Guns don't kill, V.P.'s do (well injure at least) [Archive]

usmc1

02-12-2006, 04:03 PM

What I wonder is if this shooting accident was investigated by the proepr authorities with a blood sample of the shooter being taken to see if he was impaired.

Wanna bet?

As for as shooting and hunting goes, well after hunting and being hunted by the world's most dangerous game I've given up shooting critters.

But, I'm thinking about getting an M1 from the CMP resale deal, factory standard M1s ocne "used" by the Danish army $400 -$800 bucks. Just to see if I can still put a round up up a gnats bunghole at 500 yards, and knock off those damn feral pigs taht are tearing up the pasture.

But, back to Cheney, he's lucky he didn't take the guy's head off. Damn careless shooting without looking, cause if he'd have looked, he wouldn't have shot.

But hey, silver, dude..there's still coon hunting, grab a jug of WT, black jack or some Dr. Beam, load the dogs into the pickem up, get some buddies, turn the dogs loose, build a fire, drink whiskey, roast spuds in the embers and tell lies and listen to the dogs run ole bandit face up a tree one mo time. Heck dang yeah.

Line up your sight, take in a deep breath, let half out and squeeze.

hm0504

02-12-2006, 04:51 PM

I cannot believe the cynicism of the liberals on this board.

I am sure that this incident will be as investigated as thoroughly as the Weapons of Mass Deception issue. No doubt one of Cheney's body guards probably meant to say something like "There's Harry over there" but actually said "There's quarry over there" and Cheney just reacted with the information he was given.

hm0504

02-12-2006, 05:09 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sliver:
This is sure to open LOTS of anti-gun quacks. I'm sure tomorrow's paper will be full of editorials/cartoons depicting this accident in the most negative way possible. Why? Because it sells more newspapers.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, there ought to be a law limiting how humourous cartoons about Pres. and V. Pres. can be -- could be part of the 2006 version of the Alien and Sedition Act.

Hooked

02-12-2006, 05:57 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sliver:
This is sure to open LOTS of anti-gun quacks.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is that like um.. an unqualified doctor who doesn't support guns

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Sadly missing those misty mornings, restless dogs, and the comraderie of good friends.
Rick </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sure there are better activities over which to bond than killing defenseless, innocent, dumb animals. Congrats on giving up hunting.

nudeM

02-12-2006, 06:26 PM

You can bet your a** the liberal media will no doubt, turn this into a political agenda, especially the ones who want to enforce gun control. I can hear it now. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/smoking.gif

Qikdraw

02-12-2006, 06:38 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sliver:
This is sure to open LOTS of anti-gun quacks. I'm sure tomorrow's paper will be full of editorials/cartoons depicting this accident in the most negative way possible. Why? Because it sells more newspapers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't think this is a left wing thing. You know full well that if Kerry or Dean did this the media would be all over it too.

Stop looking for something that isn't there...

Qikdraw

nacktman

02-12-2006, 06:51 PM

What is surprising is that it was reported at all, what with the mass media firmly in the right wing hip pocket.

As to an investigation into the circumstances that led to the "accidental" shooting, http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/rofl5.gif why should you expect something that is required by law most everywhere to be adhered to?

Paniga

02-12-2006, 07:03 PM

Sounds like the white house didnt want this to be reported as it was almost 24hrs later after a owner of the farm told a local paper about it then it made the news. its not a sport unless the animals have guns too

CharlieMike

02-12-2006, 07:25 PM

I am sure many will say guns should be banned and VP Chaney impeached. I think cars should be banned and Sen Kennedy jailed.

jon71

02-12-2006, 07:51 PM

I don't want guns outlawed, I only favor common sense restrictions. If a person does use a gun they should be used with great care and responsibility. I think it speaks to his personality that he lacked caution. I do believe it was an accident but it seems to be a careless preventable accident.

Swimguy

02-12-2006, 07:55 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Cheney shoots fellow hunter:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/02/12/cheney-hunt.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a tragedy for Cheney and his friend. Another tragedy is that we turn such things into political fuel.

Qikdraw

02-12-2006, 08:02 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CharlieMike:
I am sure many will say guns should be banned and VP Chaney impeached. I think cars should be banned and Sen Kennedy jailed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now thats just crazy talk.

My opinion on this is the right is making far to big a deal of what the left might say. You're creating the very thing you say the left is doing. Its just stupid.

Anyway... Cheney had an accident, thats it, an accident. Yes its going to make news, he's a big news item guy thingy... The right is complaining because it made the news... Maybe the right is afraid the left will do to Cheney what the right has done to Kennedy and the whole Kopeckny(sp?) drowning. Whats the saying? "We fear most what is in ourselves." Or something like that.

Anyway, my take on guns & hunting... Hunting is fine, trophy hunting is not. (at least eat what you kill, not for the 'sport' of it)
Guns are fine, although I have no idea why there is a need for an assault rifle to be used against animals with no way to shoot back.

Qikdraw

jon71

02-12-2006, 10:13 PM

Quickdraw has a good point. There are even some aid organizations (food banks) that will accept game meat to give to the poor. If any hunters wish to do that ask about the places you have locally, not all can safely store and handle the meat.

azgreen

02-13-2006, 01:04 AM

This only reinforces the fact that Cheney is part of the gang that can't shoot straight. And also that this man is a loose canon. The shady part of this being reported (or improperly reported) underescores how shadowy and not forthcoming this admistration is. Shoot, ready, aim.

tarsus

02-13-2006, 05:17 AM

maybe he thought he saw a democrat. i am pro gun of course. no longer hunt haven't have in many years after losing my best rabbit dog,knew never would be another like her,the perfect partner. [died giving birth].

hooked; ever been to disney world? any idea how much wetland was distoryed to build that palace to a mouse?
true i have killed the defenseless.--but never in such great numbers. and autos how many here knew someone now gone because of a car? nobody is going to give up driving to protest that are they? myself, i could name a dozen i counted as friends,and some classmates; and my childern already remember three.

myself i think the bush gang should be called the "insane clown posse" but that name is already taken.
pro gun,pro wildlife. anti bush.

my weapon of choice? a pump shotgun. any idea how much damage one of those things can do? assault rifes are totally useless for hunting. but we all know it's better to take small amounts at a time rather then the whole thing at once. the gun control act of 1968 was an inch now they want the mile.

tinner666

02-13-2006, 05:33 AM

A General Assembly member here fired off a round in the General Assembly building about a week or so ago. It was reported. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif
The guy is a anti-nudity nut, far as the youth camps go, but pro-gun. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/confused.gif
It started a flurry of comments about stopping citizens from going to the General Assembly while armed, but it seems to have died down. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

For the record, it's not about being able to carry inside the building, it's the ability to travel to and from your vehicle to any building safely. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

tinner666

02-13-2006, 05:39 AM

usmc1

[QUOTE]
But, I'm thinking about getting an M1 from the CMP resale deal, factory standard M1s ocne "used" by the Danish army $400 -$800 bucks. Just to see if I can still put a round up up a gnats bunghole at 500 yards, and knock off those damn feral pigs taht are tearing up the pasture. QUOTE]

Could you let me know more about this. I want an ex- M-14 from springfield Armory, but it's way out of my range. But it was one of my favorite weapons, even for plinking. You can pm me.

shomymojo

02-13-2006, 06:48 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Cheney shoots fellow hunter:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/02/12/cheney-hunt.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Its OK...he only shot a lawyer...and that is legal in Texas....LOL...( but only during season...and you have to tag em)...LOL

shomymojo

02-13-2006, 07:00 AM

And....its still safer to hunt with Dick Chaney...than it is to ride in a car with Teddy Kennedy...LOL

xgsft

02-13-2006, 07:54 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shomymojo:
And....its still safer to hunt with Dick Chaney...that it is to ride with Teddy Kennedy...LOL </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL Good point! I only hope it does not get as bad as everyone says it can. However, I can see it happening sence everyone wants something to further thier agenda regardless of the curcumstance.

usmc1

02-13-2006, 09:49 AM

Dicke Cheney's top ten excuses for shooting his hunting buddy!

10. Sick and tired of Whittington's "Hey, I'm having a heart attack" jokes.

9. Pushed over edge by Dixie Chicks and Streisand blasting on pick-up truck stereo.

8. Ongoing dispute over whether it's acceptable to torture quail before shooting them.

7. Thought he saw Scooter Libby on other side of tree line.

6. Bombed out of his gourd on Wild Turkey and Lone Star Beer.

5. Companion's ill-advised decision to wear Moveon.org sweatshirt.

4. Was trying to impress Jodie Foster.

3. Whittington's repeated ribbing that Bush is actually the "real president".

2. Targeting scope on rifle made by Halliburton

And the number one excuse given by Dick Cheney for almost blowing away hunting companion Harry Whittington...

