Cheney aims...shoots...hits!
Amethyst
We are amused.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:1139791526.804776.117740
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
> But instead of the quail (or Quayle?) he shot a fellow hunter. Ooops.
> We are amused.
Now he needs two game wardens, six more hunters, and a cow.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Wilson Heydt
Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Amethyst" <adopts...@aol.com> appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:1139791526.804776.117740
>@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
>
>> But instead of the quail (or Quayle?) he shot a fellow hunter. Ooops.
>> We are amused.
>
>Now he needs two game wardens, six more hunters, and a cow.
A pure bred Guernsey cow.
--
Hal Heydt
Albany, CA
My dime, my opinions.
Jette Goldie
"Amethyst" <adopts...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1139791526.8...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> But instead of the quail (or Quayle?) he shot a fellow hunter. Ooops.
> We are amused.
>
In the army they call that a "blue on blue" incident don't they?
--
Jette Goldie
je...@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
("reply to" is spamblocked)
David G. Bell
<mB2If.303069$D47.1...@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
boss...@scotlandmail.com "Jette Goldie" wrote:
> "Amethyst" <adopts...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1139791526.8...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> > But instead of the quail (or Quayle?) he shot a fellow hunter. Ooops.
> > We are amused.
> >
>
> In the army they call that a "blue on blue" incident don't they?
Well, that would apply to Joe Nickerson and Willie Whitelaw, but for two
Republicans it would be "red on red".
But do the Secret Service allow anyone else to have live ammo?
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
"I am Number Two," said Penfold. "You are Number Six."
Zev Sero
>>In the army they call that a "blue on blue" incident don't they?
> Well, that would apply to Joe Nickerson and Willie Whitelaw, but for two
> Republicans it would be "red on red".
According to Kevin Drum, in 2008 it will be the Republicans' turn to
be blue.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005157.php
--
Zev Sero Security and liberty are like beer and TV. They go
z...@sero.name well together, but are completely different concepts.
- James Lileks
Zev Sero
http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.html
I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
or hit a baseball into someone's face.
Kip Williams
> Compare this case to Adlai Stevenson:
> http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.html
>
>
> I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
> accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
> or hit a baseball into someone's face.
Of if his name had been "Clinton."
Kip W
Zev Sero
I was going to say "Kennedy".
Matthew B. Tepper
be typed in news:S65If.18200$vU2....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:
> Kip Williams wrote:
>> Zev Sero wrote:
>
>>> Compare this case to Adlai Stevenson:
>>> http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.h
>>> tml
>
>>> I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>>> accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf
>>> club, or hit a baseball into someone's face.
>
>> Of if his name had been "Clinton."
>
> I was going to say "Kennedy".
That's what I get for doing my job and waiting until lunch to check Usenet.
You both beat me to the two surnames I was going to choose between.
Robert Sneddon
<ki...@comcast.net> writes
Or a rabbit swimming towards a fishing boat (Carter).
--
My gmail account is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams wrote:
>
>> Zev Sero wrote:
>
>>> Compare this case to Adlai Stevenson:
>>> http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.html
>
>>> I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>>> accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
>>> or hit a baseball into someone's face.
>
>> Of if his name had been "Clinton."
>
> I was going to say "Kennedy".
Or "Disney." (Dick Disney? What kind of name is that? Erase, erase...)
Or "Dastardly."
Kip W
Doug Wickstrom
<hx4If.14969$rH5...@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> caused electrons to dance and photons
to travel coherently in saying:
>I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
>or hit a baseball into someone's face.
Gerald Ford was famous for conking people on the noggin with his
golf balls. "Fore" meant something when Ford said it.
--
Doug Wickstrom <nims...@comcast.net>
"I think it [Western civilization] would be a good idea." --Mohandas K. Gandhi
Now filtering out all cross-posted messages and everything posted
through Google News.
Kip Williams
> Gerald Ford was famous for conking people on the noggin with his
> golf balls. "Fore" meant something when Ford said it.
Bob Hope learned to take the term seriously.
Kip W
Paul Ciszek
In article <nssmWPTd...@nospam.demon.co.uk>,
It was a white-water raft, the way I remembered it. And the
speculation was that the rabbit was rabid, as that is not
normally something rabbits do.
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:dsr9lp$pka$1...@reader2.panix.com:
> In article <nssmWPTd...@nospam.demon.co.uk>,
> Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <NqWdnY1gQNyXQW3e...@comcast.com>, Kip Williams
>><ki...@comcast.net> writes
>>>Zev Sero wrote:
>>>> Compare this case to Adlai Stevenson:
>>>> http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.
>>>> html
>>>> I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>>>> accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf
>>>> club, or hit a baseball into someone's face.
>>>
>>>Of if his name had been "Clinton."
>>
>> Or a rabbit swimming towards a fishing boat (Carter).
>
> It was a white-water raft, the way I remembered it. And the speculation
> was that the rabbit was rabid, as that is not normally something rabbits
> do.
For that matter, didn't that story turn up to be entirely fabricated?
Zev Sero
>>>Or a rabbit swimming towards a fishing boat (Carter).
>>It was a white-water raft, the way I remembered it. And the speculation
>>was that the rabbit was rabid, as that is not normally something rabbits
>>do.
> For that matter, didn't that story turn up to be entirely fabricated?
Nope. It happened, all right, and there are pictures to prove it.
Not that I quite get what is supposed to have been the big deal.
A rabbit swam toward Carter's boat, he didn't want it climbing in,
so he pushed it away. Why exactly was this newsworthy?
