especially when that one poster got pretty quickly and universally shot down (pardon the pun)
It’s not; it hasn’t been; it won’t be. In case it has escaped you, the bulk of my objection has been, and still is, the callousness of the lame jokes. There are many of those from many individuals. The first time I made my objections known was yesterday afternoon - in post #156 which refers specifically to “callous and stupid jokes.”
I should have known better than to earlier make light of Mr. Whittington’s condition. It seems I once again bought the line the administration was selling, and I should know better.
It certainly confirms my earlier observation that the administration has handled this poorly. Even making light of his condition when they obviously would be far more informed of his condition than anyone on the SDMB. Those very same people who had knowledge that doctors were performing a cardiac catheterization on the man Cheney shot were joking about it. A 78 year man has buckshot in his pericardium, and they are calling it “peppered” and joking about it as if it was a scratch. A man that age may very well succumb to secondary infections, and maybe a doc can give an opinion, but wouldn’t that heart attack be under the realm of ‘traumatic arrest’? 78 year old folks don’t handle this kind of injury well. It’s not the scratch that they made it out to be, and each revelation that comes out of this incident makes the WH look worse and worse.
I’m really sorry but I haven’t a clue as to where you’re coming from and wonder if we’re not talking about two different things. Posts 273 and 274 questioned where someone was wishing harm to the injured Whittington. I quoted the offending comment, fraught with his typos, and then included a second wish for Whittington’s demise by the same poster to show that his first quote wasn’t a fluke. I expressed my opinion that that poster was quite the dick for saying that about an innocent, wounded man.
Now, you’ve chastised him several times over a couple of days, I’ve called him dickish and his comment offensive. Where exactly is this “well, obviously everyone feels this way, someone even said…”, what does it have to do with me and in what way did I ever claim to be speaking for any group in this thread where opinions have been so divided? Ugh, now I’ve got a headache. Are we actually resolving an issue, because normally I find you and I to be often times in step on many matters of import, or at least I can see where you’re coming from, so I’m questioning if we’ve just misunderstood each other.
I too thought it was a mild injury; knowing virtually nothing about shotgun injuries, I was imagining something similar to The Wedding Crashers, not something that could cause a heart-attack. My apologies for calling it a hilarious gaffe.
I still think that, unless something more serious comes out about it, this is not a story with great political significance. I want to focus on the political decisions of political leaders, not on what they do during their private lives. If Cheney did something for which he should be imprisoned, that’s one thing; if his shooting had a political motive (say, Whittington is one of the disguised Venutians who control US oil policy), that’s one thing. But if it’s not a serious felony, and it’s not a political event, I think it’s a distraction to everyone except the people immediately involved.
We’ve got Scooter saying he was authorized by his superiors to leak Valerie Wilson’s name. We’ve got suggestions that Wilson was a key CIA resource evaluating Iran’s weapon capacity, and that calling her off the Iran beat might have harmed our country’s ability to respond to Iran. We’ve got the Republican report that the Administration screwed up royally on Katrina response. THESE are the issues that need focus.
Daniel
Daniel
That’s possible; I hope it is. It simply seemed that a couple of the posts were a bit on the histrionic side. This one in particular caused me to sit back and think “Damn, decaf next time.”
There was only one person who stated that Mr. Whittington deserved everything he got, and he does not speak for anyone else here. I also think that, had we known the severity of his injury from stories like this one sooner, there would have been a great deal fewer jokes made. No one was under the impression Mr. Whittington’s injuries were anything but superficial, and Uncle Beer, I apologize for having offended you so deeply.
And I’m here to tell you, that’s God damned hard to do.
My edjumacated WAG from what little we’ve heard is that it’s unlikely, but from a purely legal perspective, it’s possible. From the Texas Penal Code:
Heh Heh Heh… nice. Perhaps the rest of the world should be allowed to vote for the leadership of the “Most Powerful Nation on Earth”? Only American citizens get to run for it of course, but man, what a different election campaign you’d have to run. No more tele-evangelistic zeal and photogenic perfection. Nope. The rest of the world would have lots of different criteria, let me tell ya.