1. Because he's a wartime vice president, damn it!

Captain Curmudgeon

02-13-2006, 11:32 AM

Whatever happened to the NRA Hunter Safety Course? I took it when I was a kid and it was excellent. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> CNN reported that Cheney had his gun cocked and whirled around to fire at a bird not realizing that Whittington had walked up without announced himself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
One thing it taught was not to shoot behind the line of hunt without at least looking. Actually, they were more adamant than that: don't shoot behind the line of hunt.

I wish the NRA would give some of its political contributions in kind, i.e. the Hunter Safety Course.

But then I'm prone to pointing out that if Hinkley had had proper NRA training, there never would have been a Brady Bill.

P.S. Found this (http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/2693558/detail.html) while looking up details and it gives some insight into Cheney as sportsman and shooter.

karrenlandry

02-13-2006, 12:09 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
I'm sure there are better activities over which to bond than killing defenseless, innocent, dumb animals. Congrats on giving up hunting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Call me liberal, I must agree. Look, these were two very wealthy older white gentlemen who certainly weren't hunting to put dinner on the table. In my opinion, anyone who hunts for "sport" is entitled to a face full of birdshot! (Anyone careless enough to walk into the line of fire without announcing himself AND anyone stupid enough to shoot without looking first is also just asking for this lesson!)

I say if the press can get away with needling a powerful Republican, have a ball! We liberals have been 'under fire' as well.

...and yes, I'm a gun owner.
karrenlandry

shomymojo

02-13-2006, 12:27 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by usmc1:
Dicke Cheney's top ten excuses for shooting his hunting buddy!

10. Sick and tired of Whittington's "Hey, I'm having a heart attack" jokes.

9. Pushed over edge by Dixie Chicks and Streisand blasting on pick-up truck stereo.

8. Ongoing dispute over whether it's acceptable to torture quail before shooting them.

7. Thought he saw Scooter Libby on other side of tree line.

6. Bombed out of his gourd on Wild Turkey and Lone Star Beer.

5. Companion's ill-advised decision to wear Moveon.org sweatshirt.

4. Was trying to impress Jodie Foster.

3. Whittington's repeated ribbing that Bush is actually the "real president".

2. Targeting scope on rifle made by Halliburton

And the number one excuse given by Dick Cheney for almost blowing away hunting companion Harry Whittington...

1. Because he's a wartime vice president, damn it! </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Good ones USMC1...made me chuckle...I too have been pelted with buckshot during a hunt...and it will get your attention...and make you more careful next time...LOL

Captain Curmudgeon

02-13-2006, 03:04 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by usmc1:
Dicke Cheney's top ten excuses .... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here's some more from Scott (Dilbert) Adams:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Vice President Cheney explained the shooting this way: “I was tracking a covey of quail with my gun barrel. Suddenly Whittington just popped up from the grass, directly in the way, so I shot him. I know my critics on the left will point out that Whittington is not a bird, but he was between the quail and my gun. My feeling is that when you harbor a quail, it’s the same as being one...”
...
A spokesman for the Whitehouse pointed out that Whittington was a known quail sympathizer. “Our intelligence told us he had WMD in his Elmer Fudd hat. A lot of people were fooled, not just us.” </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Blog (http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/)

nacktman

02-13-2006, 03:15 PM

Here it is folks...

Qikdraw

02-13-2006, 04:52 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shomymojo:
Its OK...he only shot a lawyer...and that is legal in Texas....LOL...( but only during season...and you have to tag em)...LOL </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, now that's funny. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/beam.gif

Qikdraw

Naturist Mark

02-13-2006, 04:56 PM

The shooting itself sounds like a regretable accident. For that Mr. Whittington and Dick Cheney have my sympathy.

I am concerned that the police were not notified in a timely manner and that the Secret Service did not allow them to interview the Vice President. Clearly the standards of law that apply to everyone else were not followed. One of the first duties of an investigating officer would have been to determine if alcohol was involved, but that would be a moot point 22 hours after the fact.

-Mark

Qikdraw

02-13-2006, 04:59 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by karrenlandry:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
I'm sure there are better activities over which to bond than killing defenseless, innocent, dumb animals. Congrats on giving up hunting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Call me liberal, I must agree. Look, these were two very wealthy older white gentlemen who certainly weren't hunting to put dinner on the table. In my opinion, anyone who hunts for "sport" is entitled to a face full of birdshot! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If they were going to eat what they shot, whats the problem? I don't have a problem with rich folk, or poor folk, going hunting. As long as they eat what they shoot.

Don't be so anti-rich, or anti-republican that anyone in those categories is wrong in anything they do.

Qikdraw

Naturist Mark

02-13-2006, 05:12 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
If they were going to eat what they shot, whats the problem? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I want to be on record as firmly opposed to eating elderly republican lawyers.

-Mark

roadrambler2

02-13-2006, 05:20 PM

Ole "shoot and ask later Dicke Boy" didn't have a migratory bird stamp! Poor intelegence one would think.

karrenlandry

02-13-2006, 06:32 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by karrenlandry:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
I'm sure there are better activities over which to bond than killing defenseless, innocent, dumb animals. Congrats on giving up hunting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Call me liberal, I must agree. Look, these were two very wealthy older white gentlemen who certainly weren't hunting to put dinner on the table. In my opinion, anyone who hunts for "sport" is entitled to a face full of birdshot! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If they were going to eat what they shot, whats the problem? I don't have a problem with rich folk, or poor folk, going hunting. As long as they eat what they shoot.
Qikdraw </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I do have a problem with people hunting when they can easily afford all the food they could ever need or want. I also have a problem with the fact that in America there are still a lot of people who can't afford enough food to live on, particularly when the Cheneys of this world live high on the hog. Being rich is not inherently bad in my book; keeping it all to yourself is unconscionable.

Frankly I don't care what Dickie and Harry were planning to do with the birds they 'dropped'. They were first and foremost hunting as sport, and that's not only disrespectful to the birds they were using for their enjoyment, but downright wasteful.

karrenlandry

karrenlandry

02-13-2006, 06:35 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
The shooting itself sounds like a regretable accident. For that Mr. Whittington and Dick Cheney have my sympathy.

I am concerned that the police were not notified in a timely manner and that the Secret Service did not allow them to interview the Vice President. Clearly the standards of law that apply to everyone else were not followed. One of the first duties of an investigating officer would have been to determine if alcohol was involved, but that would be a moot point 22 hours after the fact.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Right you are, Mark. However, here in America the President and the people who work for him are above the law. Our fearless leader said that, remember?
It may seem innocent enough now, but look out...

karrenlandry

NudeAl

02-13-2006, 06:57 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The shooting itself sounds like a regretable accident. For that Mr. Whittington and Dick Cheney have my sympathy.

I am concerned that the police were not notified in a timely manner and that the Secret Service did not allow them to interview the Vice President. Clearly the standards of law that apply to everyone else were not followed. One of the first duties of an investigating officer would have been to determine if alcohol was involved, but that would be a moot point 22 hours after the fact.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well that's nothing new. Out here in Kaulifournya, that's California to you and me, the Govenator had a little traffic mishap while riding around on his classic Harley. Only problem was the Gov dosen't have a motorcycle license and he had a passenger. He was not cited and the whole thing seemed to play very favorably in the media. Now I know damn good and well if you or I had been involved in an accident like that we would be getting a big fat tickett. Want another one from recent headlines? How about old Brittney Spears holding her baby in her lap while speeding away from those dangerous stalker Paparazzi?

Of course the rules are different for the rich and famous. It's no different now than at any other time in history. It is just that we seem to be more selective in who we deem worthy of extra media attention when it is brought to light. Justice is blind my eye!

One more note. The hunter who was injured left the hunting party to retrieve a bird he had shot, okay no biggie. However, when he was headed back to the hunting party he failed to announce that so everyone in the party would know he was comming up on them. I think it was a fairly common form of accident. But the real problem is in the time it took to report the incident and some of the procedures the police followed.

