Posted on 02/17/2006 5:51:20 AM PST by blitzgig
There are few less edifying sights than Terry McAuliffe in full battle cry. But alas there was no avoiding him after the Cheney hunting accident. There he was demanding to know why the vice president waited 22 hours before informing the press and shouting that if Al Gore had done something like this he'd be in Leavenworth by nightfall (a dubious if pleasing supposition). The White House press corps was even more insufferable. One reporter asked, "Is it proper for the vice president to offer his resignation or has he offered his resignation?" Another demanded, "Scott (McClellan), would this be much more serious if the man had died?" Our pressies asked dozens of questions about the timing of the disclosure -- some wondering aloud whether the White House purposely delayed the announcement to avoid its becoming Topic A on the Sunday morning chat shows. One particularly eager journalist asked, "Under Texas law, is this kind of accidental shooting a possible criminal offense?" The transcript does not indicate whether he was rubbing his hands together at the time.
Is there something missing in the mental architecture of reporters? When they get credentialed, do they lose ordinary human reactions?
An ordinary person, hearing about such an accident, would respond as follows: How horrible! Cheney must be in agony. What's the prognosis on Whittington?
I honestly don't see why it was so essential that the press be informed about the accident immediately. Admittedly, if the vice president had shot someone in the Oval Office, or better yet, in the pressroom, that would be a story. But these kinds of things happen all too often when people hunt. It is terrible for the two men involved and for their families, but it has zero public relevance.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Mona Charen ping list...
Why do you keep bringing this up?
Ok, if I ever get over these conniptions, I'll ponder those considerations. Thanks.
(It will explain a lot if you are......)
You might. And I'm not. But I probably would've gotten a lot more action than I did at the high school I did go to.
*Snort*
I brought it up because it was topical! what do you mean "why?"
Exactly. And when faced with a situation where they SHOULD be ashamed and embarassed, rather than admit their mistake, they ramp it up to areas none of us can even imagine.
It's the newsroom equivalent of "staying on too long" in a comedy show.
True. In this specific case, however, there is NO evidence whatsoever that anyone was drunk in the Cheney/Whittington accident.
I was saying it theoretically.
Can you try to keep up here, dear?
(And you would probably have more to say here if you had tried to get some intellectual 'action' in High School).
Yes. That title says it all, doesn't it?
Projecting an assumed set of facts in this case, is nothing but pure and total fabrication.
Look, at post 69, you said they determined it was an accident. I said, of course it was. Then the terminally rude Always Right said to me "but you implied he was drinking" or words to that effect. So I said, even if he was drunk, it was still an accident. THAT is how it was topical.
And so we can accuse you of being a pedophile with no evidence? Just thoretically speaking of course.
Bush wouldn't be able to give Cheney a pardon because he has to behave as the "un-Clinton"...and his power of pardons only extends to offenses against the United States. Shooting a Texas lawyer doesn't qualify, I don't think. Of course Bush could pressure the governor of Texas to cough up a pardon...
You are just digging yourself a deeper hole.
I'm certain you say plenty of things without any evidence. Why stop now?
Don't forget Hillary's interview with Matt Lauer a few days after the Monica Lewinsky story broke open, giving marching orders to the media and other Democrats to treat the whole story as the product of a "vast right-wing conspiracy." Despite the preposterousness of her claim, that turned the tide in Clinton's favor.
"So, you tell me, is it true that a cop wanted to talk to him and he was turned away, or not?"
OK Perry Mason. Now go away.
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.