[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by KarlG

If you doubt it, then you must be right. Interestingly enough, it's never been mentioned on a show I watch almost weekly about outdoor activities, with an emphasis on hunting (inluding bird hunting). But then again, you no doubt know best.

Yup, I sure do.

It was an accident, and a very very common circumstance in that hobby. People need to get over it and Move On™.

[Monique]

No it is too much fun. It is our turn now.

[Dakar]

diediedie

[greenamp]

I wish I knew how to quit this thread

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by greenamp

Or maybe b/c he was hunting with visitors from outer space!!

Wha?? Hunting and drinking go together like Mac n Cheese, or Ham n Burger. The likelyhood that he was legally drunk at the time that he shot the guy is high, unless he doesn't drink do to his weak heart..which is possible..I dunno.

But I'd be willing to bet big money that he was drunk and needed the 20 hours to cleanse his blood of alcohol. This is not a consipiracy theory...its what anyone would do if they could.

Still, if the guy happens to die, and Dick was drinking, it would put him in Ted Kennedy territory.

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by greenamp

The opinion of one poster here does not disqualify the opinions stated by others. I stand by my statement that Whittington is at fault for not alerting the other hunters of his whereabouts. And if you wanna know why, I've already stated on more than more occasion the reasons. Kindly read the thread before posting.

I don't think you get it. You just confirmed exactly the point I made.

I already said you, and a few others, think Whittington is at fault, which disproves the statement "Nobody here is blaming the guy who got shot in the face."

Kindly read the actual response before posting.

[Monique]

No it could not be Whittington's fault because Cheney had the gun and when you have a gun in your hands you are supposed to be even more careful than usual. But, it is too hard for Repubicans to think and act at the same time.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Monique

No it could not be Whittington's fault because Cheney had the gun and when you have a gun in your hands you are supposed to be even more careful than usual.

WOW! You are actually right about something! AMAZING! Yes when you have a gun in your hand you are responsible for who or what gets shot. Period.

But, it is too hard for Repubicans to think and act at the same time.

Couldn't resist being an ignorant ass could you?

[Monique]

Obviously it was very hard for Cheney since he was unable to check if someone around him could get hurt. It is not like they were going to run out of quails to shoot.

[besson3c]

It's amazing how the partisans scramble to defend themselves in such an overly predictable way.


The bottom line, outside of politicizing, is that this was a very dumb and embarrassing mistake. Both Winningham or whatever his name was and Cheney can be blamed to some extent, don't really care who should be blamed more.

It's just bad press for the Right, press which they could do without right now.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Ask any wingless, farm raised bird hunter and they'll tell you they have bird shot lodged in their heart like MacNHick does.

Do the Democrats in this forum find this to be acceptable behavior, an example of your best and brightest?

How droll.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Do the Democrats in this forum find this to be acceptable behavior, an example of your best and brightest?

How droll.

You are always a good target. I love it when you're my bitch.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

You are always a good target. I love it when you're my bitch.

Yet another quality individual from the Left. You have quite an imagination too.

Wow, you guys are really looking rather poor right now. No wonder your group has been losing popularity with some of the more decent people in this country.

You really had a good "shot" at winning this discussion too, especially in light of previously unknown factors (ie. they weren't using bird shot, but shells with much larger pellets). However, your poor character comes shining through yet again.

Can't say that I'm surprised.

[ironknee]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Wow, you guys are really looking rather poor right now. No wonder your group has been losing popularity with some of the more decent people in this country.

decent? people? you mean people who shoots birds for fun? and all those people who live away from water and likes to play solders?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Yet another quality individual from the Left. You have quite an imagination too.

Wow, you guys are really looking rather poor right now. No wonder your group has been losing popularity with some of the more decent people in this country.

You really had a good "shot" at winning this discussion too, especially in light of previously unknown factors (ie. they weren't using bird shot, but shells with much larger pellets). However, your poor character comes shining through yet again.

Can't say that I'm surprised.

I think that stupid partisan taunting like Rolling Bones is doing is wrong, but I suggest that you transcend this by not generalizing the entire Left. I'm an independent, but many either choose to disbelieve this or associate me with the Left anyway, fine... However, I'm not doing what Rolling Bones is doing, so it is somewhat insulting to be clumped in with this generalizing, assuming that you too also would mentally clump me in with the Left crowd.

Set an example. Illustrate the shortcomings of being partisan by not being partisan yourself. Make the Right look good, if that is a goal of yours.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by ironknee

decent? people? you mean people who shoots birds for fun? and all those people who live away from water and likes to play solders?

No, the people who don't resort to namecalling and regard character as something of value. There are many people on the Left that I believe have fine character. I may not agree with them on various issues, but it doesn't change the fact that they're noble people.