MJ_KC

02-13-2006, 07:26 PM

sw1sweendog

02-13-2006, 08:08 PM

cheney was hunting with out the proper permits,got off with a warning.....you or me.big fines.must be nice

Qikdraw

02-13-2006, 08:22 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by karrenlandry:
I do have a problem with people hunting when they can easily afford all the food they could ever need or want. I also have a problem with the fact that in America there are still a lot of people who can't afford enough food to live on, particularly when the Cheneys of this world live high on the hog. Being rich is not inherently bad in my book; keeping it all to yourself is unconscionable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you do have a problem with the rich then. You're saying that the rich should give their money to the poor. I disagree. I think the rich should pay their fair taxes, and some of that money should go to the poor, but I don't think we need to take away money from the rich, just because they have it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Frankly I don't care what Dickie and Harry were planning to do with the birds they 'dropped'. They were first and foremost hunting as sport, and that's not only disrespectful to the birds they were using for their enjoyment, but downright wasteful. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

See? You don't even care what they were going to do with the birds they got. That's just anti-rich, and anti-republican for no reason. Maybe they were going to give that money to a shelter? Or maybe they were just going to eat it. Does it matter as long as the birds get eaten?

Most people drink milk and eat beef and chickens... Don't you find the way those animals are treated horrible? ANy time someone mentions food you should be after them for teh horrible treatment these animals go through.

You can be anti-rich and anti-republican all you want, but you should at least be fair about it. Contrary to popular belief politicians are allowed to have lives outside of politics.

Qikdraw

Qikdraw

02-13-2006, 08:38 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NudeAl:
Well that's nothing new. Out here in Kaulifournya, that's California to you and me, the Govenator had a little traffic mishap while riding around on his classic Harley. Only problem was the Gov dosen't have a motorcycle license and he had a passenger. He was not cited and the whole thing seemed to play very favorably in the media. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He got off on a technicality. He had a sidecar on the motorcycle, which means he doesn't need the licence. Even though he admitted that he has been driving for 20-odd years, with no sidecar, in blatant violation of the law. Its nice to know we have a governator that has no problem with breaking the law...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But the real problem is in the time it took to report the incident and some of the procedures the police followed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very true, and this is where we should be looking, not that Cheney accidently shot someone. (even if he was a lawyer)

Qikdraw

Qikdraw

02-13-2006, 08:40 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sw1sweendog:
cheney was hunting with out the proper permits,got off with a warning.....you or me.big fines.must be nice </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well to be fair to Cheney, he probably had a staffer get him the licence, who flubbed up with it. It is his own fault for not double checking. He should have gotten fines at the very least. Hell he should have demended to get a ticket so that no one could go after him for special treatment.

Qikdraw

Bob S.

02-13-2006, 10:49 PM

As Al mentioned, it wasn't totally Cheney's fault for shooting Mr. Whittington. He had gone off to retrieve a downed quail and failed to give proper warning before coming back. Note to hunters: When hunting in a group, make sure everyone knows where every is.

The White House Press Corps' reaction was insane. They were left out of the loop for once. To them, that is unfathomable. They must be told about everything immediately!

But remember, the most important thing is that Mr. Whittington is going to be fine. Or is it a good thing?..He is afterall a lawyer! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif

Bob S.

usmc1

02-14-2006, 09:42 AM

TV joke writers take shots at Cheney

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Television talk shows took aim Monday at Vice President Dick Cheney's accidental weekend shooting in Texas of a hunting companion. Here are a few of the jokes.

"Late Show with David Letterman," CBS

"Good news, ladies and gentlemen, we have finally located weapons of mass destruction: It's Dick Cheney."

"But here is the sad part -- before the trip Donald Rumsfeld had denied the guy's request for body armor."

"We can't get Bin Laden, but we nailed a 78-year-old attorney."

"The guy who got gunned down, he is a Republican lawyer and a big Republican donor and fortunately the buck shot was deflected by wads of laundered cash. So he's fine. He took a little in the wallet."
"The Tonight Show with Jay Leno," NBC

"Although it is beautiful here in California, the weather back East has been atrocious. There was so much snow in Washington, D.C., Dick Cheney accidentally shot a fat guy thinking it was a polar bear."

"That's the big story over the weekend. ... Dick Cheney accidentally shot a fellow hunter, a 78-year-old lawyer. In fact, when people found out he shot a lawyer, his popularity is now at 92 percent."

"I think Cheney is starting to lose it. After he shot the guy he screamed, 'Anyone else want to call domestic wire tapping illegal?' "

"Dick Cheney is capitalizing on this for Valentine's Day. It's the new Dick Cheney cologne. It's called Duck!"
"The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," Comedy Central

The show's segment titles included "Cheney's Got a Gun," "No. 2 With a Bullet" and "Dead-Eye Dick."

"Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot a man during a quail hunt ... making 78-year-old Harry Whittington the first person shot by a sitting veep since Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton, of course, (was) shot in a duel with Aaron Burr over issues of honor, integrity and political maneuvering. Whittington? Mistaken for a bird."

"Now, this story certainly has its humorous aspects. ... But it also raises a serious issue, one which I feel very strongly about. ... Moms, dads, if you're watching right now, I can't emphasize this enough: Do not let your kids go on hunting trips with the vice president. I don't care what kind of lucrative contracts they're trying to land, or energy regulations they're trying to get lifted -- it's just not worth it."
"Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson," CBS

"He is a lawyer and he got shot in the face. But he's a lawyer, he can use his other face. He'll be all right."

"You can understand why this lawyer fellow let his guard down, because if you're out hunting with a politician, you think, 'If I'm going to get it, it's going to be in the back.' "

"The big scandal apparently is that they didn't release the news for 18 hours. I don't think that's a scandal at all. I'm quite pleased about that. Finally there's a secret the vice president's office can keep."

"Apparently the reason they didn't release the information right away is they said we had to get the facts right. That's never stopped them in the past."

hm0504

02-14-2006, 09:50 AM

Well, I hate to think what would have happened if Cheney had gone quail hunting with former Bush V.P. Dan Quayle.

nacktman

02-14-2006, 10:15 AM

hm0504, I think we'd be debating the spelling of tomato or is it tomatoe.

Or the merits of Quayle hunting and the bag limit on the pesky noisemakers.

nimrod

02-14-2006, 10:42 AM

nacktman you stole my joke! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/angry.gif

I was going to say that Quayle was being hunted for not knowing how to spell. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/rolleyes2.gif Or something along those lines. Well, it would make more sence with this government if Gore was hunted down for Quayles spelling. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wiseguy.gif

usmc1

02-14-2006, 12:09 PM

Definition of risky business:

Golfing with Ford.

Hunting with Cheney.

Anything with Quayle.

nacktman

02-14-2006, 01:24 PM

Cheney's victim had a heart attack at approx. 7:30 am this morning and the administration doesn't feel the buckshot inside the victim's body around the heart had anything to do with it?

Damn, if I smoked dope I'd want to get my hands on whatever those nitwits are smoking ... I mean a 78 year old man who has just been hit in the face and chest by a shotgun blast of 7 1/2 buckshot at 30 yards or less not having enough stress and trama to his body not to trigger a heart attack.

There may be no connection, but damn it sure is awfully close in timing there McGhee.
http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/shrug.gif

Captain Curmudgeon

02-14-2006, 01:47 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:
As Al mentioned, it wasn't totally Cheney's fault for shooting Mr. Whittington. He had gone off to retrieve a downed quail and failed to give proper warning before coming back. Note to hunters: When hunting in a group, make sure everyone knows where every is. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What was Cheney's fault: <UL TYPE=SQUARE> <LI>Shooting behind the line of hunt (nice diagram in today's SLC Trib). <LI>Shooting without looking. [/list]

If Whittington had said something, I doubt that would have stopped Cheney. There's an old story about (I think) the Mad King of Bavaria. After shooting one of his court officials, another court official wore a sign saying (in Barvarian, of course) "I not a deer." The Mad King shot him and said "I thought the sign said 'I am a deer.'"

hm0504

02-14-2006, 01:54 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
Cheney's victim had a heart attack at approx. 7:30 am this morning and the administration doesn't feel the buckshot inside the victim's body around the heart had anything to do with it?

Damn, if I smoked dope I'd want to get my hands on whatever those nitwits are smoking ... I mean a 78 year old man who has just been hit in the face and chest by a shotgun blast of 7 1/2 buckshot at 30 yards or less not having enough stress and trama to his body not to trigger a heart attack.

