Tuesday, February 14, 2006

Cheney Should Resign . . . For The Children! [Updated]

After reading Left-Over’s commentary on efforts to spin the Dick Cheney shooting accident, I couldn’t help but recall that Cheney is a guy who campaigned with Bush under the slogan “Character Matters!”

Indeed it does, and what kind of “character” does Cheney show when he accidentally shoots a guy and then tries to keep the incident quiet as long as possible, doesn’t publicly apologize, and uses surrogates like former Wyoming Senator, Alan Simpson, to issue statements blaming the victim?

The same character that led Cheney to authorize Scooter Libby to leak classified information in order to smear a political enemy. The same character that led Cheney to get five deferments rather than serve in a military he so readily uses to achieve his own business objectives. The same character that led Cheney to push so hard for the freedom to secretly torture anyone the President labels an “enemy combatant.” The same character that led our frequent commenter, Anonymous Conservative, to suggest that “he embodies much of what is wrong with the (Republican) party; he's secretive, too close to the business community...in a word, creepy.”

Conservatives often talk about morals and family values – basically the importance of setting a good example for our children. On that argument alone, it seems clear that Dick Cheney should be forced to resign. He clearly doesn’t have the character to continue serving in a position where his behavior could be an example for future generations!

Then again, he also appears to be doing his best to make sure there aren't too many future generations to be influenced by his behavior!

[Update] Just added a link to the Hardball transcript with the Alan Simpson statement mentioned above. Here's the most baffling quote:

But when this man, the victim, the poor guy, it‘s a sad thing what happened to him, but it has less to do with Dick Cheney and much more to do with him. He apparently went for another bird, picked it up, came back and got behind the two other hunters and didn‘t say I‘m back, I‘m behind you, I‘m here. And if you don‘t do that, let me tell you, anything can happen.

So if I understand correctly, there were 3 hunters and one went to to get a bird and then came back and got behind the other two hunters (where he was apparently supposed to be) but did not announce he was behind them, so Cheney quickly turned and shot the guy from 30 yards away. I'm not a hunter, but I'm thinking at the point when Cheney turned, the guy was now "in front of him!" and was entitled to a fair opportunity to get back to an appropriate spot behind Cheney, before Cheney pulled the trigger! If the other hunters are supposed to be behind you when you are preparing to shoot, why would you turn and shoot without re-assessing where your partners are?

In other words, if you are back where you are supposed to be, you shouldn't have to announce your presence to avoid getting shot!


  1. This may be the last straw that we wrote about earlier. At least for Cheney. I love the quote from AC. Don't forget this one regarding the Iraq:

    "...we could have done much better. We could have had the Iraqi Army trade weapons for shovels and put them to work on public works projects rather than send home a mass of angry, unemployed men already trained in the use of weapons. We could have had enough troops on the ground to secure the borders and infrastructure."

    I do believe AC is not so thrilled with the current administration.

    If the illegal domestic spying didn't turn the NRA crowd against Bush & Cheney - this shooting incident will.

  2. It's kind of weird to watch TV and hear over and over and over the phrase "Vice President Cheney shot a guy!"

    It's going to go down in history as Cheney's "potatoe!"

  3. Did you read that ABC news has a story out where they called the weapon a pellet gun.

    Next we are going to get stories that say Cheney sprayed him with a "Water Weenie"

  4. McClellan in his press briefing today basically said they are moving on. They will anwer no more questions regarding the shooting.

    Because the American people are clamoring for "Health Savings Account".

  5. Hopefully the Health Savings Account would cover something like, say, a heart attack from birdshot lodged in the heart

  6. Yeah and the victim would no longer be able to sue the doctor for mal-prectice for missing a pellet of buckshot lodged next to his heart.

  7. This is not about politics, its about a stupid mistake that may cost a man his life. Whether or not the Veep ends up resigning over this (unless the man dies, I doubt it), the paramount issue here is and should be the health of the man who was shot.

  8. If this unfortunate event had happened to, say, Hillary Clinton, do you think Karl Rove and Ken Mehlman would put the health of the victim over politics?

    Give me a break!

    There are still plenty of conservatives with bumper stickers politicizing Chappaquiddick. I park every day next to a guy whose bumper reads "Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun!"

    Every day I see it, I want to take a black El Marko and change it to Laura Bush, but I don't . . . out of respect for the dead.

    Somehow, I doubt that he will be removing his sticker out of respect for Mr. Whittington if it turns out that Dick Cheney ends up unable to sport the same bumper sticker!

  9. There is a substantive difference between someone dying because an individual made an errant shot and an individual dying because someone drove off a bridge, ostensibly while drunk, and then tried to pretend it never happened while a girl was drowning. Clearly the individual who was wounded in this case received prompt medical attention. The problem here is that the media was not immediately notified, which would probably have been a non-issue was not the secretive nature of Cheney's persona a controversial subject in and of itself. While the indignation of the press is largely justified, the survival of this individual is clearly the paramount concern.