Some of the Liberals on this forum have shown that they're not good and decent people, time and time again. This reflects poorly on those that share their philosophical views, but never chastise these "bad eggs" for their behavior.

Sure, we joke with each other and such, and that's fine, but there's a line of abuse that some people love to cross, and that's unfortunate because it destroys the discussions. moderator, Rolling Bones, and a few others have proven that they don't have a place in a polite debate.

Now, as for career politicians, I don't trust any of them and think they're all scum.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

No, the people who don't resort to namecalling and regard character as something of value. There are many people on the Left that I believe have fine character. I may not agree with them on various issues, but it doesn't change the fact that they're noble people.

Some of the Liberals on this forum have shown that they're not good and decent people, time and time again. This reflects poorly on those that share their philosophical views, but never chastise these "bad eggs" for their behavior.

Sure, we joke with each other and such, and that's fine, but there's a line of abuse that some people love to cross, and that's unfortunate because it destroys the discussions. moderator, Rolling Bones, and a few others have proven that they don't have a place in a polite debate.

Now, as for career politicians, I don't trust any of them and think they're all scum.

There is a line of abuse that people on the Right cross too... I could name names, but I won't bother. Surely you've seen rants and raves about the Left being a bunch of tree hugging hippies, spineless weenies, having no solutions, etc.? And, I don't mean that there is also rare abuse that happens once in a blue moon, it happens quite often. I hope we don't get into a debate about how often it happens, who does it more, etc. I actually do agree with you that this occurs, but it definitely goes both ways.

Assuming we can agree, why not just do your part and put a stop to it? I'm trying my best...

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c

There is a line of abuse that people on the Right cross too... I could name names, but I won't bother. Surely you've seen rants and raves about the Left being a bunch of tree hugging hippies, spineless weenies, having no solutions, etc.? And, I don't mean that there is also rare abuse that happens once in a blue moon, it happens quite often. I hope we don't get into a debate about how often it happens, who does it more, etc. I actually do agree with you that this occurs, but it definitely goes both ways.

Assuming we can agree, why not just do your part and put a stop to it? I'm trying my best...

"tree hugging hippies, spineless weenies, having no solutions" is pretty general, I'm mainly talking about direct insults towards individuals on this forum. I see that happening far more often from the Left. This isn't to say I've not seen it from some on the Right, and I've called them on it too, but it seems much less prevalent.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

"tree hugging hippies, spineless weenies, having no solutions" is pretty general, I'm mainly talking about direct insults towards individuals on this forum. I see that happening far more often from the Left. This isn't to say I've not seen it from some on the Right, and I've called them on it too, but it seems much less prevalent.

I've been told to grow a pair, called a hypocrite, I've seen Monique abused... To the perspective of somebody else, it might seem more prevalent than you think. However, this isn't the point. The point is, you aren't helping with your generalizations. The problem is not one-sided.

[RAILhead]

I called Monique an attention whore because she posts and runs.

I AM TEH THO THAWWY!!!11!!1

But yeah, TEH LEFT are going a bit nutters over this, methinks.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I've been told to grow a pair, called a hypocrite, I've seen Monique abused... To the perspective of somebody else, it might seem more prevalent than you think. However, this isn't the point. The point is, you aren't helping with your generalizations. The problem is not one-sided.

I'm not being general, I'm being rather specific.

I asked, "Do the Democrats in this forum find this to be acceptable behavior?"

R.B. then said, "You are always a good target. I love it when you're my bitch."

It's out of hand.

Tell ya what, I'll work with my people if you'll work with yours. Deal?

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by RAILhead

I called Monique an attention whore because she posts and runs.

I AM TEH THO THAWWY!!!11!!1

But yeah, TEH LEFT are going a bit nutters over this, methinks.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I think that stupid partisan taunting like Rolling Bones is doing is wrong, but I suggest that you transcend this by not generalizing the entire Left. I'm an independent, but many either choose to disbelieve this or associate me with the Left anyway, fine... However, I'm not doing what Rolling Bones is doing, so it is somewhat insulting to be clumped in with this generalizing, assuming that you too also would mentally clump me in with the Left crowd.

Set an example. Illustrate the shortcomings of being partisan by not being partisan yourself. Make the Right look good, if that is a goal of yours.

You fell for MacNStein's troll.

Shame on you bess.

[Kevin]

I'm just glad Rolling posted the last two posts he made. This thread wouldn't have been complete with out them.

Or this one for that matter.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

I'm not being general, I'm being rather specific.

I asked, "Do the Democrats in this forum find this to be acceptable behavior?"

R.B. then said, "You are always a good target. I love it when you're my bitch."

It's out of hand.

Tell ya what, I'll work with my people if you'll work with yours. Deal?

I missed your original question, sorry....