There may be no connection, but damn it sure is awfully close in timing there McGhee.
http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/shrug.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I heard the heart attack was likely caused by a piece of bird shot that had moved to Whittington's heart. Anyway, the important thing to remember is that whatever happens, none of it is the V.P.'s fault.

nacktman

02-14-2006, 02:03 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> ... none of it is the V.P.'s fault. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, hm, but it is ALWAYS the one who squeezes the trigger who is at fault.
That is the first Cardinal Rule of Firearm Saftey.

You NEVER squeeze the trigger unless you are sure of your target.

You NEVER squeeze the trigger across or behind the line of the hunt.

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/book.gif

hm0504

02-14-2006, 02:10 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> ... none of it is the V.P.'s fault. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, hm, but it is ALWAYS the one who squeezes the trigger who is at fault.
That is the first Cardinal Rule of Firearm Saftey.

You NEVER squeeze the trigger unless you are sure of your target.

You NEVER squeeze the squeeze across or behind the line of the hunt.

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/book.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry nacktman, but that is pre-9/11 thinking. Please see
http://clothesfreeforums.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/270...880049604#8880049604 (http://clothesfreeforums.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2700016152/m/4840049604/r/8880049604#8880049604)
for the new think.

nacktman

02-14-2006, 02:21 PM

Oh, you mean theo-con orwellian groupthink. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/idea3.gif

Yep, using that fantasy it is everyone's fault but the V.P. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/goofy.gif

Daveinct

02-14-2006, 04:18 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
If they were going to eat what they shot, whats the problem? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I want to be on record as firmly opposed to eating elderly republican lawyers.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/applause.gif Best line of the thread. Was going to remark that Whittington looks nothing like Dan Quayle, and wonder why Cheney would be hunting Quayle, but others beat me to the punch.

I understand that Cheney didn't have a license for migratory birds, but is Whittington migratory? Do you have to have a license for migratory lawyers in TX?

Okay, now that I've been flip about it, I have to resume wondering if Harry's related to a guitar playing acquaintance of mine who's from TX and also named Whittington.

Dave

KetchumMaine

02-14-2006, 06:59 PM

My name is Kevin and I am pleased to inform you that you have been selected to be a special guest on Vice President Cheney's next hunting party. We will be sending you a package soon with supplies. Please disregard the bullseye on the safety vest, as it is only there to protect your face. This is an all expenses paid trip including transportation, meals, medical care and final expenses.

<----[Hey, this post actually goes with the picture of me when I worked for a call center)

02-14-2006, 09:11 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shomymojo:
Its OK...he only shot a lawyer...and that is legal in Texas....LOL...( but only during season...and you have to tag em)...LOL </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So my question is what is the legal limit of lawyers in Texas? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wink3.gif

P.J.

02-14-2006, 10:48 PM

I like Vice President Dick Cheney, and would normally object to the wild responses that the recent news has generated.

However, I hate blood sports, such as boxing and hunting (with the exception of hunting for food).

I'm not an advocate of any political-motivated gun control laws, but gun safety cannot be stressed enough!

Whether it's a Senator's negligent disregard for the life of a young woman which is snuffed out beneath the waters of the Chappaquiddick River or an accidental hunting injury caused by a Vice President, nobody should get a free pass.

P.J.

02-14-2006, 10:51 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by usmc1:
Definition of risky business:

Golfing with Ford.

Hunting with Cheney.

Anything with Quayle. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's not forget riding with Ted Kennedy on a warm summer night.

tinner666

02-15-2006, 03:36 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
If they were going to eat what they shot, whats the problem? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I want to be on record as firmly opposed to eating elderly republican lawyers.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. The meat is too tough and usually very stringy. And in this case, you run the risk of getting the 'lawyer disease', similar to eating a cow with the 'mad cow' disease. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/beam.gif

usmc1

02-15-2006, 10:23 AM

Oh,oh! Lynne Cheney is P.O'd. Seems the boys was tippling a little and each had sweetie before the shooting went down..and now it emerges that the woman ranch owner "eyewitness" who the White House left it to to "report" the incident was nowhere around the shooting.

Vicious rumors, maybe. But, you know, nudge, nudge, where's there's smoke, there's gonna be some fire, wink, wink.

God, I love it, this is fun, playing Republican and throwing slime at someone.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/cheneys-chappaquiddick-i_b_15711.html

Naturist Mark

02-15-2006, 03:31 PM

So Cheney's "hunting trip" was actually two married couples (but not married to each other) on a picnic and some live skeet shooting of pen raised birds with clipped wings. Really more of a double date. This is just the Texas oligarch version of lunch and an afternoon at the video arcade with Betty and Veronica.

Hey, ya'll. Do you remember during the Clinton administration when the Republicans and the Supreme Court established that the Secret Service can testify about the activities of the President and Vice President?

-Mark

usmc1

02-15-2006, 03:53 PM

Yep Mark that's right.

But, the funniest lines yet showed up on Smirking Chimp or maybe KOS blog today. Anyway.

Writer one writes: "I just wish the S.O.B. would have shot back".

Writer two writes: "I just wish I could grant your wish".

NudeAl

02-15-2006, 07:15 PM

Well he fessed up to it. Said there is no one to blame for this but him. He laid to rest the theory that ol' what's his name was to blame for not announcing his presence to the other hunter. I never heard him ever deny it much to his credit. Does this in any way change things. Public atonement or at least an admission of responsibility for these actions.

Naturist Mark

02-15-2006, 08:20 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NudeAl:
Well he fessed up to it. Said there is no one to blame for this but him. He laid to rest the theory that ol' what's his name was to blame for not announcing his presence to the other hunter. I never heard him ever deny it much to his credit. Does this in any way change things. Public atonement or at least an admission of responsibility for these actions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let me ask you this:

If it had been you who had accidently shot a hunting buddy ...

-Would you have been able to send the police away so that you could be interviewed the next morning?
-would you have been given the opportunity to buy the appropriate hunting license retroactively?
-would you have been able to avoid an immediate sobriety check?
-under the same circumstances, would the police have publicly 'cleared' you of any wrongdoing?

Or would you be sitting in a jail cell waiting to see a judge?

It was a regretable accident. But as usual the problem is in the response and coverup and the special treatment.

-Mark

roadrambler2

02-16-2006, 06:44 AM

Amen Mark, you hit it right on the ole coconut!!

sentient

02-16-2006, 08:58 AM

Cheney's Got A Gun:

http://dickcheneyquailhunt.cf.huffingtonpost.com

http://www.duckhuntvp.ytmnd.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_X5ryBGHGA

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

usmc1

02-16-2006, 11:14 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by P.J.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by usmc1:
Definition of risky business:

Golfing with Ford.

Hunting with Cheney.

Anything with Quayle. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's not forget riding with Ted Kennedy on a warm summer night. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd take a cross-country road trip in a Ford Pinto or Chevy Corvair with Teddy driving while loaded on speed and chug-a-luggin Mescalin cocktails searching out one-lane wooden bridges to race across blindfolded before I'd walk across the street accompanied by crossing-guards with the dry-drunk, little sociopath now in the White House, or any of his coven of hob-goblins, neo-cons and theo-cons.

Hooked

02-16-2006, 12:35 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tarsus:

hooked; ever been to disney world? any idea how much wetland was distoryed to build that palace to a mouse?
true i have killed the defenseless.--but never in such great numbers. and autos how many here knew someone now gone because of a car? nobody is going to give up driving to protest that are they? myself, i could name a dozen i counted as friends,and some classmates; and my childern already remember three.

myself i think the bush gang should be called the "insane clown posse" but that name is already taken.
pro gun,pro wildlife. anti bush.

my weapon of choice? a pump shotgun. any idea how much damage one of those things can do? assault rifes are totally useless for hunting. but we all know it's better to take small amounts at a time rather then the whole thing at once. the gun control act of 1968 was an inch now they want the mile. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, never been to Disney World and I have no desire ever to go.

Comparing sport hunting to casualties of auto accidents is like comparing apples to oranges and you know it.

I don't care about you weapon of choice. Try a camera instead.

I'm sorry for you loss. Dogs are furry angels.

Hooked

02-16-2006, 12:49 PM

shomymojo

02-16-2006, 02:44 PM

[/QUOTE]

Why don't we go out and torture some puppies too while we're at it because they are only animals and they exist for our pleasure and for fulfillment of our every whim. Who cares that that have feelings, emotions and can feel pain like everyone else? As long as we have a good time doing it, let's go for it! It'll be some good home grown fun, yee haw!

