Re: The Biggest Problem with the Cheney Shooting



Matthew Hennig wrote:
"xyzzy" <xyzzy.dude@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:1140031459.098195.245900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:


Matthew Hennig wrote:

"xyzzy" <xyzzy.dude@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in news:1140021583.308325.160480
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:


Dan Bretta wrote:

My theory is: You put a gun in the hand of millionaires who only
seem to be able to hunt farm raised game that's fenced in and
eventually they're going to shoot each other.

This summarizes it in a nutshell for me. The fact that he
accidently shot someone on a hunting trip doesn't say much about
him either way IMO -- accidents happen. Around where I live if we
get through a hunting season without someone getting killed that's
a good thing. But that's actually hunting where people have to go
into he woods and find prey. That is not what Cheney was doing.

What says more about his character is that he goes on these canned
hunts where the prey is basically helpless and provided for him on
a silver platter, complete with a full bar and a chauffer to drive
him up to it. That's not being an outdoorsman, that's not sport,
that's not hunting. That's slaughter for the fun and sake of
slaughter. And then given that the whole "hunt" is contrived and
made idiotproof and yet he STILL fucked up and shot a friend makes
one wonder if he should be "hunting" (real or fake) at all. But
since he's the VP no one's going to say to him "you're too
old/drunk/stupid/whatever" to do this, because he won't permit
anyone to tell him this. If you're not blinded by partisan
blinders, this has to make you question his judgement and attitude.

I'm not a hunter so I don't know for sure, but in my conversations
with the many neighbors and friends in my area who are, not many
consider that hunting. The hunters I know pride themselves on going
into the woods and it being them against a prey that has a chance
so if they bagged one, they've actually accomplished something, and
if they didn't, at least they got to spend some quality time in the
woods. I'm sure most of them give Cheney a pass on his fake
hunting because they're NRA guys and Cheney is the NRA's man, but
if it were anyone else going on such a farce of a canned hunt,
they'd be full of derision. Just imagine the reaction of rsfc
'wingers if Kerry had been found to have gone on a canned hunt, and
had shot someone on it, and hidden that fact for almost a full day?

If Edwards (a more apt comparison) had gone hunting and accidentally
shot one of his friends and not made a press release on it for 18
hours, I would have had the same response to the Cheney one. There's
no coverup here as much as the reporters want to try and make it look
like there is one. They're mad that a local paper got to break the
story, not the national press. They're mad that Cheney isn't
catering to their every little request. Given the media's actions
towards the administration, is it any surprise that the
administration isn't out to try and help the media out?

I mean, seriously, the press is whining about 18 hours.

You seized on one small point in my larger post for your response,
which is certainly a time honored usenet tactic that we all indulge in
so I can't blame you for that. But let's take it a little further.

Leave aside the press issue for a minute. Let's assume for the sake
of argument that they are all just a pack of Democratic hyenas who are
just out to make a mountain of a molehill and put that factor aside.
Hell, for the sake of argument, even forget that Cheney shot a guy.

Tell me what you think of Cheney's apparent love for canned hunts that
are basically just slaughters of caged, farm-raised animals, complete
with open bar and chauffer to and from the site of the massacre.
Compare and contrast that to what you would think if Kerry (and I pick
Kerry not Edwards because Kerry is the one who was accused of being a
poseur after posing in fatigues with a hunting rifle) were "hunting"
in that fashion with, say, George Soros or Ed Asner or some other rich
liberal supporter.


Perhaps its not particularly challenging, but who really cares? It'd be amusing to see someone like Kerry or Edwards all dressed up in hunting gear (given their demeanor and attitude regarding guns and hunting), but that they went to a fenced in range? Whoop-de-doo.


The hypocrisy of you righties is too funny. If the cards had ben turned and it had been Gore or Kerry or Edwards, well, you and Enright and Rogers amd all the other conservafscks would be FLOODING this chatrum with derisive comments.

Me? I actually think it's not that big a deal - apart form the fact that some poor sod got injured, I just find the whole thing rib-crackingly hilarious. What a bunch of bozos. Here's a quote I cut and pasted into another thread - it just captures the whole thing so well:

<quote>

As for Cheney, what can one say that hasn't been already said about that worthless fascist waste of diseased protoplasm.

There is nothing quite so pathetic as a bunch of wingnuts with their beer guts hanging over their belts blasting away at canned game -- farm raised quail, ducks, and whatever; released right in front of their guns so that they get to feel like mighty white hunters.

So that's what super rich, war mongering, genocidal maniacs do on their weekends off.

</quote>

Ah - I love the English language.

Why did I focus on just that one part? I thought this whole argument was just kind of silly too.

MH


--
I'm so hip I have trouble seeing over my pelvis.
I'm so cool you can keep a side of meat in me for months.
.