I think I understand what's behind this bizarre hypercoverage of a non-story behind a story. The real issue that the media is obsessed with is that the VP injured someone with an EVIL DANGEROUS G-U-N which nobody should really have in the first place, and if they do have one they should keep it locked up and unloaded at all times, since obviously if even the VP can't handle one safely, certainly no average citizen could. However, they have come to grasp that any attack based on the G-U-N issue will backfire bigtime. So they have diverted all their energy to the "Cheney handled the media aspect poorly" non-story, as a back door way of keeping the tale of the horrible G-U-N accident on the front pages, while not printing or uttering a single word that could be used as evidence that they are pushing an anti-gun agenda.
Remember the run up to Fitzmas when Russert(I think) was saying that any indictment would have to come down to a trial over the Iraqi war.
That was the story than and it exploded on them,this is just another created whirlwind to apply to whatever story they wish to promote.
"The real issue that the media is obsessed with is that the VP injured someone with an EVIL DANGEROUS G-U-N"
The libs are confused in that he didn't shoot the guy for his money