Quite frankly, your stance disgusts me.[/QUOTE] Hey Hooked...everyone to their own opinion..they are like noses...everyone has one...but...I was just wondering...are you also a vegetarian...or do you eat fish, chicken, pork...or beef...and have you ever owned a pair of leather shoes...or a leather belt...or a leather jacket...not judging...just asking

Hooked

02-16-2006, 04:12 PM

Shomymojo,

Yes, I happen to vegan and I do not buy animal produced clothing but that's not what this is about. It's about killing an animal for the fun of it. Maybe I was a little firm about some of the previous posts but I cannot justify killing any living animal for mere sport. Previous posters seem to have no problem with it and I just don't see how anyone could justify that. That was my point about torturing puppies. Most people would say that it's not suitable but hunting woodland creatures for the "fun and camraderie" is somehow ok (?) Forgive my ignorance but I don't see it.

I never said hunting with a bow and arrow to provide food for you and your starving Appelachian family was bad. Sport hunting is not sporting, it's repugnant. Like you said, everyone has an opinion and that's mine whether anyone likes it or not.

Fair enough?

usmc1

02-17-2006, 09:13 AM

Let's say you or I were taking a cocktail of meds and had a beer or two (Ever watch Cops, every drunk driver staggers out of the car saying, "yeah, I had a beer or two earlier in the day") and then blasted some sum***** in the ehad and chest with a shotgun, turned away investigators, boogied out of town and didn't tell my boss--what would ahppen to us. Nevermind, you know, but here's a great article asking the same question.

http://americanpolitics.com/20060216Bisbort.html

Sanslines

02-17-2006, 09:50 AM

I am a vegetarian and became one due to what I have observed from local hunters. I have seen some hunters take a very sadistic pleasure in torturing and killing animals. This totally disguists me. A real sport is when both sides have a chance. Most hunting is not a sport when the odds overwhelmingly favor the hunter. Deer are docile animals and can not fight back. The best they can do is to run and hide. Many hunter's won't admit it, but hunting is primarily a male ego thing. Whether we like to admit it or not, hunting is killing and killing is part of human psych. Some enjoy killing just for the fun of it. Most animal groups have a social family structure. Maby more people would be oppossed to senseless hunting for so called sport if they would consider how they would feel if one of their own family members was hunted.

Garry

02-17-2006, 02:08 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sanslines:
I am a vegetarian and became one due to what I have observed from local hunters. I have seen some hunters take a very sadistic pleasure in torturing and killing animals. This totally disguists me. A real sport is when both sides have a chance. Most hunting is not a sport when the odds overwhelmingly favor the hunter. Deer are docile animals and can not fight back. The best they can do is to run and hide. Many hunter's won't admit it, but hunting is primarily a male ego thing. Whether we like to admit it or not, hunting is killing and killing is part of human psych. Some enjoy killing just for the fun of it. Most animal groups have a social family structure. Maby more people would be oppossed to senseless hunting for so called sport if they would consider how they would feel if one of their own family members was hunted. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you talking about bow or firearm hunters? I'm talking from a firearm hunters POV. Hunters don't torture an animal, most are taken down with one shot. If that shot doesn't happen to kill, the hunter usually takes it down with another shot quickly afterwards. Deer can fight back, ever seen a guy mauled by one? I have and it's not a pretty sight. Yea they do run and it's a challenge to sneak up on one, they have one heck of a sense of sight and smell. What odds? Like I said, deer have their own protection mechanism built in, humans don't.

A male ego thing, I've seen several female hunters out there too. My best friends daughter enjoys going out on the hunt. I hunt for food and or protection (depending on the animal) like the majority of hunters do, not sport. For a lot of people, wild game meat is a stable in their diet.

Humans are hunted in the wild, it's just that we are advanced in knowledge and use that knowledge for protection. Ever see the movie "Hard Target" starring van Damme?

Jr.

Sanslines

02-17-2006, 02:33 PM

I am talking about rifle hunters whom I have seen stand 1/4 mile away from an animal, scope it, then shoot. How is this a challenge? I have heard hunters talk about wounding an animal that ran off with half its guts hanging outside of its body. The hunters were laughing at this as if it were some kind of big joke. I have heard a hunter brag how he strung up a dying deer then took a knife to it to stab it. Is this sport or is this sadistic torture? This past Fall there was a huge problem around here with teenage males going out at night, spotting deer, then shooting and killing them just for fun and leaving the carcasses to rot. Most of these 'kids' hunt during the regular season. Yes there are a FEW female hunters but the vast majority of hunters are male. It certainly is a male ego thing. How can a deer fight back and win against a man with a gun? If a man is dense enough to corner a buck during rutting season or get too close to a wounded animal or charge a deer then yes there will be a somewhat nasty response. Deer do not go around attacking people like polar bears do. As I said above, killing is part of human nature. How people control that urge is up to them. Some people seem to enjoy killing. I don't. That's my choice. To digress for a minute, look at the response to 911 tragedy. Yet, over 10 times as many people are killed each year in the USA due to gun violence. Where is the outrage to this?

Naturist Mark

02-18-2006, 05:15 AM

Welcome to Amerika:

UnitedNudists

02-18-2006, 06:19 AM

tinner666

02-18-2006, 08:50 AM

Reading some of these replies, It makes me wonder why Dick didn't do the sportsmanlike thing and put his wounded quarry down after wounding it?? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif

shomymojo

02-18-2006, 09:38 AM

White House press core's expectations...LOL

Hooked

02-18-2006, 10:09 AM

Sanslines,

Thanks for having a heart. I was starting to lose faith in humanity there for a second. Notice how all the pro-hunters keep going back to the "food/self defense" refrain when we've already excepted that situation in our original arguments?! Let's here someone defend SPORT HUNTING, killing for pleasure, leaving the corpse to rot. That's right, no one can because no matter who you are or how you were raised, you know it's just plain wrong even if you do take part in it, you know.

Anyway, to get off of my soapbox and back to the original topic:

I'm glad he lived but I'm also glad he got shot in the face. I don't mean that in a vindictive way either. I think this experience probably brought him closer to the game (double entendre there) This man has been shooting other sentient creatures for probably around 65 years and it's time he learns what it feels like. He's an old guy and I hope this experience turns him off on hunting for the remaining years he has left.

Mark,
I saw him on CNN apologizing for getting shot too. I was laughing. That's so rediculous. Anything to make the VP look good, I suppose. What a circus!

Naturist Mark

02-18-2006, 10:13 AM

A Friend: apologizes when he shoots you.

A TRUE Friend: apologizes when you shoot him.

Cheney's Got a Gun - mp3 (http://tinyurl.com/8yobj) link fixed

video version (http://www.toonedin.com/cheney.html)

-Mark

MJ_KC

02-18-2006, 12:03 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MJ_KC:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by karrenlandry:
I do have a problem with people hunting when they can easily afford all the food they could ever need or want. I also have a problem with the fact that in America there are still a lot of people who can't afford enough food to live on, particularly when the Cheneys of this world live high on the hog. Being rich is not inherently bad in my book; keeping it all to yourself is unconscionable.

karrenlandry </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I have absolutely no problem with someone hunting for sport, whether they intend to eat the meat or not.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why don't we go out and torture some puppies too while we're at it because they are only animals and they exist for our pleasure and for fulfillment of our every whim. Who cares that that have feelings, emotions and can feel pain like everyone else? As long as we have a good time doing it, let's go for it! It'll be some good home grown fun, yee haw!

Quite frankly, your stance disgusts me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What do puppies have to do with any of this? Frankly your words disgust me.

You could have simply stated your position without having to use hyperbole to make your statement.

Hooked

02-19-2006, 09:32 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MJ_KC:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MJ_KC:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by karrenlandry:
I do have a problem with people hunting when they can easily afford all the food they could ever need or want. I also have a problem with the fact that in America there are still a lot of people who can't afford enough food to live on, particularly when the Cheneys of this world live high on the hog. Being rich is not inherently bad in my book; keeping it all to yourself is unconscionable.

karrenlandry </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I have absolutely no problem with someone hunting for sport, whether they intend to eat the meat or not.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why don't we go out and torture some puppies too while we're at it because they are only animals and they exist for our pleasure and for fulfillment of our every whim. Who cares that that have feelings, emotions and can feel pain like everyone else? As long as we have a good time doing it, let's go for it! It'll be some good home grown fun, yee haw!

Quite frankly, your stance disgusts me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What do puppies have to do with any of this? Frankly your words disgust me.