I try to work with both people, but it requires constant attention. I don't really have "people", or people I want to have my ideas associated with. The fact that there are "people" is part of a larger problem, in my opinion. You've heard my spiel before though, I'm sure.

[art_director]

Cheney should be required to take a gun safety course, not because he's Cheney, but because incidents like this should require such action.

[Chuckit]

Hey, if somebody caused an even more minor injury with a car, they'd be required to take a safety course.

[art_director]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Hey, if somebody caused an even more minor injury with a car, they'd be required to take a safety course.

Exactly my point. It's just good measure.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

I'm not being general, I'm being rather specific.

I asked, "Do the Democrats in this forum find this to be acceptable behavior?"

R.B. then said, "You are always a good target. I love it when you're my bitch."

It's out of hand.

Tell ya what, I'll work with my people if you'll work with yours. Deal?

Everyone on both sides should take care with their own posts, then let the moderators take care of the rest, in an ideal world.....

Not to mention the +1 posts that are there only to be insulting. Some of which "don't post anything antagonistic", but just end up coming off passive aggressive. MacNN would be a lot less frustrating if they had +1 only to be an ass ban weeks.

But yeah, how is a hunting accident a partisan issue? We get it, a lot of people don't like Bush and Cheney (myself included), but does a hunting accident really make him that much worse as his official duties go? If you want to bag him, do it over something that actually has to do with his political career.

[art_director]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

If you want to bag him, do it over something that actually has to do with his political career.

One can't help but wonder how conservatives would react if the shoe were on the other foot. My guess is that you'd see the same sort of posts pointed in the opposite direction.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by art_director

One can't help but wonder how conservatives would react if the shoe were on the other foot. My guess is that you'd see the same sort of posts pointed in the opposite direction.

For most things, they have and they would. But this is such a trivial matter. It's like bashing someone because they put the roll of toilet paper where the paper comes from under and behind instead of the logical and civilized way of over the top and in front. Yes, it IS retarded, but it's nothing to get yourself upset about.

[OldManMac]

Now look, if you're going to start talking about the toilet paper is hung, you're asking for real trouble. I mean, come on!

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by KarlG

Now look, if you're going to start talking about the toilet paper is hung, you're asking for real trouble. I mean, come on!

Exactly! I would take this thread more seriously if people were calling Cheney out on his toilet paper hanging technique rather than a hunting accident. One is quite serious and shows a rudeness to guests and lack of civility, the other is an accident that shows an old man and his friends need to be more careful with their hobbies.

Can anyone really keep a straight face while making such an uproar about this issue? I think it's great when older folks get out and do something fun that makes them happy. Hell, I hope he was tired because he took an extra viagra to get his freak on with Mrs. Cheney the night before. This whole issue is just plain silly.

It's like the whole world has gone stupid. 1st we're debating how wrong a few political cartoons are, then we're making a huge deal out of a hunting accident, next we'll be debating laws on putting condoms over everyone's ears so they never hear anything offensive ever again. If anyone wonders why good reporting is dying, go look in the mirror and shake your head after realizing you're posting the same crap everyone complains about. This is like reality news, lol. Nothing that people can do anything about, just a chance to fap to how much we really hate the guy. Haha, he shot someone on accident, lets compare his bad judgement here to his judgement in Iraq!!! Yes!

sorry
i'm done now

[OldManMac]

This just in; Cheney does a concert at Folsom Prison! NSFW or young kids.

http://cheneyplaysfolsom.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

[greenamp]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

I don't think you get it. You just confirmed exactly the point I made.

I already said you, and a few others, think Whittington is at fault, which disproves the statement "Nobody here is blaming the guy who got shot in the face."

Kindly read the actual response before posting.

And that disproves my statement how? I said it once, Ill say it again: Whittington is just as much to blame as Cheney..

You quoted my statement in response to another poster as if the idea that Whittington sharing some of the fault is some kind of wild fallacy. If this was in fact the point you were trying to make in quoting me then you are wrong. Whittington is just as much to blame as Cheney. If you want me to explain why I see it this way, I already have.

[ironknee]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Here's the point of this story in a nutshell:

Q: Why would it take Dick Cheney 12+ hours to notify the police and press about the fact that he shot someone.

A: Because he couldn't pass a breathalyzer.

Case closed.

BINGO!

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by greenamp

And that disproves my statement how? I said it once, Ill say it again: Whittington is just as much to blame as Cheney..

You quoted my statement in response to another poster as if the idea that Whittington sharing some of the fault is some kind of wild fallacy. If this was in fact the point you were trying to make in quoting me then you are wrong. Whittington is just as much to blame as Cheney. If you want me to explain why I see it this way, I already have.

Let's follow the trail of conversation here. (Names changed to protect the innocent.)

