Dick "Gunner" Cheney!

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Um, is it wrong to be happy that at least the recipient of Cheney's wayward weaponry was a major Repug kiss-ass? Just a thought, but maybe this guy can release a rap album. I mean, how many guys get shot in the face by the V.P. and live to tell about it? He's definitely got street cred with me.

Posted by: jkghostrider on February 12, 2006 at 08:34pm

 

[dddooo]

Quote from Sam123:

I’m still waiting for any evidence supporting the Democrat’s chance at winning a majority in Congress, let alone the White House.

All you have to do is ask:


Generic Congressional Vote:
Republican 37.1%
Democrat 47.3%
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/generic_vote.html

That's certainly not a guarantee but a pretty solid evidence that the democrats do have a chance. Of course their chances will only increase if Cheney keeps shooting his republican supporters and voters.

 

[jzlucas]

Quote from dddooo:

All you have to do is ask:


Generic Congressional Vote:
Republican 37.1%
Democrat 47.3%
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/generic_vote.html

That's certainly not a guarantee but a pretty solid evidence that the democrats do have a chance. Of course their chances will only increase if Cheney keeps shooting his republican supporters and voters.

Hmmm... what to do next weekend? Should I take a joyride w/ Mr. Kennedy or go hunting w/ Mr. Cheney? I guess Ill just stay home and reply to political threads again. (Sigh).

 

[Sam123]

Fair enough. The lagging indicators are not so rosy, but let me say it in a different way: The public yearns for leadership so much they will “flip flop” party lines to go where the leadership is. I think the Republican party still has it over the Dems, despite the polls reflecting incumbent dissatisfaction. In other words, the next election cycle will show that Democrats still can’t top Republicans on potential leadership. So the voters will stick with the incumbents, even thought they are not satisfied with them today.

And it goes back to what I was asking: what do the Dems have to show for in the next election cycle?

Quote from dddooo:

All you have to do is ask:


Generic Congressional Vote:
Republican 37.1%
Democrat 47.3%
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/generic_vote.html

That's certainly not a guarantee but a pretty solid evidence that the democrats do have a chance. Of course their chances will only increase if Cheney keeps shooting his republican supporters and voters.

 

[dddooo]

Quote from Sam123:

And it goes back to what I was asking: what do the Dems have to show for in the next election cycle?

I think after Cheney's shooting rampage the democratic gun-control position will better resonate with the public.

Just kidding, seriously though it will be a mid-term election, it will be decided by local issues, quality of the candidates and whether voters want to restore checks and balances to the government. BTW the dems will have quite a few very high quality candidates - Iraq war veterans.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

I appreciate that the White House's failure to announce this "incident" hardly ranks with other scandals, notably Cheney lying this country into war.

But I refuse to demur to the sensitivities of Katherine Armstrong, a wealthy Texas Republican (and apparently a major Halliburton shareholder) who is attempting to minimize the significance of what happened, to the point of twisting the facts and lying outright to the press. For example, these two instances, noted by E&P:

In an odd disparity, Armstrong told the Houston Chronicle that Whittington, 78, was "bruised more than bloodied" in the incident and "his pride was hurt more than anything else." Yet he was airlifted to a hospital and has spent more than a day in an intensive care unit.

The Chronicle also reports Monday that hunting accidents are amazingly rare in Texas. In 2004, it said, the state's 1 million-plus hunters were involved in only 29 hunting-related accidents (19 involving firearms), four of which were fatal.

Notwithstanding the statistical evidence, Katherine Armstrong is painting such injuries as commonplace:

Cheney has come to her ranch to hunt quail once a year for at least 15 years, and she called him "a very conscientious hunter."

"I would shoot with Dick Cheney everywhere, anywhere, and not think twice about it," she said. But she said, "The nature of quail shooting ensures that this will happen. It goes with the turf."

Lie, lie, lie. It goes with the turf, too. If you are a Republican, that is.

"And I hope you'll understand if any of us come before a court and we can't remember Abramoff, you'll tend to believe us." - Senator Lindsey Graham.


Posted by: willfarnaby on February 13, 2006 at 04:03am

 

[hapaboy]

 

[Trader5287]

I want to know about the bird in question - not the lawyer. Was the bird in a box? Never been much of a hunter other than birds every few years. It is difficult to the point of near impossible to hit one in the wooded areas which predominate around here where we go.

With skeet you know when the launcher is being pulled and the general direction of flight. That's what these canned hunts are really like I'd imagine. Not much sport in that kind of a hunt. Kind of thing Mr. Market would do.

Looks like Cheney has opted for canned bird hunts in the past:

"Dick Cheney is under fire for shooting birds. The Vice President has come under attack from an animal rights group for participating in a “canned hunt” in which he reportedly killed pheasants that were released for the purpose of being shot by hunters.

THE INCREASINGLY low-profile V.P. was taken to Pittsburgh by Air Force Two earlier this week where his “security detail loaded him and his favorite shotgun into a Humvee,” and went to Rolling Rock Club in Ligonier Township, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. There, he and nine other hunting buddies shot at 500 ringneck pheasants, killing 417 of them. The V.P. was credited with offing 70 of the birds, as well as an unknown number of mallard ducks.

The shooting spree prompted an outraged letter from the Humane Society. “This wasn’t a hunting ground. It was an open-air abattoir, and the vice president should be ashamed to have patronized this operation and then slaughtered so many animals,” Wayne Pacelle, a senior vice president of The Humane Society of the United States, wrote in a letter of protest, according to ThePittsburghChannel.com. “If the Vice President and his friends wanted to sharpen their shooting skills, they could have shot skeet or clay, not resorted to the slaughter of more than 400 creatures planted right in front of them as animated targets.”

Who in hell would want to be given one of those birds for a gift - even if it was from the VP? Bet most of them went right in the trash.

Finally, don't give me any BS about other kinds of hunting or fishing. Sure, they chum the water on deep sea trips and a fox is in a box at the start of a fox hunt - but that is still different than scores of pheasants stored up for release.

So I say pffffttt Cheney if that's what they were up to on this hunt.

 

[Covertibility]

Quote from Sam123:

Fair enough. The lagging indicators are not so rosy, but let me say it in a different way: The public yearns for leadership so much they will “flip flop” party lines to go where the leadership is. I think the Republican party still has it over the Dems, despite the polls reflecting incumbent dissatisfaction. In other words, the next election cycle will show that Democrats still can’t top Republicans on potential leadership. So the voters will stick with the incumbents, even thought they are not satisfied with them today.

And it goes back to what I was asking: what do the Dems have to show for in the next election cycle?

Maybe thats why in the 2 gubernatorial races in 2005 - New Jersey and Virginia- Democrats took both states. Georgie even showed up in Virginia to help his GOP buddy but to no avail. Everyone sees the incompetency of the Republicans. It'll show up in the polls this year.