You could have simply stated your position without having to use hyperbole to make your statement. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not as much a hyperbole as you think. What makes the life of a puppy any more important than the life of a deer or a quail? It's cuter so it has more of a right to live and not be hunted and tortured for sport? I don't see a difference and in fact it's no hyperbole at all. If I was incorrect in the REASON why you have no problem with hunting wether the intent is to eat what you hunt or not, then please enlighten me.

I disgust you? Sure...I'm such a disgusting vegan. It's so disgusting that I've gone out of my way to remove myself from the cycle of violence that is the animal-for-food institution. How vile I am for making fruits and vegetables the staple of my diet instead of meat, milk and eggs. I'm sorry that someone asked and I had to air my dirty, disgusting lifestyle here on the forums. Why oh why did they have to ask me if I was vegetarian or not? Oh well, I sure do hope that you can recover from the disgust I caused you and I hope you never again have the image of me eating friend tofu in place of sausage links in your mind ever again.

Yes, my WORDS were disgusting. I was making a point. Your STANCE is disgusting. I'd rather use a graphic illustration and have a good stance than to have a STANCE that is reprehensible.

Look, I don't mean to offend you. I just don't see how anyone can justify killing for fun/sport. That's what this is all about. You apparently do not wish to justify it, you just want to say that you don't mind it. You are entitled to your opinion without any sort of back up reasoning but then it all turns into opinions and when I hear people say that it's ok to kill animals because they are lesser beings, that disgusts me and since this has now become a let's share out opinons thread, I shared my opinion on your stance. So that's my two cents and I'm done here. I tried to turn this thread back to the original topic once already. If you want to discuss hunting in general, feel free to private message me.

nacktman

02-19-2006, 10:00 AM

Mark your 'Cheney's got a gun' link isn't working. The site appears to have been taken down.

Now, if we want some real fun, we all need to go in an enclosed area 'hunting' inprisoned quarry, then step into the path of a bullet, after which we would apologize for stepping into the bullet's path and ruining the 'hunt' for the shooter. Yeehaw what fun!

MJ_KC

02-19-2006, 10:38 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
I just don't see how anyone can justify killing for fun/sport. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sounds similar to people telling us that they see no justification for us wanting to be nude in public.

There is no need to provide justification for either activity.

Naturist Mark

02-19-2006, 10:53 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
Mark your 'Cheney's got a gun' link isn't working. The site appears to have been taken down. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cheney's Got a Gun - mp3 (http://tinyurl.com/8yobj) link fixed

video version (http://www.toonedin.com/cheney.html)

-Mark

gamblefish

02-19-2006, 12:36 PM

I know some guys here in Ohio who deer hunt. It is mostly a macho thing, but it serves a good purpose. Population control.

Without it, the deer population multiplies until the land cannot support all of them, and they starve to death. Personally, given the choice, I would rather be shot than starve to death.

As for puppies (and kitties), the county dog pound and humane society destroy a bunch of them too every year for much the same reason.

Sad but true. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cry.gif

Naturist Mark

02-19-2006, 01:19 PM

Gamblefish is quite right. Properly managed hunting does keep our wild populations healthy and under control in an environment with few keystone predators. The fees paid by hunters protects vital habitats from development and degradation. Hunters were the first conservationists in the US. It was game bird enthusiasts and the hunter's organization Ducks Unlimited that first recognized the vital resource of natural wetlands, public policy followed their lead decades later. Some of my favorite natural areas in a part of the country with very little wilderness or public lands is land set aside primarily for hunting but also available for public recreation.

Nature red in tooth and claw has been rule since the beginning. People who hunt responsibly are maintaining the natural order - no more cruelly than any other predator. In fact, I know a few "almost" vegans who will eat wild game - because those animals lived free and naturally without being exploited by what they consider an inhumane agricultural system, and in death continue to nurture life.

Even though I am not a hunter, I have no beef with responsible hunting. I don't consider it unduly cruel - and I am a certified animal lover, regular contributor to the Humane Society and Felix. (http://www.aspca.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ih_pro_felix)

That does not mean I support "sport shooting" of live targets, or canned hunts (http://www.hsus.org/legislation_laws/wayne_pacelle_the_animal_advocate/cheneys_canned_kill_and_other_hunting_excesses_of_ the_bush_administration.html) where semi-domesticated raised game are released for executives and vice-president's (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03343/249105.stm) to kill.

-Mark

Hooked

02-19-2006, 02:05 PM

Hooked

02-19-2006, 02:10 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
Gamblefish is quite right. Properly managed hunting does keep our wild populations healthy and under control in an environment with few keystone predators. The fees paid by hunters protects vital habitats from development and degradation. Hunters were the first conservationists in the US. It was game bird enthusiasts and the hunter's organization Ducks Unlimited that first recognized the vital resource of natural wetlands, public policy followed their lead decades later. Some of my favorite natural areas in a part of the country with very little wilderness or public lands is land set aside primarily for hunting but also available for public recreation.

Nature red in tooth and claw has been rule since the beginning. People who hunt responsibly are maintaining the natural order - no more cruelly than any other predator. In fact, I know a few "almost" vegans who will eat wild game - because those animals lived free and naturally without being exploited by what they consider an inhumane agricultural system, and in death continue to nurture life.

Even though I am not a hunter, I have no beef with responsible hunting. I don't consider it unduly cruel - and I am a certified animal lover, regular contributor to the Humane Society and Felix. (http://www.aspca.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ih_pro_felix)

That does not mean I support "sport shooting" of live targets, or canned hunts (http://www.hsus.org/legislation_laws/wayne_pacelle_the_animal_advocate/cheneys_canned_kill_and_other_hunting_excesses_of_ the_bush_administration.html) where semi-domesticated raised game are released for executives and vice-president's (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03343/249105.stm) to kill.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I respecfully disagree with you on the whole poulation control thing but at least I can see the logic in it. If the environment can't support the population then most likely human development is to blame. Starvation vs. getting shot: I think with starvation at least they are given a fighting chance at survival. It's a complicated issue for sure. Generally, I do not trust hunters. They are like cops. Power-hungry, macho, and not the smartest people in the world. (my personal experience here, not that every hunter fits this description) Why trust them with something as important as our wildlife? Also, the preservationists have done work for the joy of doing it whereas the conservationists tended to do it for good public relations and had their own agenda (read: preserve a habitat so we will have a place to go huntin') It's kind of a mixed bag with the conservationists. With the preservationists you know exactly where they stand. (Prof Stoufer @ TxState University - San Marcos)

I also don't agree that hunting supports a natural order whatsoever. There is nothing natural about a gun. It's technology and time and time again, humans have used technology irresponsibly to eff up the environment. It's bound to happen again and again.

Preditory Cruelty vs. Hunting Cruelty --
preditors are biologically bound to eat flesh. they can't shoot guns. The only option is to tear the prey apart BUT you will note that it is more effective, energy wise, for a preditor to kill the animal as quickly as posible (yes there are some exceptions, like in the case of venomous serpents). I think of cats, they generally go for the jugular. They want their prey to die so that don't have to waste energy on it while it's struggling. Now then, in the case of human hunters, it's really not the same thing. A good hunter will shoot to kill, yeah that's great. But bad hunters miss their targets alot of the time. Also, say a hunter misses the target and the animal flees into the woods wounded, will the hunter follow quickly and finish the job? Not as quickly as a bobcat would. I just don't think it's at all the same thing. Just my opinion.

You do have a point about an animal living it's life in nature, coming to an end of it's life in freedom as opposed to farming. Like I've been saying from the beginning, the thing that ticked me off is the sport hunting thing and disregarding animal life to fulfill some thoughtless urge. So I'm with you on that one for sure.

MJ_KC

02-19-2006, 03:14 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
Going nude and sport hunting are totally unrelated. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are right and neither activity requires justification.

MJ_KC

02-19-2006, 03:20 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
I think of cats, they generally go for the jugular. They want their prey to die so that don't have to waste energy on it while it's struggling. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sometimes a cat will play with its food for awhile before eating it. I have seen this behavior frequently with house cats.

They will catch a mouse or rabbit and play with it for quite awhile before going ahead and killing it. It all depends upon how hungry they are.

karrenlandry

02-19-2006, 03:49 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
Shomymojo,

Yes, I happen to vegan and I do not buy animal produced clothing but that's not what this is about. It's about killing an animal for the fun of it. Maybe I was a little firm about some of the previous posts but I cannot justify killing any living animal for mere sport. Previous posters seem to have no problem with it and I just don't see how anyone could justify that. That was my point about torturing puppies. Most people would say that it's not suitable but hunting woodland creatures for the "fun and camraderie" is somehow ok (?) Forgive my ignorance but I don't see it.