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_019.html
www.narsil.org/politics/carter/killer_rabbit.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swamp_rabbit
Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:K3bIf.18330$vU2....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:
> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>> nos...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek) appears to have caused the following
>>>Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>>Or a rabbit swimming towards a fishing boat (Carter).
>
>>>It was a white-water raft, the way I remembered it. And the speculation
>>>was that the rabbit was rabid, as that is not normally something rabbits
>>>do.
>
>> For that matter, didn't that story turn up to be entirely fabricated?
>
> Nope. It happened, all right, and there are pictures to prove it.
> Not that I quite get what is supposed to have been the big deal.
> A rabbit swam toward Carter's boat, he didn't want it climbing in,
> so he pushed it away. Why exactly was this newsworthy?
>
> http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_019.html
> www.narsil.org/politics/carter/killer_rabbit.html
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swamp_rabbit
Because it "proved" that he was "weak" or something. Or maybe it showed
that he was secretly Sir Bors from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail."
Which is idiotic. Which is exactly my point.
Marty Helgesen
Amethyst wrote:
> But instead of the quail (or Quayle?) he shot a fellow hunter. Ooops.
> We are amused.
A blogger labelled a link to a story about the incident: "Ballistics
Experts Determine Existence of Second Vice President on Nearby Grassy
Knoll"
-------
Marty Helgesen
Bitnet: mnhcc@cunyvm Internet: mn...@cunyvm.cuny.edu
"Hopefully I use English correctly. Disgustedly I watch others
massacre it." Steven Brust
Help outlaw spam. For further information see http://www.cauce.org/
Dave Weingart
on 'Cheney aims...shoots...hits!', Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> was heard to remark:
>I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
>or hit a baseball into someone's face.
I wonder what the reaction of the conservatives would be if it had been
Bill Clinton shooting someone instead of Dick Cheney.
Actually, I don't wonder at all.
--
73 de Dave Weingart KA2ESK Conrunning is like any addiction. You
dweingart @ gmail . com know it's bad for you and you should
http://www.weingart.net/ stop...but you'll only do just one more.
-- Tracy Penner
Daniel R. Reitman
<nims...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Gerald Ford was famous for conking people on the noggin with his
>golf balls. "Fore" meant something when Ford said it.
Games once ran a "design a mini golf hole" contest. The grand prize
included a Gerald Ford statue swinging a club. Hit the ball right,
and you get chipped onto the green. Hit it wrong, and you get beaned.
Dan, ad nauseam
Zev Sero
> I wonder what the reaction of the conservatives would be if it had been
> Bill Clinton shooting someone instead of Dick Cheney.
Probably something snarky like "gun control is hitting what you aim at".
Tim McDaniel
Dave Weingart <dwei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I wonder what the reaction of the conservatives would be if it had been
>Bill Clinton shooting someone instead of Dick Cheney.
It's easy to misparse English: my first reply to the above was "So the
conservatives would have thought it OK if Bill Clinton shot Dick
Cheney?".
--
"Me, I love the USA; I never miss an episode." -- Paul "Fruitbat" Sleigh
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tm...@panix.com
Joe Ellis
Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
> Dave Weingart wrote:
>
> > I wonder what the reaction of the conservatives would be if it had been
> > Bill Clinton shooting someone instead of Dick Cheney.
>
> Probably something snarky like "gun control is hitting what you aim at".
You mean Vincent Foster didn't go hunting with Bill? <<weg>>
--
Evaluating all GUIs by the example of Windows is like evaluating all cars
by the example of Yugos.
Amethyst
Zev Sero wrote:
> Compare this case to Adlai Stevenson:
> http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.html
>
>
> I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
> accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
> or hit a baseball into someone's face.
Who knows. But he shot a LAWYER! and I bet the TV and radio comics will
be having a field day with that.
Kip Williams
> While costing hundreds if not thousands of dollars to state an opinion
> on 'Cheney aims...shoots...hits!', Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> was heard to remark:
>
>>I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>>accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
>>or hit a baseball into someone's face.
>
> I wonder what the reaction of the conservatives would be if it had been
> Bill Clinton shooting someone instead of Dick Cheney.
>
> Actually, I don't wonder at all.
Still, I don't recall Clinton frequenting ranches where they raise tame,
trusting, captive birds to be released moments before you shoot them.
"Quailtards," they called them on The Daily Show.
Kip W
Kip Williams
> Amethyst wrote:
>
>>But instead of the quail (or Quayle?) he shot a fellow hunter. Ooops.
>>We are amused.
>
> A blogger labelled a link to a story about the incident: "Ballistics
> Experts Determine Existence of Second Vice President on Nearby Grassy
> Knoll"
Perhaps there are some valiant bloggers waiting for a photo so they can
announce that the spacing of the shot is all wrong, and it's all just a
smear campaign.
Kip W
Leroy F. Berven
> Who knows. But he shot a LAWYER! and I bet the TV and radio comics will
> be having a field day with that.
If game ranchers begin raising tame lawyers, will the average intelligence
of the breed decrease accordingly?
--
Leroy F. Berven
ber...@wolfenet.com
Andrew Stephenson
ber...@wolfenet.com writes:
> "Amethyst" wrote
>
> > Who knows. But he shot a LAWYER! and I bet the TV and radio comics will
> > be having a field day with that.
>
> If game ranchers begin raising tame lawyers, will the average
> intelligence of the breed decrease accordingly?
Let's hope they don't try. Going by how our local target-bred
pheasants, grouse (grice?), partridges and such behave, there'd
be lawyers feeding on my lawn, roosting in my trees, cr*pping
onto the plants below the trees... *gah*
And don't get me started on those barristers and judges.