Bob: Nobody is blaming Whittington.
Frank: Actually, Bob, you're wrong. Here's a bunch of quotes from people blaming Whittington.
Greenamp: What a weak attempt at disproving what I said.
Frank: I wasn't trying to disprove what you said. I was talking to B—
Greenamp: That doesn't disprove what I said either. Man, your arguments against me are WEAK!

[Gee-Man]

Thank you. At least somebody has basic reading comprehension skills around here.

[greenamp]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Let's follow the trail of conversation here. (Names changed to protect the innocent.)

He quoted me in an attempt to prove a point that Whittington was not to blame and that the idea was ludicrous. I know I responded to him a bit out of context. I did so quite knowingly.

[greenamp]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Let's follow the trail of conversation here. (Names changed to protect the innocent.)

Chuckit: OMG BUCKSHOT IN TEH FACE OH NOES!11!!
davesimondotcom: Actually, Chucky, you're wrong. It was birdshot. Light birdshot. Big difference. Here's a diagram!
Greenamp: Chuck you just got owned hard man.
Chuck: [random wore out abbott and costello quote in an attempt to save face and pass his ignorance off for jest]
Greenamp: lol ok bro

BTW Fixed™

[Rolling Bones]

Yup, seems they were drinking and Cheney was pissed up. Of course now they can't prove it.

Dead Eye Dick.

"I never had sex with that beer, Bud"

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by greenamp

He quoted me in an attempt to prove a point that Whittington was not to blame and that the idea was ludicrous. I know I responded to him a bit out of context. I did so quite knowingly.

You need to go back to page 2 and start over, unless you're just saying this to be funny.

Wasn't there just a study released showing 50% of the time, people misunderstand the email/post they are responding to...leading to flamewars?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

Yup, seems they were drinking and Cheney was pissed up. Of course now they can't prove it.

Dead Eye Dick.

"I never had sex with that beer, Bud"

Where are you getting this information?

[production_coordinator]

I find it funny that many of the left... that only days ago wouldn't have known the difference between bird shot and a 9mm... or wouldn't have been able to pick a quail from a rooster are now hunting experts.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

I find it funny that many of the left... that only days ago wouldn't have known the difference between bird shot and a 9mm... or wouldn't have been able to pick a quail from a rooster are now hunting experts.

Not only that, He was DRUNK!@



I can't wait till the story grows even bigger tomorrow.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Hey, if somebody caused an even more minor injury with a car, they'd be required to take a safety course.

So, is that why Teddy kennedy has a driver these days?

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

Yup, seems they were drinking and Cheney was pissed up. Of course now they can't prove it.

More FUD.

With no proof, the far left is taking a non-action and mutating it into an irresponsible act.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

I find it funny that many of the left... that only days ago wouldn't have known the difference between bird shot and a 9mm... or wouldn't have been able to pick a quail from a rooster are now hunting experts.

I'm definitely no hunting expert. Maybe someone can enlighten me.

Does hunting wingless, farm raised quail, in someone's backyard, from your car consititute "sport" ??

Is it not true that drinking is a big part of hunting?

Is there any reasonable explanation for Cheney not reporting the accident, and not going to the hospital to be with his friend, other than needing to lower his B.O.C. ??

Doesn't this seem to be the most logical explanation?? Can someone provide a logical alternative?

...I know if I were in that situation I'd do the same thing.

[jersey]

classic.

probably nsfw ( language ) but damn hi-larious.

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Moderator

I'm definitely no hunting expert. Maybe someone can enlighten me.

I'll be happy.

Originally Posted by Moderator

Does hunting wingless, farm raised quail, in someone's backyard, from your car consititute "sport" ??

You obviously have never been hunting which is perfectly fine. Yes, it is a sport... as much so as many other marginal sports. It does take a bit of skill.

Originally Posted by Moderator

Is it not true that drinking is a big part of hunting?

This is a major misconception many liberals have. Getting drunk while playing cards at your hunting cabin is somewhat common. Getting drunk and going into the woods with a loaded weapon is 100% irresponsible, illegal and not condoned by ANY hunting organization. It's on par with drunk driving.

Originally Posted by Moderator

Is there any reasonable explanation for Cheney not reporting the accident, and not going to the hospital to be with his friend, other than needing to lower his B.O.C. ??

Doesn't this seem to be the most logical explanation?? Can someone provide a logical alternative?

...I know if I were in that situation I'd do the same thing.

Cheney going to the hospital would have been a media circus. I love how you downplay it as "well that's what I would have done"... walk in the vice presidents shoes and you may be singing a different tune. He just shot his friend... his friend was taken to the hospital. The hospital should have immediately called the police (as is the case with all gunshot victims).

Again, pure speculation on your part. Not only are you saying he is irresponsible for not calling the police, you are ASSUMING he was drunk.