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 ...
"It also would make no difference if it was reported six months later, would it?"
Six months would make a big difference as the story would no longer be current. Now you can explain to me the importance of notifying the press that evening instead of the next morning?
secret service said a cop showed up and was turned away that night.
Perhaps they should call it the White House press corpse.
Source? Link?
If that happened, I guess it would be fair to ask why.
Implying that the secret service, because they are law enforcement, act as other law enforcement officers do. By your logic, anyone with a secret service detail could do whatever they wanted, and say "hey, law enforcement was on the scene, don't worry about it." You do know that they don't "police" the people they protect, don't you?
And do you ever tire of accusing people of having DNC talking points? You seem obsessed.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20060214-0016-cheney.html
bottom of the article.
DU probably. He seems pretty trollish.
You keep making accusations with no facts to back them up. If you were not 'obsessed' with doing that, I would back off the DNC talking points comments.
So far, your implication that alcohol was a factor with no basis in fact, and your claim that law enforcement was turned away citing no source and giving no factual data to back it up, are ineffective in making your case.
You are making some serious charges here, notigar. You have an obligation to back it up with facts.
So far you have completely failed in doing so.
why wait?
Also within that article is an explanation, which you just happened to leave out.
Batting zero here, notigar.
Care to try again?
Of course it was an accident. who suggested otherwise?
And I didn't say alcohol was a factor. That would be for the cops to determine. The best way they could do that is by seeing the VP that day. It didn't happen. So they aren't "charges", they are questions.
But you conveniently left out lots of facts. The officer showed up, but after other arrangements had already been made with the Sherrif's office.
He wanted first to make sure that his friend's medical needs were dealt with, THEN he wanted to make sure that Mr. Whittington's adult children were notified, and did not hear the news on the radio.
THAT is 'why wait.'
Are you bringing up the fact that it is an AP article because you don't believe it? Because you apparently believe the excuse they gave for turning the guy away.
So, you tell me, is it true that a cop wanted to talk to him and he was turned away, or not?
I dunno... how about making sure that they guy who was shot was ok being more important than spoon-feeding the press something they could find out by reading public records?
yes, this is my 1,112th post, and I wasn't caught until now. you are good.
And he made sure that he was ok how?
You know, little things like medical attention.
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.