I think objectively speaking, from a purely utilitarian perspective of doing the greatest good for the greatest number of people, you are right on the mark.
welcome to the shitlist…
There’s a detail to this sad accident that I wonder about:
Where were the Secret Service during the hunt? I’d expect an agent or two is guarding the VP at all times, so why didn’t They see Mr. Whittington come back to the hunting party, and act to warn Mr. Cheney, or Mr. Whittington? Is it that easy for someone with a gun to catch the VP unaware?
A minor hole in the story told, but I’d think it would discount the initial story that Mr. Whittington was majorly at fault, a bit. If that’s not the case, seems like Mr. Cheney would want to have a talk with his bodyguards about their alertness.
Again, I do think this an accident, no foul play, but it doesn’t make sense to me that a SS agent wouldn’t see someone approaching the Vice President and immediately take action.
this is really getting to me.
I don’t think the Veep intended to shoot his friend. but ya know what? I also don’t think any of the kids in the articles I linked to intended to shoot anyone. Yet those kids were charged criminally
We hold people responsible every damn day for the unintended results of their careless behavior.
My guess? They were staying as much out of the way as possible, and following Cheney’s orders not to scare ther birds or otherwise interfer with the hunt unless the VP’s life was in danger. Maybe they thought Cheney knew where the other guy was. And it’s highly unlikely that they’d be able to stop Cheney once he started to take aim. That can all happen in a fraction of a second.
Wring, I phrased it that way to avoid any sense that there was a “conspiracy” reason that The SS was off guard, which I do not see as the case. I agree with you that carelessness with firearms should be treated equally under law, and was not at all making apologies for Cheney’s lack of safe practice.
John Mace: See, I still don’t see this as a valid point. The SS is paid to watch the VP for all threats, and I suppose he has at least one person watching every move. Why would they not see Mr. Whittington coming up on him from any distance? If Cheney told them to suspend that watch, well, then, it’s square on his shoulders for that accident for poor hunting practice. But why would a VP tell his bodyguards to give it a rest?
Again, I’m only speculating, but if the SS was worried about his every move, he wouldn’t be able to hunt at all. And, as I already said, even if the SS guy was right at his back, he probably couldn’t have done anything to stop the shot. The SS guy probably assumed that Cheney knew where the other guy was. After all, this is where Cheney messed up-- he was SUPPOSED to be aware of his partners at all times. It was Cheney’s fault that he shot the guy, not the SS for warning him about something his 30 years of hunting experience should have told him to do.
I’m not claiming to be able to answer your question, only pointing out that I can think of very valid reasons that the SS did no interfere. And I’m sure we’ll never know the whole story-- not to the level of detail you seem to require.
John Mace, I hear you, but, my point is this:
Mr. Whittington approaches from across whatever field with his bird, as stated in the original description of events. If someone assigned to keeping close watch for the VP’s safety doesn’t see this as a matter of concern…well, I don’t get it. The SS should have an overview of any situation to make it safe for the VP. They are meticulously trained to do this, I’d suppose. Mr. Whittington did not magically appear next to Mr. Cheney: he had to have traversed a bit of field to join the hunt. At that point, if the people who are hired to protect the VP do not notice, it , well, it just doesn’t make sense at all to me. They are being remiss in their duty.
What were they supposed to do, wrestle Whittington to the ground?
I don’t get what you think they were supposed to do. Their job is to protect the VP. One would assume that the four(?) people carrying loaded firearms along with the VP had been vetted within an inch of their lives. That’s their job. If one of the others decides to take a pot shot at the veep, they’re going to try to stop it. That’s their job. It’s not their job to prevent either Cheney or Whittington or both from making a mistake.
No, Frank, what I meant was that a SS person should have seen Whittington coming across the field to join the party. I assume that the SS in this situation would want to have an overarching environmental view of any possible threat on the VP. So, the detail would not be right physically next to to VP, but also people who are viewing the whole scenario for threats.
In that light, I still don’t see that trained observant eyes could not have noticed Mr. Whittington’s approach, and given notice to the VP.
If an overarching view of the physical location of the VP is not in the specific protocol of SS protective policy, what good is it?
OK, in that case, you’re talking about someone who is likely one or two hundred yards away, and is not even looking at Cheney. How are they to tell that he is about to shoot? And if they do happen to glance over and see him raising his shotgun, how is he supposed to notify him in the one or two seconds before he shoots?