--
Andrew Stephenson
Dave Weingart
on 'Cheney aims...shoots...hits!', Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> was heard to remark:
>
>> I wonder what the reaction of the conservatives would be if it had been
>> Bill Clinton shooting someone instead of Dick Cheney.
>
>Probably something snarky like "gun control is hitting what you aim at".
Probably something snarkier than that.
The Thunder Child
Jette Goldie
"Andrew Stephenson" <am...@deltrak.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:113993...@deltrak.demon.co.uk...
They couldn't lower the intelligence of the conveyancing
lawyers if they tried.
--
Jette Goldie
je...@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
("reply to" is spamblocked)
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
And one of the pellets went into his heart and he had a little heart
attack.
--
Marilee J. Layman
http://mjlayman.livejournal.com/
Kip Williams
I hope he gets better.
Kip W
Joe Ellis
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:8-mdnYc8k_a96G_e...@comcast.com:
I hope he has a complete recovery.
Randolph Fritz
>
> "Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
>
And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
was the act of a good man?
Randolph
Dorothy J Heydt
>attack.
Gads. I would too.
Joe Ellis
Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> wrote:
And when you have finished putting words into other people's mouths and
ascribing things to them they did not even remotely say, and Bob Hope
comes calling for you, who will explain you are totally lacking a sense
of humor?
Randolph Fritz
> In article <slrndv4vm6....@panix2.panix.com>,
> Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > "Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
>> >
>>
>> And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
>> for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
>> was the act of a good man?
>>
>
> ascribing things to them they did not even remotely say, and Bob Hope
> comes calling for you, who will explain you are totally lacking a sense
> of humor?
>
I don't think that Bob Hope ever made a joke at the expense of a man
wounded, and at risk of his life.
Randolph
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:slrndv51h0....@panix2.panix.com:
No, that would have been Bing.
Joe Ellis
Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> wrote:
> On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > In article <slrndv4vm6....@panix2.panix.com>,
> > Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
> >> >
> >>
> >> And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
> >> for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
> >> was the act of a good man?
> >>
> >
> > And when you have finished putting words into other people's mouths and
> > ascribing things to them they did not even remotely say, and Bob Hope
> > comes calling for you, who will explain you are totally lacking a sense
> > of humor?
> >
>
> I don't think that Bob Hope ever made a joke at the expense of a man
> wounded, and at risk of his life.
You never heard any of his USO routines...
Kip Williams
One of my favorite people on earth is a cousin who happens to be a
lawyer in Texas.
Kip W
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
<oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Amethyst" <adopts...@aol.com> appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:1139791526.804776.117740
>@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
>
>> But instead of the quail (or Quayle?) he shot a fellow hunter. Ooops.
>> We are amused.
>
>Now he needs two game wardens, six more hunters, and a cow.
Note: the cow must have COW painted on it in bright red letters.
jrw
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
>Compare this case to Adlai Stevenson:
>http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.html
>
>
>I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
>or hit a baseball into someone's face.
As a person who hunts, I consider this to be irresponsible behavior in
the hunting field and irresponsible gun handling.
jrw
Kip Williams
When Dad used to get N*R*A magazines in the late 60s, they were at least
30% about proper gun handling. There have been ringing condemnations of
Cheney's foolishness from the hunting community. Dad used to hunt as
much as possible when we lived in Colorado -- we needed the meat. I
haven't heard much about him hunting since he's been living in Texas,
but I can't imagine him having anything good to say about how sloppy and
unsound his apparent hunting technique is. Or how "sporting" it is to
blast away at tame animals, for that matter.
Of course, I could be mistaken. Dad's always been an ardent
environmentalist, but he seems to have shelved some of that to support
the Administration.
Kip W
Robert Sneddon
<ki...@comcast.net> writes
>When Dad used to get N*R*A magazines in the late 60s, they were at
>least 30% about proper gun handling. There have been ringing
>condemnations of Cheney's foolishness from the hunting community.
There are different kinds of hunting. Many of them involve the hunter
only discharging their weapon a few times in a season in the field (deer
or other mammal game). The sort of hunting Cheney engages in is
bird-shooting and of the sort where they can expect to fire their
weapons many times every hunt. I recall hearing the Vice-President is
also a duck-hunter, another form of bird-shooting that involves several
shots at game per day.
The reason I bring this up is that the sort of hunting he does involves
a lot of shooting and a lot more chances to get it wrong on any given
hunt. Unlike shooting from blinds (as in duck-hunting) or
grouse-shooting in Scotland where the hunters stay in one place and the
game is driven over them, quail hunting involves moving through brush
and light cover with loaded firearms, often in groups. Individuals stop
to recover shot birds and catch up with their group as needful. This is
inherently more dangerous than standing in one place and waiting for the
game to be driven (grouse, partridge) or for it to flock over your blind
(duck, geese). It requires even more situational awareness than regular
hunting.
It was a fucking stupid thing to do, and he will be remorseful about it
and he would give anything for it not to have happened.
--
My gmail account is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
Sea Wasp
No, we'll just shoot him and put his head on the wall along with the
others, obviously.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
David G. Bell
<2vr4v1ptgmr83gjg4...@4ax.com>
I find that particular detail implausible. A sensible shotgun load for
quail wouldn't have enough penetration to do that. There's plenty of
reason for a heart attack, but the idea of a pellet that deep seems more
like a reporter jumping to conclusions.
Of course, if the range was very short, and the shot didn't have time to
disperse, things can be different. The claim is a range of 30 yards, but
some details in the reports are consistent with a shorter range.
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
"I am Number Two," said Penfold. "You are Number Six."
