Cheney shoots someone (I'm not kidding)

WyoBob wrote in
:

rw wrote:
Ask if, in hindsight, he regretted shooting the man, Cheney replied,
"Certainly not. I acted correctly based on the best intelligence at the
time. If I had it to do over again, I would still shoot him. It was the
right decision and I stand by it."

Good one, RW

Snoop



I enjoyed that one on John Stewart, as well.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

WyoBob wrote:
I'd still rather go hunting with Dick Cheney than ride in a car with Ted
Kennedy.

Yeah, yeah, hey at least when Clinton shot somebody in the
face she didn't have to go to the hospital.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
WyoBob wrote in
:

rw wrote:
Ask if, in hindsight, he regretted shooting the man, Cheney replied,
"Certainly not. I acted correctly based on the best intelligence at the
time. If I had it to do over again, I would still shoot him. It was the
right decision and I stand by it."

Good one, RW

Snoop



I enjoyed that one on John Stewart, as well.

Someone should inform Mr. Stewart that plagiarism is considered by many to
be a fairly serious business.

Wolfgang

On 14 Feb 2006 14:43:07 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in news:cro3v1ha5pr56gp465kvdodf6dq0dlvj22@
4ax.com:

He does? Why? The only person to whom he almost certainly owes an
apology is Whittington. And I understand he has done so, and
Whittington accepted some responsibility. I also understand that
Whittington has said "no comment" and "no comments forthcoming." These
are men who willingly and jointly engaged in an activity that has its
risks and there was an accident - it is between them, barring any
evidence of intentional or willfully negligent misconduct. Neither of
them owe you, me, or anyone else an apology, an explanation, a
donation,
or even a comment about the incident at this point.

TC,
R

The rules are slightly different for public officials under the
microscope, rightly or wrongly. Perhaps "needs" is too strong a word,
though. "Should, in order to stop the mad press" is more accurate.

I doubt anything he could do would "stop the mad press" or other
pundits. If he were to publicly apologize, will you agree to never,
under any circumstances, so much as mention it, for any reason or in any
context, ever again? And if you would so agree, why? And why, in this
case, do you think "(T)he rules are different...?" As you acknowledge
that these (unwritten, loose) rules are equally likely to be wrong, or
at least uncertain, why should he follow them?

He should apologize to the hunting community for setting a bad example by
contributing an environment where a hunting accident could occur.

The mere act of hunting, or even being in the area, contributes to an
environment where a hunting accident could occur. Note that they are
called "accidents."

This crap just feeds the anti-hunting crowd, and will reverberate.
Outdoorsmen don't need this crap.

If you mean the overboard coverage, absolutely. If you mean that
accidents feed them, absolutely. If you mean something else, ???

If I were him, I'd publicly announce my plans to sit through a hunter
safety refresher course, or alternatively, to give up hunting. I know he
probably doesn't need one.

So, if I understand you correctly, you'd advise him to do something
unnecessary (and meaningless) to appease people who are against him
politically and/or hunting and stop the "mad press," knowing full well
that it isn't going to change a thing, but it'll look good. If he were
to do so, the bulk, if not the entirety, of these same folks will most
likely start in about him having just done it "because it looked good."
I suspect that this will reverberate in the press in any case.

See above.

It adds
to the whole "no respect for any law at all" thing. Hunter safety
procedures, like the Fourth Amendment, are for the other guy, not Darth
Cheney.

Thus my recommendation, which would at least provide lip service to the
idea that Cheney thinks hunter safety is important, valuable, and worth
supporting.

One wonders whether all the witnesses would have been carted off to Gitmo
before the story got out if Whittington were actually killed.

Reread and reconsider what you wrote above as well as your initial
advice, please. If you are serious, you probably ought to refrain from
giving advice to public figures.

