. classic fucking repukes

verminous freaks

[SoCalDem]

231. It was on PRIVATE PROPERTY

so what's a little gunplay between friends :sarcasm:

Don;t you just love the privacy angle??

Like it's OK if you shoot someone on your own property..and if they are your friend, you get a pass.. No cops, no interrogation, no signed statements, no investigation.. no nuttin..

You just have "your people" drop him off" and you go about yuour business

[beam me up scottie]

237. Drive by drop offs at the hospital!

That is EXACTLY what it's like.

[libhill]

260. Yup

booze and guns don't mix. Seems like the Rethug "Ain't gonna get my guns lessn' ya take 'em outta my cold dead hands" crowd should know that. Not only did the bastard shoot a man while under the influence, the fuck wads are trying to cover it up. If it were a Dem politico who had pulled a stunt like that, that's all you'd hear about for the rest of the god damned year.

[NNN0LHI]

269. But I just heard Lou Dobbs say it ain't no big thang n/t

[mmonk]

273. But there are so many stories that can't be explained away

as an accident. It is a big story though, it's just part of an avalanche of big stories (or at least what should be big stories).

[sendero]

274. I've said since hour one..

... people here are missing the obvious.

Americans GET this. They understand simple things like hunting accidents. They understand that they don't happen very often. They understand that ultimately, the SHOOTER is responsible for where his rounds go, just like a driver is responsible for where his car goes.

This was a big deal. Then yesterday, we find that a shot pellet is in or near the man's heart. THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING, it is no longer a superficial "peppering" case at this point, it was a close range shot and it is life threatening.

Cheney's arrogance in refusing to speak about it is not helping either.

[mikeytherat]

275. Like The Daily Show, repeating over, and over, and over:

"A 78-year-old man was shot in the face by the Vice President of the United States."

There's really no way to "spin" this, but they have tried anyway. Why? They are Pathological Liars and it is ingrained. It's instinctive - they lie about everything, even when they don't have to or shouldn't.

Deadeye Dick could have come out with an immediate statement expressing his remorse, saying he was putting down his guns forever, this incident has really shaken him, he is deeply concerned about his friend, yadda, yadda, yadda, and even gotten a little sympathy humor out of, "I shot a lawyer; I really hope I don't get sued." He could have defused this incident, at least to a point. Instead he allowed the hole to get deeper and deeper.

If Cheney is supposed to be the "brains" of this organization, that's really, really pathetic.

mikey_the_rat

[SammyWinstonJack]

276. Yes and imagine the outrage and up roar if it had been a Dem VP?

24/7 news coverage! None of it good. Fux sNooze would be having a field day! Congressional hearing would be underway. Calls for resignation would be numerous and demanded. Cover-up would be proof positive of an intentional, not accidental shooting. IOW, we'd never hear the end of it, not for weeks. months or years.

[mzmolly]

320. Indeed. Has anyone even asked about the *women* on the trip?

:shrug:

[Wheezy]

279. *wanders in to popular thread*

eep.

*backs away slowly*

[MrBenchley]

280. On an overnight trip with a woman who was not his wife

and he was shitfaced.

Who can pretend that this is not a big story?

[mmonk]

297. Yeah,

something of this nature is the real story behind the obvious.

[goodhue]

282. Cheney must address the nation

take responsibility and tell us how badly he feels; Otherwise he is toast.

[janx]

286. He is toast regardless. n/t

[Ganja Ninja]

284. And just as serious is the fact that when the cops come out to

interview him which, is routine and would be required of any person in a similar situation, he uses his secret service contingent to block access to him. That's what really pisses me off about these people. Laws are for the little people. Big shots like Dick a Dubya are royalty and above us common folk.

[ProfessorGAC]

287. The Shooting: Medium Story. Hiding a Shooting: MAJOR!

Accidental shootings happen every day. (Admittedly not by the VP though.) So, the people involved raise it beyond the "ordinary". But, trying to pretend it didn't happen for a whole day is a MAJOR deal!
The Professor

[ChairmanAgnostic]

300. the stats show that at most it happens 2x per day, with 1/5 being

self-inflicted, and only 74 being fatal despite 15 million registered hunters.


You know, come to think of it, this is a blessing in disguise. If we can turn 15 million people against the White house and Cheney because of the lies, the misdirection and the utter stupidity of Cheney in ignoring basic hunting rules, that would be hugh.

I don't wish anyone harm, but whittington chose his friends and suffered the consequences.

[ProfessorGAC]

306. Thanks

Still, 700 plus per year is an "ordinary" story. The VP doing it makes it more than ordinary, i suppose, but denying it, and attempting a news black-out on it was a continuation of overly secret behavior and symptomatic of a White House acting outside the bounds of accountability.
The Professor

[ChairmanAgnostic]

309. absolutely. And therein lies most of the story.

I suspect that more Americans are being turned off, not by the coverage, but the arrogant non-response.

The beauty is that all the previous problems and similar behavior are finally being highlighted and reanalyzed. Before, the MSM gave the WH and the VP a pass. No longer. Same with Joe 6-pack. He knows gun safety and he knows that Cheney did no practice it. That makes him question everything this admin has done or said.

There is still another advantage. Just how much mojo does a presidential speech have when the only questions revolve around his VP shooting an innocent person? By concentrating their efforts to craft a response on this minor issue, they are precluded from enacting other parts of Rovian attacks on our freedoms.

[tgnyc]

302. A lot of passion, but I think one key word is missing from your post:

accidentally.

Would your point carry as much force if you had included that qualifier? Or do you think maybe it wasn't an accident?

[Beetwasher]

305. Heh? Bullshit!

Accident or not it's a big story. I have no clue whether or not it was really an accident, nor do you. And it's irrelevant anyway. Why should I give the maniac the benefit of the doubt that it was an accident?

[mdmc]

304. drunk hunters get shot all the time

BFEE created war...treason...

a hunting accident / shitty reaction to accident...seems...trivial...

[Road Scholar]

308. LOL. NT

[Beetwasher]

314. FOR ALL THE WHACKY PEOPLE WHO THINK THERE WAS A COVERUP

You whackos! What would ever give you THAT silly idea!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/15/71550/5894

:rofl:

[autorank]

317. Straight and to the point. Get the message, it's frightening. n/t

[Klukie]

321. Hear Hear!

My thoughts from yesterday. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=414397&mesg_id=414397

[The empressof all]

323. Locking

This flamewar has ended.