Andrew Stephenson
ki...@comcast.net "Kip Williams" writes:
> One of my favorite people on earth is a cousin who happens to
> be a lawyer in Texas.
I'm trying to parse that in the context of recent postings. This
cousin would be a favo(u)rite because he/she is in Texas, his/her
state of existence as a lawyer being largely immaterial? Or must
we take it that this favo(u)r arises somehow due to a conjunction
of (i) being a lawyer and (ii) being in Texas? Nit-picking minds
seek enlightenment with a view to further mis-comprehension. ;-)
--
Andrew Stephenson
Andrew Stephenson
Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
to say you're sorry".
--
Andrew Stephenson
Kip Williams
So far, every one of your suggestions is misses the mark.
One of my favorite people on earth is my cousin.
My cousin is a lawyer.
My cousin lives in Texas.
Perhaps I should have made these three statements in separate posts,
lest someone get the idea that there are a bunch of "because" and
"therefore" statements hidden in the white spaces between the letters.
Kip W
Zev Sero
Apologised to whom? I'm sure he's apologised to his injured friend and
his family, repeatedly (though from what I've read it seems that the
fault was mostly the friend's). To whom else does he owe an apology?
--
Zev Sero Security and liberty are like beer and TV. They go
z...@sero.name well together, but are completely different concepts.
- James Lileks
David Dyer-Bennet
Well, I don't really approve at that kind of laughing at an actual,
serious, injury to an actual person just because of his profession.
But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt lawyers
would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd...@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
Wilson Heydt
Not so far that i know of. There is however, an editorial cartoon
out today of Cheney standing by the bedside of the injured lawyer
saying, "I think an apology is in order... I'm waiting."
--
Hal Heydt
Albany, CA
My dime, my opinions.
Wilson Heydt
Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
>Andrew Stephenson wrote:
>
>> I may have missed it in all the fuss and dust; but has that nice
>> Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
>> Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
>> to say you're sorry".
>
>Apologised to whom? I'm sure he's apologised to his injured friend and
>his family, repeatedly (though from what I've read it seems that the
>fault was mostly the friend's). To whom else does he owe an apology?
There appears to be enough fault to go around. While the injured
party apparently should have announced his movements, it is very
much up to the person with the gun to be aware of everything that
may be in the line of fire. One might say that it's hard to miss a
person in a bright orange vest, and indeed, Cheney didn't miss him.
Kip Williams
> Andrew Stephenson wrote:
>
>> I may have missed it in all the fuss and dust; but has that nice
>> Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
>> Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
>> to say you're sorry".
>
> Apologised to whom? I'm sure he's apologised to his injured friend and
> his family, repeatedly (though from what I've read it seems that the
> fault was mostly the friend's). To whom else does he owe an apology?
He could apologize to Texas Parks & Wildlife for hunting illegally:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0213061cheney1.html
He could apologize to the American People not mentioning the incident
for almost a whole day, and continuing to stonewall on it even now. He
could also come clean on the matter. And monkeys could fly out of...
well, you know.
He could apologize to real hunters -- the sort who follow their game in
the wild and only shoot when they have a clean shot -- for more or less
shooting tame birds in a barrel. Real class.
He could apologize to the gun safety advocates who've supported him all
along, for failing to follow the most elementary, basic rules of safety
on his "hunt."
He could apologize to the law enforcement authorities in Texas for not
talking to them after he, you know, shot a guy:
"CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer reports Texas authorities
are complaining that the Secret Service barred them from speaking to
Cheney after the incident. Kenedy County Texas Sheriffs Lt. Juan Guzman
said deputies first learned of the shooting when an ambulance was called."
news.com/stories/2006/02/13/national/main1309344.shtml
Of course, there's no law forcing him to apologize to anybody. I guess
he could just tell everybody to fuck off.
Kip W
David Dyer-Bennet
Lots of things I agree with, so of course I'm only responding to one
bit I'm not so sure about:
> "CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer reports Texas
> authorities are complaining that the Secret Service barred them from
> speaking to Cheney after the incident. Kenedy County Texas Sheriffs
> Lt. Juan Guzman said deputies first learned of the shooting when an
> ambulance was called."
>
> news.com/stories/2006/02/13/national/main1309344.shtml
Any reasonable set of rules for this situation requires calling the
ambulance first; there is after all an injured victim who requires
medical care.
Andrew Stephenson
ki...@comcast.net "Kip Williams" writes:
> Andrew Stephenson wrote:
> > In article <4I6dndxxg-f...@comcast.com>
> > ki...@comcast.net "Kip Williams" writes:
> >
> >>One of my favorite people on earth is a cousin who happens to
> >>be a lawyer in Texas.
> >
> > I'm trying to parse that in the context of recent postings. This
> > cousin would be a favo(u)rite because he/she is in Texas, his/her
> > state of existence as a lawyer being largely immaterial? Or must
> > we take it that this favo(u)r arises somehow due to a conjunction
> > of (i) being a lawyer and (ii) being in Texas? Nit-picking minds
> > seek enlightenment with a view to further mis-comprehension. ;-)
>
> So far, every one of your suggestions is misses the mark.
Yay! Clean sweep!
> One of my favorite people on earth is my cousin.
>
> My cousin is a lawyer.
>
> My cousin lives in Texas.
A man with a capacity for multivariate thinking... Cor lummie.
Weirdly, _something_ about your listing reminds me of those "See
Spot Run" reading primers.
> Perhaps I should have made these three statements in separate posts,
> lest someone get the idea that there are a bunch of "because" and
> "therefore" statements hidden in the white spaces between the letters.