As a coda, I'll tag on the lyrics to my NEW favorite Tom Lehrer piece:

I always will remember,
'Twas a year ago November,
I went out to hunt some deer
On a mornin' bright and clear.
I went and shot the maximum the game laws would allow,
Two game wardens, seven hunters, and a cow.
remainder of funny stuff snipped

TC,
R

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 15:55:18 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

WyoBob wrote:
I'd still rather go hunting with Dick Cheney than ride in a car with Ted
Kennedy.

Yeah, yeah, hey at least when Clinton shot somebody in the
face she didn't have to go to the hospital.

Just the free clinic...and the cleaners...and the check-cashing
place...oh, wait - which time are you talking about?

Scott Seidman wrote:
WyoBob wrote in
:


rw wrote:

Ask if, in hindsight, he regretted shooting the man, Cheney replied,
"Certainly not. I acted correctly based on the best intelligence at the
time. If I had it to do over again, I would still shoot him. It was the
right decision and I stand by it."

Good one, RW

Snoop




I enjoyed that one on John Stewart, as well.

I thought it was his funniest show ever.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

rw wrote in
k.net:

Scott Seidman wrote:
WyoBob wrote in
:


rw wrote:

Ask if, in hindsight, he regretted shooting the man, Cheney replied,
"Certainly not. I acted correctly based on the best intelligence at
the time. If I had it to do over again, I would still shoot him. It
was the right decision and I stand by it."

Good one, RW

Snoop




I enjoyed that one on John Stewart, as well.

I thought it was his funniest show ever.


With material like this, how could he miss?


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

wrote in news:8ku3v1h7aqb8rcqc8na5j2q4e1cmkltqmb@
4ax.com:

If he were to publicly apologize, will you agree to never,
under any circumstances, so much as mention it, for any reason or in
any
context, ever again? And if you would so agree, why?


No, I wouldn't agree to not mention this, but I would stop believing that
Cheney is a man unable to publicly acknowledge mistakes like a man.

He should apologize to the hunting community for setting a bad example
by
contributing an environment where a hunting accident could occur.

The mere act of hunting, or even being in the area, contributes to an
environment where a hunting accident could occur. Note that they are
called "accidents."

Yes, and like most accidents, many are avoidable, and those that are
involved in them can admit responsibility and/or show a real effort to
make sure they don't happen again.

Just like today's Times said, this Administration would rather look inept
than open.

Reread and reconsider what you wrote above as well as your initial
advice, please. If you are serious, you probably ought to refrain from
giving advice to public figures.

You're obviously right. There's absolutely no need to publicly show
contrition for shooting a member of his hunting party. Cheney is getting
fine advice, and the whole thing will just blow over.

Sarcasm aside, I'd guess that by tomorrow evening, Cheney does something
along these lines. I don't think he has a real choice. The sooner he
does this, the better. It would have gone best for him if he did this
yesterday or this morning, as it stood more of a chance to pass as
genuine contrition.
--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:52:44 -0600, "Wolfgang"
wrote:

Damn, you're getting near about as good at this as.......dicklet.

Wolfgang
that's it.....FEEL the rage......give in......don't fight it......

Good at what? And who is dicklet? Ah, yes. The name calling.
Dicklet could only be Richard Dean. Does it make you feel good to
make fun of people?

Speaking of rage.... man, I think you've lost your mind. YOU are the
one filled with rage and hate. Have you noticed the first thing you
do when you get in a conflict on roff? You begin with the insults and
name calling. Willi called you on it and he's correct.

You need help, Wolfgang. Maybe it is because you are small and as a
child you took a lot of razzing about your names. And you probably
did lose more than a few shiney nickles on the playground.

Get help, Wolfgang.

Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:52:44 -0600, "Wolfgang"
wrote:


Damn, you're getting near about as good at this as.......dicklet.

Wolfgang
that's it.....FEEL the rage......give in......don't fight it......


Good at what? And who is dicklet? Ah, yes. The name calling.
Dicklet could only be Richard Dean. Does it make you feel good to
make fun of people?

Girly man.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.