I never said hunting with a bow and arrow to provide food for you and your starving Appelachian family was bad. Sport hunting is not sporting, it's repugnant. Like you said, everyone has an opinion and that's mine whether anyone likes it or not.

Fair enough? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well said, hooked! I agree and it's good to see someone persisting in providing what appears to be (for some reason) an unpopular opinion.

It's odd to me that a group of people generally considered freethinkers and noted for their tolerance and friendliness (nudists) can't see the difference between MY RIGHT TO GO NUDE, DA**IT!! and killing animals for anything less than survival. 'Sport' hunting, no matter what you do with the animals once you've killed them, is wasteful, disrespectful, and yes, disgusting. Even if you don't embrace the 'extremes' of forgoing leather shoes and deciding not to eat meat, you should be able to see this. The puppy-torturing analogy is completely accurate, in my opinion. Think about it, and then I'll vigorously defend your right to loudly disagree. I'm such a far-left nutcase, I like free speech and fried tofu for breakfast! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

And, uh...didn't this used to be a thread about special privileges and lawlessness among those imbeciles who live in the White House? For the record, when they finally kick off I hope they come back as ordinary working-class American citizens and live a long, long time. Enjoy, guys!!

karrenlandry

Naturist Mark

02-19-2006, 03:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MJ_KC:

Sometimes a cat will play with its food for awhile before eating it. I have seen this behavior frequently with house cats.

They will catch a mouse or rabbit and play with it for quite awhile before going ahead and killing it. It all depends upon how hungry they are. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Domesticated cats are a particularly bad example of natural hunting. Even well fed cats will hunt by instinct - for pleasure. Hunting is an instinct never bred out of domestic cats, but killing is a behavior they have to learn. In some cases they "play" with injured prey simply because they don't know how to kill, nor need to for their sustenance. Don't blame the cat, it is their long association with people that has changed their nature.

Still, they CAN indeed learn to kill, and to sustain themselves by hunting. Pound for pound the common housecat is one of the most fierce predators (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/reference/cat) around.

-Mark

nacktman

02-19-2006, 04:03 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> And, uh...didn't this used to be a thread about special privileges and lawlessness among those imbeciles who live in the White House? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Technically no, Karren, the Veep lives at another location, but the sentiment was correct ... just substitute 'who are in the current administration' for 'who live in the White House' and you have it sussed.

MJ_KC

02-19-2006, 08:00 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
Domesticated cats are a particularly bad example of natural hunting. Even well fed cats will hunt by instinct - for pleasure. Hunting is an instinct never bred out of domestic cats, but killing is a behavior they have to learn. In some cases they "play" with injured prey simply because they don't know how to kill, nor need to for their sustenance. Don't blame the cat, it is their long association with people that has changed their nature.

Still, they CAN indeed learn to kill, and to sustain themselves by hunting. Pound for pound the common housecat is one of the most fierce predators (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/reference/cat) around.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I had a male cat when I was a teenager that very seldom ever ate any cat food that we provided for him. He preferred to catch and kill his own food. He would sometimes bring his catch into the yard and play with it for awhile before eating it. His food consisted mainly of mice and rabbits.

He was also very territorial and would kill other male cats he found roaming the countryside. This was told to me by a neighbor who had over 30 cats that lived in his barn. He said that my cat would intentionally pick a fight with whichever of his cats was the dominant male and would kill it. My cat continued to do this even after he was neutered.

To get back on topic a bit, many people still like to hunt as much or even more than ever. Just because we can get our food from a supermarket doesn't mean that we don't like to go hunting just like the VP and his friends.

missouriboy

02-20-2006, 04:01 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Generally, I do not trust hunters. They are like cops. Power-hungry, macho, and not the smartest people in the world. (my personal experience here, not that every hunter fits this description) Why trust them with something as important as our wildlife? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Hooked, you make many good points, but I'd like to expand on this one a bit. You'll find "not the smartest people" in every avocation, but need we worry about trusting them to be the managers of anything? They won't be the ones to run stuff, it's the cream that rises to the top who will do that. So if "hunters" manage wildlife, it'll be the smart ones doing it, not the ones you experienced.

The success achieved by Ducks Unlimited is a great example. Today, all over the midwest and elsewhere, the spectacle of geese flying in V-formation is a sight to behold, very, very often, and at almost any time of the year. When I was your age this was seen only in pictures, unless you could travel to Canada and/or their migratory pathways at certain times of the year. The change for the better has been phenomenal, yet I'm sure a good number of duck and goose hunters fit the description you gave. Hey?

BTW, I'm not a hunter and don't own a gun. Cheers! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/happy.gif

Sanslines

02-20-2006, 04:37 AM

Why don't people wake up and see that the human population needs to be controlled too? This planet has gone from less then 4 billion people 40 years ago to over 6 billion people today. If the population keeps increasing uncontrolled as it does today, then mankind won't have to worry about anything as we will have destroyed this planet. Since hunting appears to be the most cost effective way of controlling populations, then why not have world wide hunting of humans. I am sure quite a few animal hunters would gladly cross the line and hunt humans with no hesitation. Think of the revenues that would be generated for sales of licenses and hunting apparel.......

usmc1

02-20-2006, 05:14 AM

Folks, cats don't make ethical decisions and have absolutely no relevance to this quarrel over hunting.

As for me, this so-called hunting that people now engage in seems to merely shooting a critter for the "sport" of shooting something with the balance heavily tipped in the favor of the "hunter".

Seems to me it would be a more balanced affair and proof of one's skills and manhood if one were to set out in pursuit of, say, a Cape Buffalo or Rhino armed with a club. Or a grizzley bear with an Arkansas toothpick. I''d pay to watch that!

Or better yet, arm the prey with at least as much firepower as you're carrying. Give the white-tails some uzzis and you take your favorite k47 and get it on.

You see, until you've hunted soemthing that's hunting back and is at least as well armed as you, you ain't even been hunting Jack!

tarsus

02-20-2006, 05:19 AM

hooked; most people who are anti-gun talk about how many people are killed by guns each year. it may be an apples and oranges thing. but they are both fruits after all.
many wish to ban handguns,my refering to "my weapon of choice" is simply take away handguns and then whats next?
cameras; read my profile.
your reply to anothers post answers my next question.
it simply burns me up when someone tells me; "i am a murderer of the innocent"while munching on a hamburger.
your choosen lifestyle and opinions--while i do not agree with you, have my respect. [your diet i wish i could do that,you should have a long healthy life. your opinions is what i don't agree with]

in my opinion preservationists are not so bright; i am reminded of the "yellowstone" fisaco of a few decades back.
in order to protect the elk population,coyotes,and wolfs were killed off. the elk population grew in such great number they distoryed their food supply causing a chain reaction for all wildlife.

no i am not the brightest person in the world,pretty far down on the list as a matter of fact. but i am not power hungery,or macho. after all in my hunting days i wore pantyhose,as do many hunters,as themals are ichy to some of us. ain't nothing macho about that now is there?

man by his very nature affects the natural order of things,unless we are wearing hemp,and living on nuts and berrys.

tarsus

02-20-2006, 05:29 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sanslines:
Why don't people wake up and see that the human population needs to be controlled too? This planet has gone from less then 4 billion people 40 years ago to over 6 billion people today. If the population keeps increasing uncontrolled as it does today, then mankind won't have to worry about anything as we will have destroyed this planet. Since hunting appears to be the most cost effective way of controlling populations, then why not have world wide hunting of humans. I am sure quite a few animal hunters would gladly cross the line and hunt humans with no hesitation. Think of the revenues that would be generated for sales of licenses and hunting apparel....... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

we do; it's called "war"

ncnudlady

02-20-2006, 06:02 AM

Why not send Cheney to hunt bin Laden? I mean if he can shoot at trapped little birdies and hit a man in the face he could do the same thing again right?

Jay473

02-20-2006, 11:46 AM

Not really sure what the big fuss is all about. Yeah, so what he shoot someone. I could care less as long as he doesnt shoot me. You know what it could of happened to anyone. Not sure what he was really doing but it happened and I got no idea why everybody is making a big deal out of it.

usmc1

02-20-2006, 01:45 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jay473:
Not really sure what the big fuss is all about. Yeah, so what he shoot someone. I could care less as long as he doesnt shoot me. You know what it could of happened to anyone. Not sure what he was really doing but it happened and I got no idea why everybody is making a big deal out of it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here's why it is a big deal.