Probably would have been a smart idea. Some daft noodle usually
gets hold of the wrong end of some stick. Happily, not me. :-)
--
Andrew Stephenson
Andrew Stephenson
z...@sero.name "Zev Sero" writes:
> Andrew Stephenson wrote:
>
> > I may have missed it in all the fuss and dust; but has that nice
> > Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
> > Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
> > to say you're sorry".
>
> Apologised to whom? I'm sure he's apologised to his injured friend and
> his family, repeatedly (though from what I've read it seems that the
> fault was mostly the friend's). To whom else does he owe an apology?
Politics aside, it was his target of whom I was thinking. Why'd
you suppose I meant anyone else? Bringing politics back into it
for a moment: a bright lad like Mr Cheney must have realised the
whole affair would play a lot better in Peoria (maybe elsewhere,
too) if he made clear to everyone he _had_ said "sorry"; but all
I hear concerns the political fallout and a brief account of the
phone call C made to whosit in hospital -- with no mention of an
apology. I get one of those "What's missing from this picture?"
feelings, that's all... Hey-ho, let's discuss religion instead.
--
Andrew Stephenson
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams <ki...@comcast.net> writes:
>
> Lots of things I agree with, so of course I'm only responding to one
> bit I'm not so sure about:
>
>>"CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer reports Texas
>>authorities are complaining that the Secret Service barred them from
>>speaking to Cheney after the incident. Kenedy County Texas Sheriffs
>>Lt. Juan Guzman said deputies first learned of the shooting when an
>>ambulance was called."
>>
>>news.com/stories/2006/02/13/national/main1309344.shtml
>
> Any reasonable set of rules for this situation requires calling the
> ambulance first; there is after all an injured victim who requires
> medical care.
How long does it take to call an ambulance? Was there someone else there
besides Cheney? Was Cheney himself calling the ambulance? Did calling
the ambulance then make it necessary to bar them from speaking to Cheney
after that?
There was at least one other person there, in addition to Cheney and
those Secret Service agents.
Kip W
Alan Braggins
>I find that particular detail implausible. A sensible shotgun load for
>quail wouldn't have enough penetration to do that. There's plenty of
>reason for a heart attack, but the idea of a pellet that deep seems more
>like a reporter jumping to conclusions.
While it's possible that all the reports saying that a hospital spokesman
said a pellet was close to his heart have misintepreted the statement,
it seems unlikely.
http://news.google.co.uk/news?q=Whittington+heart+Blanchard
>Of course, if the range was very short, and the shot didn't have time to
>disperse, things can be different. The claim is a range of 30 yards, but
>some details in the reports are consistent with a shorter range.
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2006_02_12_patriotboy_archive.html#113998442413821344
explains how 4/5ths of the load could hit an 18" grouping at 30 yards. Magic.
David Friedman
db...@zhochaka.org.uk ("David G. Bell") wrote:
> > And one of the pellets went into his heart and he had a little heart
> > attack.
>
> I find that particular detail implausible. A sensible shotgun load for
> quail wouldn't have enough penetration to do that. There's plenty of
> reason for a heart attack, but the idea of a pellet that deep seems more
> like a reporter jumping to conclusions.
Is it possible that the pellet when somewhere else--into a major vein,
say--and then got carried to the heart?
Robert Sneddon
<db...@zhochaka.org.uk> writes
>On Tuesday, in article
> <2vr4v1ptgmr83gjg4...@4ax.com>
> mar...@mjlayman.com "Marilee J. Layman" wrote:
>>
>> And one of the pellets went into his heart and he had a little heart
>> attack.
>
>I find that particular detail implausible. A sensible shotgun load for
>quail wouldn't have enough penetration to do that. There's plenty of
>reason for a heart attack, but the idea of a pellet that deep seems more
>like a reporter jumping to conclusions.
It's a known problem with shotgun wounds, where a small pellet or two
penetrates a vein or even an artery and is flushed into the bloodstream.
The medics can patch up the hole and stop the bleeding, but sometimes
the pellets will lodge in the veins of the heart causing a minor heart
attack as they deprive the muscle of blood. They might also end up
damaging a heart valve itself. Another common occurrence is thrombosis
in the extremities as the pellet permanently blocks narrow veins and
capillaries leading to gangrene.
A complication is that a lot of bird shooting in the US is now done
with steel shot rather than more toxic lead shot which was building up
in the ground and water of areas regularly hunted over (and ending up in
the gizzards of bottom-feeding waterfowl). This limits the treatments
available like MRI examinations since they could rip the steel shot back
out of the guy's body, causing a lot more damage on the way.
whoa yeah
I shot the elderly, but I tried to shoot the quale covey.
I shot the elderly, but I tried to shoot the quale covey.
All around in my beltway town
They're trying to track me down.
They say they want to bring me in guilty
For the killing quale by an elderly,
For the shot of an elderly.
But I say:
I shot the elderly, but I swear it was a before dinner drink.
I shot the elderly, and it combined with my heart drug i think.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:87r764o...@gw.dd-b.net:
> Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> writes:
>
>> On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > "Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
>
>> And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
>> for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
>> was the act of a good man?
>
> Well, I don't really approve at that kind of laughing at an actual,
> serious, injury to an actual person just because of his profession.
>
> But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt lawyers
> would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
What about Daniel Webster?
