Posted on 02/14/2006 12:31:19 PM PST by frankjr
followed with....
You think it is ironic to direct you to your own source?
In light of your first statement? Oh, indubitably! Please loosen your own arms and legs from said embrace.
Don't bother, the "Bush is Evil" crowd always show up when the MSM starts another smear.
Next week they will be onto something new!
From the people on the scene, we've heard behind and behind on the right. Since he was shot on the right side, that would tend to indicate he wasn't directly even on the right, but back a ways.
Folks can try to distort that to make it sound like something else, but it is obvious to anyone who isn't trying to avoid it that the VP wheeled to the right beyond the zone of fire and fired.
I'm out.
How the heck can you make such pronouncements? You weren't there and don't know precisely what happened.
In fact, none of us knows precisely what happened. All we have is a written description that comes to us through the media filter.
Based on the description we do have, it's entirely likely Mr. Whittington was not even anywhere in the Vice President's line of sight at the moment he pulled the trigger. When a group of hunters are walking a field in a line, as was the case in this instance, everyone is supposed to stay in line. If you drop out of line for some reason, you're supposed to let your companions know, and indicate where you are in the field.
Why? When birds flush, they don't necessarily fly ahead of the line of hunters, but may fly over their heads to the rear, or to the left or right.
We do know that Mr. Whittington dropped out of line and was searching in tall grass for a bird he shot. According to the reports, he was about 30 yards behind the VP -- directly behind, or to the left or right rear, we don't know. None of the reports that I've read say that Mr. Whittington told anyone he was moving out of line to the rear of the group.
We don't know where the covy of birds that flushed at that moment were in relation to the line, the VP, or to Mr. Whittington. I have an image in my mind of the way it may have happened, but there's no way I can know for sure. In any case, I'd be willing to bet that the VP never saw Mr. Whittington when the covy flushed and he lined up his shot.
OK. Another geometry lesson: The human body is not a Möbius strip. It has two sides. A front and a back. Whittington could have been shot on the right side and yet been to the right of Cheney.
How? He might have been turned around.
The CSI guys you're not.
Ron P. Reagan (as he likes to call himself) is back to calling dog shows on Animal Planet. I mentioned this on a thread yesterday. Thought it would be fun to mention it again today. :-)
Mary Matalin, Assistant to the President and Counselor to the Vice President, will be returning to the private sector, effective December 31, 2002. Catherine J. Martin, will be named Assistant to the Vice President for Public Affairs. [end snip]
I don't know why lugsoul seems so determined to characterize the incident as something more than a genuine accident. Lugsoul talks about a zone of fire and about how the VP supposedly wheeled around and shot outside that zone. How he or anyone who wasn't there can make such assertions should astonish me, but few things people with venom in their hearts astonish me anymore, it seems.
I have gone hunting many times for quail and other game birds with my ex-husband. For this reason, I know we simply do not have enough facts that could let us understand the prescise dynamics of this incident.
Examples: When they flushed, where was the covy of birds in relation to the two men? When the birds flushed, did they fly low or high? What direction did they fly in relation to where the VP was standing? Was there a breeze or wind that would affect the shot pattern? Approximately how wide was the shot pattern at about 30 yards from the VP? Where was he aiming, and was his aim good or a little off? Was Mr. Whittington bending down in the grass looking for his bird, and did he happen to stand just at the moment the VP pulled the trigger?
All of these, and several other dynamics would need to be known in order for us to accurately understand what happened.
Some people simply don't have accidents. They are perfect.
So it seems. They are so perfect that they know precisely how accidents others were involved in happened even without being on the scene.
rofl!!
In an era in which just about everyone and their brother runs to the nearest microphone at the slightest excuse, it's refreshing to see this incident being handled in an old-fashioned way -- which is to say with regard for the Whittington family and the ranch owner, and without feeding the ravenous MSM beast.
Upland bird hunters everywhere knew exactly what had happened when word spread this past weekend that Vice President Dick Cheney shot a quail-hunting companion in South Texas, but some media reports made it sound as if the victim were to blame.
A quail flushed. Vice President Cheney swung his 28-gauge shotgun on the bird and tugged the trigger. His 78-year-old buddy, Austin attorney Harry Whittington, took a piece of the shot string in the upper body and face. Luckily, they were about 30 yards apart, far enough that pinhead-sized quail shot did minimal damage.
Reports from the owner of the ranch where the VP was hunting that Whittington violated some sort of ``Texas protocol'' requiring hunters to make formal announcement of their comings and goings in the field were a bit misleading. Everywhere that upland birds are hunted, the drill is pretty much the same. It makes sense to let other hunters know when you're moving to the left or right, or that you're back after visiting a nearby tree, but there's no requirement to do so. The onus is on everyone who carries a gun not to shoot at anyone else.
Cheney shot another hunter. Sooner better than later, he should own up to his mistake.
As I said above - a good lesson to teach, and a good moment to teach it.
Goodnight.
So true!
Charles Krauthammer, on Brit's show, said that Cheney decided to give his hostess and the man he hurt a 12 hour reprieve, before the hordes of reporters descended. I agree that was Cheney's motivation for the delay - to let Mr Whittingdon and his doctors get his treatment underway without the pressure of the media compounding the trauma.
K and I and others with medical backgrounds can visualize the medical complications that an immediate barrage of media could cause or exacerbate.
At least you're acknowledging that it was a MISTAKE (accident). I don't get the 'own up to' though. What exactly is it that you want Vice President Cheney to do that in your view would qualify as 'owning up to'?
Also, have you pondered the probability that ACCIDENTS can be the fault of MORE THAN ONE person involved?
Thank you for that official confirmation, deport. I appreciate it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.