The second most powerful man in the world (cynics would say the most powerful) in the world was involved in a hunting accident, severely wounding a fellow hunter.

Cheney hid behind his secret service entourage and boogied out of town leaving the ranch owner to answer questions and delayed for 18-hours in the telling of the incident to the American people.

There are several areas of concern. The first has to do with his qualifications for office and how he responds to crisis. His behavior seems on the very face to be questionable and irresposnible and as more and more facts come forth there seems to be a lot of contradictory stories clashing into each other.

If you've ever watched cops or one those police chase shows where the drunk driver is pulled over after trying to high tail it somewhere long enough to clear their system and to get their story straight the staggering slurry voice driver invariably says, "I had one or two beers earlier in the day".

This is exatly the scenario we're seeing with Mr. Cheney--"oh, I had beer or two earlier, but there was no drinking."

Here's why all this becomes important beyond Mr. Cheney. This has become the way this administration operates, in secrecy and with lies and obfuscation. It is how we were lied into Iraq. It is the contempt for the american people and disdain for truth that permeates this administration.

These things are inportant.

sentient

02-20-2006, 05:37 PM

http://www.dudehisattva.com/Elmer%20Cheney.jpg

usmc1

02-21-2006, 02:39 PM

The NYT has found a way to tie Bob Dylan to the Cheney shooting.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_di...ontent_id=1002035220 (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002035220)

Naturist Mark

02-21-2006, 03:40 PM

The White House is getting tired of the non-stop coverage of the Cheney shooting, so they have produced a message to get the media to move on. As reported by Dave Letterman (click on picture to play wmv):

http://www.crooksandliars.com/images/Letterman-Cheney-BowlBad1.jpg (http://movies.crooksandliars.com/David-Letterman-Cheney-BowlofBad.wmv)

-Mark

UnitedNudists

02-21-2006, 03:43 PM

This was engineered by Karl Rove don't you think? The shooting never took place. It's a distraction and a message to Scooter Libby.

hm0504

02-22-2006, 09:33 AM

Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer:
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8184.shtml

nacktman

02-22-2006, 09:59 AM

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/funny.gif
You don't say!

Wonder where those ex-secret service agents will find work now? http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/dizzy2.gif

Of course he shot a lawyer and a neocon lawyer at that so you got to give him points for trying!http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/shrug.gif

Hooked

02-22-2006, 10:42 AM

nacktman

02-22-2006, 10:51 AM

Mark, just watched the video link for the first time, thanks http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/rofl5.gif.

Hooked, MJ why not take your exchange to a seperate Hunting thread I've set up.

shomymojo

02-22-2006, 10:53 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer:
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8184.shtml </div></BLOCKQUOTE>...Hmmm..I saw no proof of the claim...that Cheny was DRUNK...In the article...just a mysterious un-named source...I could go on a blog and claim that George Bush is gay...and use un-named sources...but would that give it any validity...wheres the beef...LOL

hm0504

02-22-2006, 11:02 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shomymojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer:
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8184.shtml </div></BLOCKQUOTE>...Hmmm..I saw no proof of the claim...that Cheny was DRUNK...In the article...just a mysterious un-named source...I could go on a blog and claim that George Bush is gay...and use un-named sources...but would that give it any validity...wheres the beef...LOL </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, the FART button at the top of the current Capitol Hill Blue page provides all the validity I need! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/wiseguy.gif

nacktman

02-22-2006, 11:02 AM

Shomymojo, Dick himself said he had a few beers that day.

It only takes one ounce of alcohol to impair the functioning of the body, the biological/physiological definition of 'drunk'.
The level of impairment rises with increased quantities of alcohol that is obvious, therefore one can only get 'drunker' the more alcohol one consumes.

Now as to what qualifies as a 'few' to Dick is open to conjecture.

But by his own words he was 'drunk'.

shãybare

02-22-2006, 11:48 AM

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/cool4.gif
Yes, Dick admitted to a beer. How many he actually had, I don't know. I do however believe guns and alcohol do not go together. There are those that will disagree because they believe they can "handle" their drinking, a wide mis-conception.

Whether some Secret Agents made the statements, again, I do not know, but I believe they did.

It says in the article the Sheriff had someone working undercover at the ranch. I wonder what that is all about? It shows the Sheriff must have some suspions about the ranch.

UnitedNudists

02-22-2006, 12:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer:
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8184.shtml </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you for that informative article. I knew that 1 beer would make the VP drunk. Did anyone push the 'fart button' in the ad?

Naturist Mark

02-22-2006, 05:38 PM

What the media didn't notice because it can only handle one story at a time.

While the media has been distracted by the Dick Cheney shooting story to the exclusion of all else, a few more essential pieces of the Plame-Wilson TreasonGate scandal have fallen in place. (reposted from another thread)

In a seeming non-sequitor Brit Hume asked Vice President Dick Cheney about his ability to classify government secrets during Cheney's interview about the Texas shooting. Cheney disclosed he had the power to classify (and presumptively to re-classify secrets as non-secrets) under an executive order (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060216/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cheney_cia_leak;_ylt=AhYQ2.uKi46eNy37deHuedas0NUE; _ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-) signed in 2003.

It was July of 2003 that Libby Scooter and Karl Rove disclosed the undercover identity of Valerie Wilson as a CIA agent to the press in retaliation for her husband's role in exposing administration lies about Iraqi attempts to obtain yellowcake uranium ore from Niger in the 1990's. Clearly it was a shot across the bow to warn whistleblowers that their careers and their family members careers are the price for speaking out.

Libby and Rove now have the probable defense that Mrs Wilson's identity, and that of CIA cover company Brewster Jennings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_Jennings_&_Associates) was secretly declassified by Dick Cheney in 2003 shortly after he gained that authority by executive order. Perhaps even afterwards since Cheney may even have the power to declassify retroactively.

Last week we learned that Libby testified that he was authorized (http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001994568) by his superiors to leak the Valerie Wilson story to reporters. This is probably the main reason that counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald has not brought any charges under the various intelligence acts. Unfortunately for Libby he is being prosecuted for lying under oath, and Rove still faces those charges.

What has been somewhat confusing is the vigor with which administration officials and their media surrogates attacked Ambassador Wilson's credibility because his wife was a CIA agent. To most of us that doesn't seem all that discreditable. Was there another reason to burn Valerie Wilson's cover besides the campaign to discredit Ambassador Wilson?

Yep.

We also learned last week that Valerie Wilson had continued to work on the clandestine side of the CIA in the Directorate of Operations as a non-official cover (NOC) officer right up to the time she was publicly outed by the administration. She was NOT just a 'desk officer' no longer working in the field. And we discovered that her work in the field of WMD proliferation was almost entirely focused on the Iranian nuclear program (http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Outed_CIA_officer_was_working_on_0213.html) . And since they not only blew Valerie's identity, but also the identity of her cover company Brewster Jennings - that provided cover for many other agents on her team - the entire program came to a crashing halt.

We know that Iran has been next on the list of nations to attack since before the Iraq war. That has been the Project for the New American Century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNAC) plan all along (http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CRG502A.html). So why burn the team that is working to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons? Well, the cynical might hypothesize that neo-cons WANT Iran to acquire, or nearly acquire nuclear weapons in order to justify an Iranian war. That may be, but it turns out there is an even better reason for Vice-President Cheney to want to derail the CIA program.

Back in 1995, while Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, a wholly owned subsidiary of Halliburton based in the Cayman Islands began doing business (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0806-21.htm) in Iran. The use of the Cayman Islands subsidiary was intended to shield Halliburton from the law prohibiting US corporations from doing business in Iran. Most of Halliburton's Iranian business was in the fields of oil and gas production. But it turns out that Halliburton was also doing business with Cyrus Nasseri, a key member of Iran's nuclear development team - who has been charged in Iran with accepting as much as $1 million in bribes from Halliburton. Al Jazeera reports (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2005/100805nuclearcomponents.htm) that Halliburton sold Iran centrifuges and detonators to be used specifically for its nuclear program.

So, the question now is - was the outing of Valerie Wilson and the burning of the CIA's project to counter the Iranian nuclear program really just to punish Ambassador Wilson, or was it to protect Halliburton and its former CEO? And was the crippling of the CIA program intended to allow Iran to create a greater provocation for a desired war with Iran? Or was it all 3 reasons in one fell swoop?

Perhaps it is all just a juxtaposition of chance, but it certainly shows strong evidence of design. Good thing I don't believe in the theory of Intelligent Design.

-Mark