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:Iuqo0...@kithrup.com:
"Almost every day during the hunting season you see at least one item in
the newspapers about somebody who has shot somebody else, under the
impression that he was a deer with a red hat, perhaps. Maybe a large
flesh-colored squirrel." -- Tom Lehrer (in the patter to, what else? "The
Hunting Song")
Matthew B. Tepper
Dorothy J Heydt
The media tell Hal that Cheney has not yet said anything whatever
on the subject.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
David Dyer-Bennet
> A complication is that a lot of bird shooting in the US is now done
> with steel shot rather than more toxic lead shot which was building up
> in the ground and water of areas regularly hunted over (and ending up in
> the gizzards of bottom-feeding waterfowl). This limits the treatments
> available like MRI examinations since they could rip the steel shot back
> out of the guy's body, causing a lot more damage on the way.
But at least that'd make sure they got it out. :-)
David Dyer-Bennet
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:87r764o...@gw.dd-b.net:
>
> > Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> writes:
> >
> >> On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
> >
> >> And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
> >> for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
> >> was the act of a good man?
> >
> > Well, I don't really approve at that kind of laughing at an actual,
> > serious, injury to an actual person just because of his profession.
> >
> > But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt lawyers
> > would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>
> What about Daniel Webster?
Fiction, innit?
Kip Williams
> "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> writes:
>
>>David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> appears to have caused the following
>>letters to be typed in news:87r764o...@gw.dd-b.net:
>>
>>>Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
>>>
>>>>And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
>>>>for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
>>>>was the act of a good man?
>>>
>>>Well, I don't really approve at that kind of laughing at an actual,
>>>serious, injury to an actual person just because of his profession.
>>>
>>>But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt lawyers
>>>would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>>
>>What about Daniel Webster?
>
> Fiction, innit?
Naw, he wrote th' Dictionary.
Kip W
Konrad Gaertner
> In article <114001...@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
> Andrew Stephenson <am...@deltrak.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> I may have missed it in all the fuss and dust; but has that nice
>> Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
>> Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
>> to say you're sorry".
>
> The media tell Hal that Cheney has not yet said anything whatever
> on the subject.
Isn't he supposed to be interviewed by Fox News today?
--
Konrad Gaertner - - - - - - - - - - - - - - email: gae...@aol.com
http://kgbooklog.livejournal.com/
"I don't mind hidden depths but I insist that there be a surface."
-- James Nicoll
Matthew B. Tepper
> "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> appears to have caused the following
>> letters to be typed in news:87r764o...@gw.dd-b.net:
>>
>> > Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> writes:
>> >
>> >> On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > "Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
>> >
>> >> And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
>> >> for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
>> >> was the act of a good man?
>> >
>> > Well, I don't really approve at that kind of laughing at an actual,
>> > serious, injury to an actual person just because of his profession.
>> >
>> > But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt lawyers
>> > would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>>
>> What about Daniel Webster?
>
> Fiction, innit?
But wonderful fiction indeed.
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:26NIf.403195$qk4.31810@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <114001...@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
>> Andrew Stephenson <am...@deltrak.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> I may have missed it in all the fuss and dust; but has that nice
>>> Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
>>> Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
>>> to say you're sorry".
>>
>> The media tell Hal that Cheney has not yet said anything whatever
>> on the subject.
>
> Isn't he supposed to be interviewed by Fox News today?
Yes, you can always count on Fox News to ask the tough questions.
Marilee J. Layman
<oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>Kip Williams <ki...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:8-mdnYc8k_a96G_e...@comcast.com:
>
>> Marilee J. Layman wrote:
>>> On 14 Feb 2006 00:01:23 -0800, "Amethyst" <adopts...@aol.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Zev Sero wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Compare this case to Adlai Stevenson:
>>>>>http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.h
>>>>>tml
>>>>>
>>>>>I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>>>>>accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf
>>>>>club, or hit a baseball into someone's face.
>>>>
>>>>Who knows. But he shot a LAWYER! and I bet the TV and radio comics will
>>>>be having a field day with that.
>>>
>>> And one of the pellets went into his heart and he had a little heart
>>> attack.
>>
>> I hope he gets better.
>
>I hope he has a complete recovery.
They're talking about leaving the pellet in the heart.
--
Marilee J. Layman
http://mjlayman.livejournal.com/
Marilee J. Layman
<seawasp...@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote:
>Randolph Fritz wrote:
>> On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
>>>
>>
>>
>> And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
>> for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
>> was the act of a good man?
>
> No, we'll just shoot him and put his head on the wall along with the
>others, obviously.
You've seen that cartoon? Tom Toles' from yesterday's WashPost:
Today's is pretty good, too:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinion/ssi/images/Toles/c_02152006_520.gif
Marilee J. Layman
Heydt) wrote:
>In article <114001...@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
>Andrew Stephenson <am...@deltrak.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>I may have missed it in all the fuss and dust; but has that nice
>>Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
>>Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
>>to say you're sorry".
>
>The media tell Hal that Cheney has not yet said anything whatever
>on the subject.
I started watching news about 4pm, and they had a brief bit on how he
had his first press conference since 2002 and apologized.
Marilee J. Layman
Braggins) wrote:
>In article <20060215.09...@zhochaka.org.uk>, David G. Bell wrote:
>>I find that particular detail implausible. A sensible shotgun load for
>>quail wouldn't have enough penetration to do that. There's plenty of
>>reason for a heart attack, but the idea of a pellet that deep seems more
>>like a reporter jumping to conclusions.
>
>While it's possible that all the reports saying that a hospital spokesman
>said a pellet was close to his heart have misintepreted the statement,
>it seems unlikely.
>http://news.google.co.uk/news?q=Whittington+heart+Blanchard
Yeah, I saw the actual cardiologist explaining about it on TV
yesterday. The pellet migrated to his heart and they've decided to
leave it, for now, at least.
>>Of course, if the range was very short, and the shot didn't have time to
>>disperse, things can be different. The claim is a range of 30 yards, but
>>some details in the reports are consistent with a shorter range.
