EvC Forum: Setting the record straight on hunting accidents

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Setting the record straight on hunting accidents

crashfrog

Member (Idle past 1761 days)

Posts: 19762

From: Silver Spring, MD

Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 20 of 71 (286533)
02-14-2006 2:38 PM

So, apparently this is just a little more than a little hunting accident. Firstly, it's been three days and the guy is still in the ICU. Also, some of the birdshot lodged in his heart and caused a heart attack.

And the administration is treating this like a joke?

Replies to this message:
	Message 21 by Omnivorous, posted 02-14-2006 2:44 PM		crashfrog has not replied

crashfrog

Member (Idle past 1761 days)

Posts: 19762

From: Silver Spring, MD

Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 22 of 71 (286538)
02-14-2006 2:46 PM

Ditto to what people have been saying about firearms. Top to bottom, the training is that you keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to fire, verify the safety of both your target area and the downrange, and you don't point a firearm - loaded or not - at anything you don't intend to fire at.

crashfrog

Member (Idle past 1761 days)

Posts: 19762

From: Silver Spring, MD

Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 31 of 71 (288279)
02-19-2006 12:56 AM

Reply to: Message 26 by NosyNed
02-18-2006 8:50 PM

Re: The beer

The last person I'd want to defend is Cheney but as I understand it he had a beer at noon and this was more than 3 hours later.

"I just had one beer." Isn't that what drunk drivers always say?

1) We have no way to determine how many beers Cheney had had, and when he had had them, short of a blood-alcohol analysis performed at the time of the accident.

2) The police were not allowed even the briefest contact with Cheney until hours later, long after whatever alcohol was in his system would have left it. Coverup? Draw your own conclusions, I guess.

I don't see any indication that the police actually investigated a single thing.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 26 by NosyNed, posted 02-18-2006 8:50 PM		NosyNed has not replied

crashfrog

Member (Idle past 1761 days)

Posts: 19762

From: Silver Spring, MD

Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 34 of 71 (288341)
02-19-2006 12:24 PM

Reply to: Message 30 by Murphy
02-18-2006 11:50 PM

Re: Didn't break just one rule...

Since he wasn't there, according to their knowledge, there was nothing dangerous about what Cheney did.

Ah, right. "According to the best intelligence we had", Wittington was a quail. I guess that makes it totally fine, right?

It was just an intelligence failure.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 30 by Murphy, posted 02-18-2006 11:50 PM		Murphy has not replied

crashfrog

Member (Idle past 1761 days)

Posts: 19762

From: Silver Spring, MD

Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 65 of 71 (288730)
02-20-2006 2:54 PM

Reply to: Message 63 by Murphy
02-20-2006 12:36 PM

Re: You're right.

The only one who has blamed Cheney was Cheney himself

Well, no, not exactly. Cheney started out by blaming Wittington. Oh, wait, scratch that. Cheney didn't have the courage to come out and blame Wittington himself; he had to send four of his staffers out to blame Wittington first.

No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007711.php

Murphy, fascinatingly, is under the impression that whatever the administration says can be believed, even when they've contradicted themselves in the space of 48 hours.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 63 by Murphy, posted 02-20-2006 12:36 PM		Murphy has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 66 by Murphy, posted 02-20-2006 4:04 PM		crashfrog has replied

crashfrog

Member (Idle past 1761 days)

Posts: 19762

From: Silver Spring, MD

Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 67 of 71 (288766)
02-20-2006 4:26 PM

Reply to: Message 66 by Murphy
02-20-2006 4:04 PM

Re: You're right.

Sure seems to me that Ms. Armstrong, who was there, told what happened from what she saw.

She wasn't there, wasn't a witness, which is of course why her first accounts were quickly contradicted.

Then her husband confirmed what she said.

Well, actually her husband's story contradicted hers on several counts.

Was that the administration talking?

Well, you tell me. Did Mrs. Armstrong come out immediately on her own?

The writer that you linked to, a site certainly prone to attacking the administration at every opportunity, tried to tie them all to the administration.

You don't believe that Scott McClellan is a member of the Bush administration?

This message is a reply to:
	Message 66 by Murphy, posted 02-20-2006 4:04 PM		Murphy has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 68 by Murphy, posted 02-20-2006 4:32 PM		crashfrog has replied

crashfrog

Member (Idle past 1761 days)

Posts: 19762

From: Silver Spring, MD

Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 69 of 71 (288773)
02-20-2006 4:38 PM

Reply to: Message 68 by Murphy
02-20-2006 4:32 PM

Re: You're right.

What does McClelland have to do with your accusations and the linked site?

Did you even read the article? He's mentioned prominently as the second attack dog loosed by the administration.

Are you really trying to suggest that the President's press secretary isn't a member of the administration? Did you just not know who that guy was, or what?

This message is a reply to:
	Message 68 by Murphy, posted 02-20-2006 4:32 PM		Murphy has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 70 by Murphy, posted 02-20-2006 7:15 PM		crashfrog has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

3 online now:	dwise1, PaulK, Tangle
Newest Member:	Candle3
Post Volume:	Total: 920,103 Year: 425/6,935 Month: 425/275 Week: 142/159 Day: 5/15 Hour: 0/3