>
>http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2006_02_12_patriotboy_archive.html#113998442413821344
>explains how 4/5ths of the load could hit an 18" grouping at 30 yards. Magic.
Marilee J. Layman
<j...@aracnet.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:49:49 GMT, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
>
>>Compare this case to Adlai Stevenson:
>>http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2006/02/12/guns_and_politics.html
>>
>>
>>I wonder whether the reaction would be the same had this been a car
>>accident, or if he'd accidentally hit someone with a ski or a golf club,
>>or hit a baseball into someone's face.
>
>As a person who hunts, I consider this to be irresponsible behavior in
>the hunting field and irresponsible gun handling.
Locally, the same day, a group of men and a seven-year-old were
heading out to hunt goose. One of the men in the back of the SUV
loaded his gun and accidently killed the kid. More bad gun handling.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021301992_2.html
Wilson Heydt
Konrad Gaertner <gae...@aol.com> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <114001...@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
>> Andrew Stephenson <am...@deltrak.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> I may have missed it in all the fuss and dust; but has that nice
>>> Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
>>> Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
>>> to say you're sorry".
>>
>> The media tell Hal that Cheney has not yet said anything whatever
>> on the subject.
>
>Isn't he supposed to be interviewed by Fox News today?
All I've seen is a headline (haven't read the article) saying that
"Accepts full responsibility." Gad...he'd better.
Keith F. Lynch
> All I've seen is a headline (haven't read the article) saying that
> "Accepts full responsibility." Gad...he'd better.
What does that mean? Is he going to jail? Is he paying a fine? Is
he paying the victim's medical bills? Is he resigning from office?
Does it mean anything at all, or is it just empty words?
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Keith Thompson
It wasn't a press conference, just an interview on Fox News.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Keith F. Lynch
>>> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>>>> But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt
>>>> lawyers would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>>> What about Daniel Webster?
>> Fiction, innit?
> Naw, he wrote th' Dictionary.
Wrong Webster. The dictionary guy, whose nickname was "Merrriam," was
better known for building an ark and sailing it during the Great Flood.
Wilson Heydt
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Wilson Heydt <whh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> All I've seen is a headline (haven't read the article) saying that
>> "Accepts full responsibility." Gad...he'd better.
>
>What does that mean? Is he going to jail? Is he paying a fine? Is
>he paying the victim's medical bills? Is he resigning from office?
>
>Does it mean anything at all, or is it just empty words?
So far it appears to mean that he is sending the Texas game
authority $7 to pay for the upland bird stamp that he didn't have.
In the mena time, I am given to understand that the first rule of
gun safety is to never discharge the gun unless you are certain what
it's pointed at. Cheney appears to have vioated that saftey rule.
Therefore, whatever fault lies with the person he shot, Cheney bears
primary responsibility for the incident.
personally, I think Cheney's words are empty of meaning as he is
very unlikely to be penalized. The apology and acceptance of
responsibility is just PR spin.
Keith F. Lynch
> A complication is that a lot of bird shooting in the US is now done
> examinations since they could rip the steel shot back out of the
> guy's body, causing a lot more damage on the way.
I would think x-rays and CAT scans would be a better way to locate
the shot. Or are you pointing out that MRI for unrelated problems
is forever ruled out if the shot isn't removed?
Seth Breidbart
David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>"Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> writes:
>> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> appears to have caused the following
>> letters to be typed in news:87r764o...@gw.dd-b.net:
>> > But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt lawyers
>> > would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>>
>> What about Daniel Webster?
>
>Fiction, innit?
So's the devil.
Seth
Keith F. Lynch
> ... (though from what I've read it seems that the fault was mostly
> the friend's).
As others have mentioned, the first rule of hunting is to be sure of
your target. So how could the friend be at fault?
Kip Williams
It's an empty formality without meaningful follow-up. Just ten syllables
they go out and utter to appear grown up.
Kip W
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams <ki...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>>
>>>"Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt
>>>>>lawyers would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>
>>>>What about Daniel Webster?
>
>>>Fiction, innit?
>
>>Naw, he wrote th' Dictionary.
>
> Wrong Webster. The dictionary guy, whose nickname was "Merrriam," was
> better known for building an ark and sailing it during the Great Flood.
Oh yeah, NOAA Webster. I understand he got interested in weather
prediction after that.
Kip W
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:dt0jlj$hkr$1...@panix3.panix.com:
> Kip Williams <ki...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>>> "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>>>>> But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt
>>>>> lawyers would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>
>>>> What about Daniel Webster?
>
>>> Fiction, innit?
>
>> Naw, he wrote th' Dictionary.
>
> Wrong Webster. The dictionary guy, whose nickname was "Merrriam," was
> better known for building an ark and sailing it during the Great Flood.
You get some sort of Award for that. Oh yeah -- it's "Hold Over Funds."
Matthew B. Tepper
to be typed in news:lnirrgj...@nuthaus.mib.org:
> Marilee J. Layman <mar...@mjlayman.com> writes:
>> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:53:23 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>> Heydt) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <114001...@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
>>>Andrew Stephenson <am...@deltrak.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>I may have missed it in all the fuss and dust; but has that nice
>>>>Mr Cheney yet apologised? How worried might he be of law suits?
>>>>Or is it a case of, "Being the Vice President means never having
>>>>to say you're sorry".
>>>
>>>The media tell Hal that Cheney has not yet said anything whatever
>>>on the subject.
>>
>> I started watching news about 4pm, and they had a brief bit on how he
>> had his first press conference since 2002 and apologized.
>
> It wasn't a press conference, just an interview on Fox News.
Wow, a real inquisition.
Daniel R. Reitman
<mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote:
>I started watching news about 4pm, and they had a brief bit on how he
>had his first press conference since 2002 and apologized.
Well, he can't exactly claim to have been at a secret undiclosed
location.
Dan, ad nauseam
Daniel R. Reitman
wrote:
>"Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> writes:
>> What about Daniel Webster?
>Fiction, innit?
Yes, but how do you know the devil hasn't been replaced by a hoka?
Dan, ad nauseam
Doug Wickstrom
<87k6bwl...@gw.dd-b.net>
David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> caused electrons to dance and
photons to travel coherently in saying:
>"Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> appears to have caused the following
>> letters to be typed in news:87r764o...@gw.dd-b.net:
>>
>> > Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> writes:
>> >
>> >> On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > "Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
>> >
>> >> And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
>> >> for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
>> >> was the act of a good man?
>> >
>> > Well, I don't really approve at that kind of laughing at an actual,
>> > serious, injury to an actual person just because of his profession.
>> >
>> > But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt lawyers
>> > would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>>
>> What about Daniel Webster?
>
>Fiction, innit?
I maintain that Daniel Webster is very much non-fictional, unlike
the devil.
--
Doug Wickstrom <nims...@comcast.net>
"People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have
a tremendous impact on history." --Dan Quayle
Now filtering out all cross-posted messages and everything posted
through Google News.
Robert Sneddon
<k...@KeithLynch.net> writes
>Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> A complication is that a lot of bird shooting in the US is now done
>> with steel shot ... This limits the treatments available like MRI
>> examinations since they could rip the steel shot back out of the
>> guy's body, causing a lot more damage on the way.
>
>I would think x-rays and CAT scans would be a better way to locate
>the shot.
X-rays would have difficulty in resolving the small pellet so deep in
the body. It would take a very good film reader to spot the pellet
shadow, given the heart is moving pretty much continuously during the
exposure.
> Or are you pointing out that MRI for unrelated problems
>is forever ruled out if the shot isn't removed?
It's a future problem too, but it directly limits examinations and
treatments he can undergo right now. From the accounts I've read the
docs don't want to go in after the pellet unless they have to. He's an
old man and full anaesthesia plus heart surgery is something old folks
don't always come out of. It seems their thinking is the damage to the
heart muscle is limited and as long as the pellet doesn't move it will
scar over and be trapped where it is. If that happens then there will be
no more damage elsewhere.
--
My gmail account is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
Alan Braggins
>Wilson Heydt <whh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> All I've seen is a headline (haven't read the article) saying that
>> "Accepts full responsibility." Gad...he'd better.
>
>What does that mean? Is he going to jail? Is he paying a fine? Is
>he paying the victim's medical bills? Is he resigning from office?
>
>Does it mean anything at all, or is it just empty words?
I think if I was in hospital having been accidentally shot, I'd feel
better if the person who shot me was accepting responsibility himself
rather than have other people suggesting it was my fault for being in
the way. (At least if I thought he might mean it rather than just
responding to media criticism, and Whittington presumably knows Cheney
better than we do and is in a better position to judge that.)
Kip Williams
> On 15 Feb 2006 14:12:49 -0600, in message
> <87k6bwl...@gw.dd-b.net>
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> caused electrons to dance and
> photons to travel coherently in saying:
>
>
>>"Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>>David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> appears to have caused the following
>>>letters to be typed in news:87r764o...@gw.dd-b.net:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Randolph Fritz <rand...@panix.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On 2006-02-15, Joe Ellis <synth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Lawyer... hit in heart... must... not... laugh...."
>>>>
>>>>>And when you have killed all the lawyers, and the devil comes calling
>>>>>for you, who will explain why laughing at a threat to someone's life
>>>>>was the act of a good man?
>>>>
>>>>Well, I don't really approve at that kind of laughing at an actual,
>>>>serious, injury to an actual person just because of his profession.
>>>>
>>>>But if there *is* a devil and a hell, etc., I really doubt lawyers
>>>>would be the slightest use in avoiding it.
>>>
>>>What about Daniel Webster?
>>
>>Fiction, innit?
>
> I maintain that Daniel Webster is very much non-fictional, unlike
> the devil.
Well, there's physical evidence of Dan'l Webster, right? The carving
that says "D Webster passed the Bar on this Tree."
Kip W
Konrad Gaertner
> personally, I think Cheney's words are empty of meaning as he is
> very unlikely to be penalized. The apology and acceptance of
> responsibility is just PR spin.
According to today's newspaper, he absolved the victim from all blame,
which is a nice change. But he still thinks all the delays were the
right thing to do.
--
Konrad Gaertner - - - - - - - - - - - - - - email: gae...@aol.com
http://kgbooklog.livejournal.com/
"I don't mind hidden depths but I insist that there be a surface."
-- James Nicoll
Alan Woodford
<kgae...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Wilson Heydt wrote:
>
>> personally, I think Cheney's words are empty of meaning as he is
>> very unlikely to be penalized. The apology and acceptance of
>> responsibility is just PR spin.
>
>According to today's newspaper, he absolved the victim from all blame,
>which is a nice change. But he still thinks all the delays were the
>right thing to do.
I'm not sure that telling the media straight off would have been a
great idea. Get the victim to hospital and settled first, then start
the media circus, seems better for the victim.
It still seemed to take a while for him to admit he was wrong, but I'm
really not sure I blame him for the initial delay.
(Disclaimer: I am not now, nor am I ever likely to be, a Cheney fan)
Alan Woodford
The Greying Lensman